Data and Impact Commission subcommittee pares back proposed budget‑statute cleanup, plans June presentation to LFC

The Data and Impact Commission’s Budget Process Subcommittee discussed plans to modernize and consolidate Montana’s budget statutes at a meeting on March 5, 2026, with staff saying the drafting team reduced an initial 507‑page concept to a 129‑page draft and will seek to present bill concepts to the Legislative Finance Committee in June.

"We are getting rid of the word ‘thereto,’" said Speaker 2, describing the sort of small, non‑substantive language cleanups staff have proposed. Julie Johnson, Deputy Director of Legal Services for Legislative Services, told members she redrafted the bill after codification of the 2025 laws and provided a table of proposed statute amendments rather than printing the full draft.

"I think it's about 60 or 70 pages, and it's in such a status because of our codification and annotation process," Johnson said, explaining why she supplied a condensed table instead of a lengthy printed bill. She enumerated targeted edits that update archaic wording, remove references to facsimile machines, and clarify office designations such as amending 17‑7‑111 to show that the Department of Administration director serves as state treasurer.

Johnson also described planned repeals and consolidations: removing an unused judiciary branch account statute, excising duplicative bonding provisions tied to older federal acts, and moving some provisions to more logical places in Title 17. She said the team proposed an effective date of July 1, 2027, for the changes.

Subcommittee staff described two drafting approaches. An earlier approach produced a very large bill that would have amended hundreds of statutes; after reworking, the draft was cut to roughly 129 pages affecting about 165 statutory sections. "The bill is now down to a 129 pages," Speaker 2 said, adding that the narrower draft aims to reduce opportunities for unrelated provisions to be inserted or "hijacked."

Members debated whether to place a central list of state special revenue accounts into statute or to maintain a public worksheet. Julie Johnson and others warned that writing a statutory list could unintentionally exclude funds that exist administratively but are not codified, and that statutory‑appropriation rules could create legal problems if an account is omitted.

"We certainly didn't want to do that here with state special revenue accounts, that if it's excluded from the special list, then it's not valid," Johnson said, urging caution. Speaker 6, a committee member, argued for transparency: "It would be very nice to have one spot in statute that you could go in and get a comprehensive list of state special [revenue accounts]," but conceded maintenance and completeness are concerns.

Several participants suggested a middle ground: publish a working worksheet or a consolidated list maintained by the Legislative Fiscal Division (LFD) or Budget Office that would be available to legislators and the public but would not be the sole legal determinant of an account's existence. Staff noted internal tools and fund‑balance lists already exist but that direct statute links are incomplete for many funds.

Johnson also raised trust funds as a related issue, saying she had received a list from the Department of Administration and was surprised by the number and dispersion of trust funds across the code. The subcommittee discussed either pulling trust funds into a dedicated chapter under Title 17 or creating a reference that points users to where each trust fund is codified.

Speaker 2 said a separate policy bill may be needed for a new "Dedication of Revenue" requirement in fiscal notes when legislation creates new state special revenue accounts. Because that element raises policy questions, staff proposed separating it from the technical cleanup bill.

Next steps: staff aim to have near‑final drafts before the June committee cycle so the full Data and Impact Commission can vote — "my goal is to have that be a unanimous vote," Speaker 2 said — and to present the concepts to the Legislative Finance Committee in time for bill drafting before legislative days. Julie Johnson will be unavailable June 8–20, and members discussed meeting once or twice before the LFC deadline to finalize drafts. The subcommittee took no formal votes and adjourned with no public comment.

The subcommittee did not adopt formal motions at the meeting; staff will circulate updated documents and schedule follow‑up meetings ahead of the June LFC presentations.