AN ACT to amend and reenact sections 54-55-01, 54-55-03, 54-55-04, and 54-55-05 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the North Dakota commission on uniform state laws.
Summary
HB 1175 updates the statutes governing the North Dakota Commission on Uniform State Laws. The bill revises the commission’s membership structure, including the categories of members who serve on it, the appointment process, and the term lengths for legislative members. It also clarifies eligibility requirements, including that commissioners generally must be licensed attorneys in good standing, and it preserves special provisions for life members of the national uniform laws organization and certain former commissioners.
The bill also modernizes the commission’s operating rules. It requires the commissioners to meet at least once every two years, specifies the officers the commission must elect, and restates the commission’s duties to attend the national conference, promote uniformity in state law, and report recommendations to the Legislative Assembly and Legislative Management. The reimbursement section is also revised to clarify that commissioners serve without compensation but may be reimbursed for necessary expenses under existing state travel and expense statutes.
Impact
HB 1175 makes targeted changes to Chapter 54-55 of the North Dakota Century Code, affecting how the state’s uniform law commission is composed, appointed, organized, and reimbursed. The bill shortens the legislative appointment term from four years to up to two years, clarifies who may be appointed if a legislator is not eligible, and updates terminology and procedural language throughout the chapter. Its practical effect is to refine the administration of the commission rather than to change substantive policy outside the commission’s work.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been noncontroversial and broadly supported. It passed the House 93-0 and the Senate 47-0, indicating unanimous approval in both chambers. No committee transcripts were provided, and the voting record suggests the measure was viewed as a routine administrative update to an existing state body rather than a contested policy change.
Contention
No notable opposition or substantive controversy is evident in the available record. The only potential points of interest are the changes to membership eligibility and shorter legislative terms, which could affect who serves on the commission and for how long, but the unanimous votes suggest these provisions were not disputed. The bill’s focus on technical and organizational updates likely contributed to the lack of contention.