Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee considers bill to restore procurement rules for state lottery after 2023 exemption
Summary
Sen. Matt Regier introduced SB 232 to roll back a 2023 change that exempted the state lottery (and related entities) from parts of the Montana Procurement Act; proponents urged an RFP process and immediate effective date, while staff reported an unsolicited proposal and timing questions delayed the lottery's procurement.
Senate Bill 232, sponsored by Sen. Matt Regier, would roll back language inserted during the 2023 session that has the effect of exempting the state lottery and certain university system contracting from the Montana Procurement Act. Regier said the change in 2023 created a loss of public confidence and an uneven procurement process and asked the committee to restore transparent RFP requirements.
John Metropolis (lottery commission member, speaking for himself), representatives of the gaming industry, the Montana Coin Machine Operators Association and the Gaming Advisory Council offered testimony supporting the bill and urging the committee to make the bill immediately effective to prevent further negotiated-contract actions without competition.
Misty Ann Giles, director of the Department of Administration, testified as an informational witness that DOA supports the bill’s underlying premise but recommended working with a sponsor on amendment language because the 2023 change also fixed a separate contract-law ambiguity (employees/consultants/contractors). Giles confirmed the lottery commission had voted to proceed with an RFP but that an unsolicited proposal from the incumbent vendor arrived and the situation produced months of delay; she said DOA reviewed the matter and asked the lottery to evaluate the proposal but that ultimate procurement decisions rest with the lottery commission and director.
Committee members pressed witnesses on who authored the 2023 amendment and how the unsolicited proposal affected timing; witnesses said they could not determine authorship of the 2023 language but that the unsolicited vendor proposal and subsequent delays contributed to mistrust in the process.
During executive action, committee members discovered an amendment draft that unintentionally affected the Board of Investments' exemption; after a short break the sponsor withdrew motions to pass and to adopt the amendment and the committee closed executive action for the day, planning to revisit the measure.
Next steps: committee deferred final action and anticipated reworking amendment language and reconvening to complete executive action.
