WeVote

Bill

Bill

HF 599

A bill for an act relating to regional representation and residency requirements for members of the state transportation commission, and including effective date and applicability provisions.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Tom Determann

Residency-based rules require STC members to live in their assigned region or resign, with vacancies filled per existing procedures.

Withdrawn.
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HF 599

Summary of HF 599 (2025)

A bill relating to regional representation and residency requirements for members of the state transportation commission, including effective date and applicability provisions. Status: Withdrawn.

Purpose and intent

  • To update how regional representation is assigned to members of the state transportation commission (STC) and to establish residency-based resignation rules.
  • The bill aims to ensure that commissioners continue to reside within their designated region and to align future appointments with a fixed regional sequencing.

Key provisions

Residency requirement and vacancy rule (Sec. 2)

  • New Section 307A.9 establishes a residency-based rule for commission members representing a region.
  • If a member appointed to represent a region no longer resides in that region, they are deemed to have resigned from the commission.
  • The vacancy is filled in accordance with Section 307A.4 (the existing process for filling vacancies).

Regional composition (Region 7 specification)

  • The bill specifies Region 7, listing the counties that compose it: Adams, Appanoose, Clarke, Davis, Decatur, Jefferson, Keokuk, Lucas, Monroe, Montgomery, Page, Ringgold, Taylor, Union, Van Buren, Wapello, Washington, and Wayne.

Applicability and transition (Sec. 4)

  • The act applies to members appointed and confirmed on or after the effective date of the act.
  • A sequential regional representation scheme is established for new appointments made after the effective date:
    • First regular term appointment after the effective date represents Region 1.
    • Second represents Region 2.
    • Third represents Region 3.
    • Fourth represents Region 4.
    • Fifth represents Region 5.
    • Sixth represents Region 6.
    • Seventh represents Region 7.

Effective date (Sec. 3)

  • The act is deemed to take effect immediately upon enactment.

Regional representation details

  • Region 7 (as defined for the bill) consists of the following counties: Adams, Appanoose, Clarke, Davis, Decatur, Jefferson, Keokuk, Lucas, Monroe, Montgomery, Page, Ringgold, Taylor, Union, Van Buren, Wapello, Washington, Wayne.

Current law context (Explanatory notes)

  • The existing framework charges the STC with developing, coordinating, and annually updating a comprehensive transportation policy and plan for the state.
  • The new residency-based rule interacts with the current vacancy process (307A.4) and 307A.1A, sub. 1 to ensure alignment between a commissioner’s region and residency status.

Legislative actions and timeline

  • 2025-02-25: Introduced and referred to Transportation.
  • 2025-02-26: Subcommittee meeting; subcommittee members: Determann, Madison, and Young.
  • 2025-02-27: Subcommittee recommends passage.
  • 2025-03-05: Committee reports; passes committee with a voice vote (Yeas 20, Nays 0, Excused 1). The bill was renumbered as HF 848 at this time.
  • 2025-03-07: Committee report indicates renumbering to HF 848.
  • 2025-03-21: Status updated to Withdrawn.

Sponsors

  • Primary: Rep. Determann

Impact and considerations

  • Aims to preserve region-based representation on the STC by tying residency to continued service and providing a clear process to fill vacancies when a representative no longer resides in their region.
  • Creates a defined transition plan for new appointees (post-effective date) to ensure region alignment from the outset of appointments.
  • Because the bill was withdrawn, these provisions did not become law, but they reflect a potential policy direction for regional governance of the transportation commission.

If you’d like, I can map out how a hypothetical appointment cycle would work under the new regional sequencing or compare HF 599’s approach with current practice.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.