Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
'Montana First' bill would require reporting on state food purchases above $100,000
Summary
Senate Bill 246 would require vendors under contracts over $100,000 to report the dollar value of Montana-produced food sold to governmental bodies; proponents said data is needed to develop local procurement policy and support Montana producers.
Senator Cora Newman opened Senate Bill 246 (branded the "Montana First" bill) as a reporting measure to establish baseline data on how much food state agencies, the Montana University System and local governments purchase from Montana producers for contracts above $100,000. The sponsor said the bill is the first phase of a potential policy to strengthen local food systems and noted a $0 fiscal note for the reporting requirement.
Proponents including the Montana Farmers Union, Abundant Montana, tribal food-program representatives and people working in food access argued the reporting requirement will reveal institutional purchasing patterns and help build markets for Montana farmers and ranchers. Jasmine Krotkov (Montana Farmers Union) said the Montana University System already tracks similar data and that the bill simply asks other purchasing bodies to add a column and transmit results to the Department of Administration.
Key bill details discussed in committee include: the $100,000 contract threshold; an exclusion of alcoholic beverages; a vendor reporting requirement to the purchasing governmental body; and rulemaking authority for the Department of Administration to define reporting mechanics. Don Harris, chief legal counsel for the Department of Administration, said the Department is the primary procurement agency and would likely collect agency reports and prepare a consolidated report to the Legislature.
Committee members asked whether reporting would include ingredients or additives; the Department said current state procurement law does not require reporting on food additives and the university system may track some ingredient information. Representative Schubert flagged a drafting issue moving an exemption from one part of the procurement code to another; Don Harris and others characterized that language as likely a clerical drafting error to be fixed before final action.
Senator Newman closed by describing the bill as an initial step toward providing transparency that could later support a Montana procurement preference or percentage goal. The committee closed the hearing; follow-up drafting work was requested.
