Lawmakers weigh eliminating Board of Public Assistance, advocates warn of hurdles for pro se claimants

Sen. Jeremy Trevis (Senate District 10) opened a House Health and Human Services hearing on Senate Bill 194, saying the measure would eliminate the Board of Public Assistance and move intermediate appeals into the Department of Public Health and Human Services (DPHHS).

The bill’s sponsor said the change would streamline appeals and mirror other administrative appeal paths. "The department can handle most appeals," Trevis said, adding that the board meets infrequently and rarely reverses administrative law judge decisions.

Supporters included Rutherford Hayes, administrator of the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), who said OAH receives more than 5,000 cases a year and that roughly 60% of those are public-assistance types. "BOPA meets only six days a year," Hayes told the committee, and in recent years BOPA remanded very few ALJ decisions. He urged a due-pass vote on the bill.

Lieutenant Governor Kristin Juras, speaking for the governor’s office, said the administration’s review of legacy boards found many no longer necessary. "To stop that delay," Juras said of the BOPA step, "we genuinely believe it's best to allow these claimants to proceed directly to district court."

Opponents pressed a different point: advocates for low-income Montanans and people with disabilities said removing BOPA would reduce access to an affordable, independent appeals forum. Heather O’Loughlin of the Montana Budget and Policy Center said department-provided data show roughly 70% of claimants before the board represent themselves. "The Board of Public Assistance provides a cost‑effective way for these claimants," O’Loughlin said, "especially for claimants who are representing themselves without assistance from an attorney or non‑lawyer advocate."

Cassie Wick of Ability Montana said the board provides important neutral review and accommodations for people with disabilities. "Shifting appeals to the department that made the initial decision eliminates that independence," Wick said, adding that delays and reduced access to accommodations could be life threatening for some individuals waiting for health care or food assistance.

Travis Hoffman of Summit Independent Living echoed the access concerns, telling legislators many low‑income claimants cannot afford counsel and that pro bono services are limited.

Committee members questioned witnesses about the practical effects. Hayes said ALJ hearings typically take 60–90 days, and that both the department and the individual can appeal an ALJ ruling to BOPA under current law; if BOPA is removed the next step would be district court. Representative Close asked whether BOPA and ALJ decisions are public; Hayes said they are posted online and he offered to provide copies of recent decisions to the committee.

Witnesses and lawmakers disagreed on how often BOPA overturns ALJ decisions. Hayes said BOPA rarely remands to ALJs (two remands in the past four years), while O’Loughlin noted instances where BOPA affirmed ALJ decisions in favor of claimants, and warned that forcing claimants into district court could reduce appeals by pro se litigants.

The hearing closed without a committee vote. Sen. Trevis said he would seek a carrier for the bill and asked members to consider the measure further; no formal action was taken at this session.