Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs bill requiring fingerprint background checks for adults with unsupervised student contact
Summary
Lawmakers advanced House Bill 745, which would require fingerprint-based national criminal background checks for any individual with potential unsupervised access to students; supporters including the Office of Public Instruction and school boards said most districts already follow the practice and the measure closes statutory gaps.
Rep. Eric Tillman presented House Bill 745 as a student-safety bill to require school districts to adopt and enforce a student protection policy that mandates fingerprint-based nationwide criminal background checks for any individual who may have unsupervised contact with students.
Susie Hedalen, superintendent of the Office of Public Instruction, testified in strong support, saying many districts already require fingerprint checks but that the checks are not required in statute — only in administrative rule — and that the bill eliminates inconsistencies and closes loopholes for volunteers, substitute and nonlicensed educators. The Montana School Boards Association and a coalition of advocates also urged passage, describing the bill as a “common-sense” measure that will increase accountability and protect students.
Witnesses discussed practical issues such as fingerprint turnaround time, the relative merits of fingerprint versus name-based checks and the availability of digital fingerprinting systems; MTSBA recommended fingerprint (FBI) checks as best practice and estimated a typical cost of about $30 per check while noting improved turnaround times from the Montana Department of Justice.
The committee moved HB 745 in executive action by voice vote and sent it to the House floor. Committee members said they expect a fiscal note to quantify local costs and discussed planning and implementation timelines for districts that are not yet in compliance.
What’s next: The bill advances to the House floor; committee members anticipated a fiscal note to outline local cost impacts and suggested districts plan for implementation.
