Officials examine new rules governing local health boards
Jan Ivers, chair of the Lincoln County Health Board, leads the discussion at the group's first work meeting March 9, 2021. (Derrick Perkins/The Western News)
Legal experts are deciphering the implications of a pair of new state laws that could have wide-ranging and unintended consequences in how local officials manage public health issues.
While Montana legislators touted House Bills 257 and 121 as measures meant to rein in county health boards and public health officers during pandemics, attorneys worry that the laws could keep local officials from properly managing other matters.
“I believe the spirit by which these bills came about was intended to be responsive to concerns about the pandemic,” said attorney Jinnifer Mariman, the county health board's legal liaison, during a June 8 meeting. “The unintended consequences going forward [could affect] how we deal with our landfill, how we deal with … rabies in dogs, how we deal with all these things that you guys and the health department deal with on a daily basis.”
Mariman said the laws allow local governing bodies — potentially even governing bodies that do not currently exist — to review health board actions.
To hash out the implications of the new laws, Mariman said all 50 county attorneys across the state would meet at month’s end to create a committee. The group also will look into new restrictions legislators placed on county health departments, which Mariman described as even more technical than those before health boards.
“I apologize, I can’t tell you this law is black and white,” she told board members. “Unfortunately, I don’t think a single county attorney in the state of Montana can tell you that right now.”
HB 257, signed by Gov. Greg Gianforte in May, nominally prohibits “actions that impede a private business’s ability to conduct business.” To this end, the bill would forbid local governments from passing certain resolutions or ordinances and prevent local health officers and health boards from taking certain actions.
Legislators passed HB 121, also signed by Gianforte in May, to give governing bodies more oversight over health boards and health officers. The law requires governing bodies to adopt certain rules, regulations and fees proposed by boards. Governing bodies may also amend orders given by health officers “during a time of emergency or disaster.”
One of the vagaries Mariman said the committee of county attorneys will address is which governing bodies HB 121 refers to. While the new legislation defined the term, the law allows for options that could complicate matters.
Jim Seifert, at the time Troy’s representative to the board, pointed out that the county health board includes members appointed by both county commissioners and city councils in Eureka, Libby and Troy.
Mariman said the new laws would likely result in the health board coordinating closely with commissioners to determine the best option for oversight of the board.
Despite the legislative changes, Mariman said it was clear that the board of health still remained a distinct governing body.
“That means having meetings as required by statutes and our bylaws,” she said “It's still a public forum to address health issues that arise or come to the attention of the board of health. None of that is changing.”
Mariman said she expected County Attorney Marcia Boris to be in touch with commissioners and the health board once the county attorney committee ironed out the implications of the laws.