Feed bill to fund 69th legislative session and prepare for 2027
Summary
HB 1 is Montana’s feed bill for the 69th Legislature. It appropriates general fund money to pay for the operation of the current legislative session and to cover the initial costs of preparing for the 70th Legislature. The bill sets out specific appropriations for the Senate, House of Representatives, and Legislative Services Division for fiscal years 2025, 2026, and 2027, and includes additional funding in fiscal year 2027 for the opening costs of the next legislature.
The bill is a routine appropriations measure that funds the legislative branch itself rather than a policy program. It authorizes spending from the state general fund for legislative salaries, operations, and administrative support, and it takes effect immediately upon passage and approval. Because it is an appropriations bill, it directly affects state budget law and the legislative branch’s operating authority for the covered fiscal years.
Impact
HB 1 amends state spending authority by appropriating general fund dollars to the legislative branch for the 69th Legislature and the preparatory costs of the 70th Legislature. It affects the Senate, House of Representatives, and Legislative Services Division, and it ensures funding is available for legislative operations and transition costs. The bill does not create new regulatory programs or alter substantive law outside of budget authorization for the legislature.
Sentiment
Overall sentiment appears broadly supportive and procedural, consistent with a must-pass feed bill. The bill advanced comfortably through the House and ultimately passed the Senate, indicating general agreement on the need to fund legislative operations. However, the Senate Finance and Claims Committee votes show some division, suggesting limited but real disagreement over aspects of the measure or its handling.
Contention
The main point of contention appears to have been in the Senate Finance and Claims Committee, where one recorded vote was 10-12 against the bill, even though later committee action and floor votes were favorable. There was also a failed House motion to amend on second reading (40-59), indicating some members sought changes but could not secure support. The available record does not include transcript detail, so the specific objections are not stated, but the opposition appears to have been procedural or budget-related rather than about the bill’s core purpose of funding the legislature.