Create a county road maintenance district
HB 369 authorizes the creation of county road maintenance districts to maintain roads that were previously serviced by the county but owned by other entities. These districts can be formed when at least 66% of property owners in a proposed area petition the county commissioners. The districts are funded by assessing maintenance costs directly against the benefited properties within the district. The amount assessed by a district must then be subtracted from the county's general fund dedicated to road improvement or maintenance.
Bill status
died
2 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Jan 2025
Committee Review
Apr 2025
House Failed
Apr 2025
Governor
Introduced Jan 31, 2025
Last action May 20, 2025
Maddy AI version diff · 6 comparisons
What changed between versions
HB0369_1(12).pdf
→
HB0369_2.pdf
·
3 edits
MINOR
The bill was amended to clarify its purpose by adding provisions for appropriations and contingent voidness. The text was reorganized to separate the authorization of road maintenance districts from the specific procedures for their creation and funding. These changes aim to improve the bill's clarity and ensure that the financial mechanisms for creating and operating these districts are explicitly defined.
Scope change
The scope of the bill remains focused on authorizing county road maintenance districts, but the internal structure now clearly distinguishes between the authority to create districts and the specific requirements for petitions, budgets, and tax assessments.
FISCAL
Added explicit language requiring an appropriation and providing for contingent voidness to ensure the bill has necessary funding authority.
REQUIREMENT
Reorganized the bill's structure to separate the authorization of districts (Section 1) from the petition and hearing process (Section 2) and budget/assessment details (Section 3) for better readability.
TECHNICAL
Adjusted the introductory summary line to reflect the new focus on appropriations and contingent voidness rather than just subtracting costs from the general fund.
Floor votes · House Apr 8, 2025
How they voted
32–67
Failed · 1 other
Total votes 100
Apr 8, 2025
D
Democratic42
59% Nay
R
Republican58
72% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
24
Key actions
2
Committee
3
Amendments
1
Apr 8, 2025
Vote failed
House Vote: fail (32-67-1)
house
Apr 2, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Committee Report - (H) Local Government
lower
Apr 2, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Committee Executive Action - (H) Local Government
lower
Feb 28, 2025
Amended
(H) Tabled in Committee - (H) Local Government
lower
Feb 3, 2025
Committee
(H) Referred to Committee - (H) Local Government
lower
Jan 31, 2025
Introduced
(H) Introduced
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
John Fitzpatrick
RRepublican
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about HB 369
Scope: MT
Hi! I can help you understand HB 369. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline