Revise definition of "dependent child" in highway patrol, police, and firefighter retirement systems
SB 208 revises the definition of "dependent child" within the retirement systems for highway patrol officers, police officers, and firefighters. For the Highway Patrol Officers' retirement system, the bill removes the requirement that a deceased member must have been "retired" for their child to be considered a dependent. This means an unmarried child under 18, or under 24 if a full-time student, of any deceased member may now qualify for benefits. The bill also updates the specific age and student status criteria for dependent children in the Police Officers' retirement system, and aims to make similar revisions for firefighters.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Jan 2025
Committee Review
Mar 2025
Senate Passage
Apr 2025
House Passage
Apr 2025
Signed into Law
Apr 2025
Introduced Jan 23, 2025
Signed Apr 17, 2025
Maddy AI version diff · 2 comparisons
What changed between versions
SB0208_1(7).pdf
→
SB0208_X.pdf
·
3 edits
MINOR
This bill updates the legal definition of a 'dependent child' for three specific retirement systems: Highway Patrol, Police, and Firefighters. The primary change removes the requirement that a child must be unmarried to qualify for benefits as a dependent. It also clarifies that 'compensation' for calculating retirement benefits excludes certain lump-sum payments for leave taken upon termination of employment.
Scope change
The bill applies to the Montana Retirement Systems for Highway Patrol Officers, Police Officers, and Firefighters.
ELIGIBILITY
The definition of 'dependent child' was changed to remove the restriction that the child must be unmarried, allowing married children of deceased members to potentially qualify for benefits if they meet age and student status requirements.
DEFINITION
The definition of 'compensation' was updated to explicitly exclude lump-sum payments for compensatory, sick, and annual leave paid at the time of employment termination from retirement benefit calculations.
Minor formatting and structural adjustments were made to the definitions sections of the relevant statutes to standardize the text.
Floor votes · Senate Feb 19, 2025 · House Apr 1, 2025
How they voted
47–2
Passed · 1 other
Total votes 50
Feb 19, 2025
D
Democratic18
100% Yea
R
Republican32
90% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
42
Key actions
9
Committee
6
Apr 16, 2025
Signed into law
(S) Signed by Governor
upper
Apr 8, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Signed by Speaker
lower
Apr 7, 2025
Upper · Passed
(S) Signed by President
upper
Apr 1, 2025
House · Passed
House Vote: pass (99-0-1)
house
Mar 28, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Committee Report - (H) State Administration
lower
Mar 28, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Committee Executive Action - (H) State Administration
lower
Feb 20, 2025
Committee
(H) Referred to Committee - (H) State Administration
lower
Feb 19, 2025
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (47-2-1)
senate
Feb 14, 2025
Upper · Passed
(S) Committee Report - (S) Business, Labor and Economic Affairs
upper
Feb 14, 2025
Upper · Passed
(S) Committee Executive Action - (S) Business, Labor and Economic Affairs
upper
Jan 31, 2025
Committee
(S) Referred to Committee - (S) Business, Labor and Economic Affairs
upper
Jan 23, 2025
Introduced
(S) Introduced
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Laura Smith
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 208
Scope: MT
Hi! I can help you understand SB 208. 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