Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Statute Drafting Efficiency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews bill to simplify how statutes with sunsets are amended
Summary
Sen. Sue Vinton and legislative staff described Senate Bill 75, which would change drafting practice so only the original statute with a sunset needs amendment when extending termination dates. Staff said the measure is procedural and retroactive to speed drafting; no vote was taken.
The House Legislative Administration Committee heard from sponsor Sen. Sue Vinton and legislative drafting staff on Senate Bill 75, a technical bill to simplify how termination (sunset) dates in Montana law are amended.
Vinton said the bill is a cleanup measure intended to reduce complexity for Legislative Counsel and editors when multiple session laws have amended a termination date. "By changing by making the only change when we modify a sunset or termination date to the original date of the statute, we are saving staff time and costs," she said.
Jarrett Coles, legislative deputy director of the Legislative Services Division, and a representative from Legislative Council explained the bill's mechanics. Coles and an attorney identified as Baird said the change would allow drafters to amend the first bill that placed an expiration date on an item rather than amending every subsequent session law that extended the date.
Baird said the measure was recommended as a cost‑efficiency during the interim and that it is retroactively applicable. "It does not eliminate termination dates. It just makes it easier so that when we're explaining them, we can do it with more efficient process," Baird said. The staff estimated that drafting a bill to extend a termination date would take minutes under the new approach rather than hours under current practice.
The hearing closed with the sponsor urging the committee to concur; the committee did not take a vote on SB 75 during the hearing.
Ending: Committee members accepted the technical explanation and closed the informational hearing without formal action that day.
