Senate committee approves bill requiring courts to invite governing bodies to weigh in on subdivision cases

Senator Ed Mandeville, sponsor of Senate Bill 239, told the Senate that the bill would give judges more information in district court cases about how different governing bodies interpret subdivision law. “So if there's a a court case on a subdivision, this bill would require a judge, to invite, amicus from other governing bodies that administer the same statute,” Mandeville said.

The bill’s sponsor said the change aims to reduce the statewide disruption that can follow when a court in one district interprets a subdivision statute in a way that becomes precedent for other districts. "We're just trying to make, a mechanism for courts to get a little more information before they issue a decision that, really has the potential to interrupt how, statutes are interpreted on a statewide level," Mandeville said.

Senator Janet Olson opposed the measure on grounds that it prescribes procedural duties to the courts and expands rights for nonparties. “All lawsuits are a interested party who's harmed, suing somebody else who's responsible for that harm,” Olson said, arguing that interested parties already may seek intervention under existing law and that the bill would inappropriately require courts to invite additional participants and to grant stays when asked by amici.

The committee recorded 34 senators voting yes and 16 no when it moved to recommend that SB 239 do pass. The motion to report the bill out with a do-pass recommendation was recorded at the committee’s second-reading session and carried by that tally.

If enacted as written in committee, the bill would require district court judges in subdivision litigation to invite amicus submissions from governing bodies that administer the same chapter of law, and would provide those amicus filers a route to intervene in the case. The measure as presented in committee did not specify a particular chapter number in the public record excerpted here.

Senators asked technical questions during committee about who qualifies as an association of governing bodies and what the statute means by "nonparty." The sponsor responded that the provision targets organizations whose membership is composed of governing bodies — for example, associations that represent counties or cities — and that "nonparty" meant groups that are not formal litigants but have a potential interest in the statutory interpretation at issue.

The committee discussion and the recorded vote occurred on the Senate floor during second-reading business; the committee recommended the bill do pass by a 34-16 vote and reported that recommendation to the full Senate.