WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 2201

Relates to requiring mandatory arbitration clauses in certain consumer contracts to be printed in large font type

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Leroy Comrie and 1 co-sponsor

Gives the Secretary of the Commonwealth authority to approve formats for recording documents instead of microfilm, enabling digital/electronic submissions.

REFERRED TO CONSUMER PROTECTION
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 2201

Summary — S.2201 (An Act relative to microfilm)

Status: Filed in MA Senate 01/17/2025; referred to committee(s).
Primary sponsor (filed): Sen. Jacob R. Oliveira.

Note on source material: the bill text filed with the Senate docket is titled “An Act relative to microfilm” and amends Massachusetts General Laws. Other supplied metadata (title about arbitration clauses, a list of U.S. Senators as cosponsors, duplicate referral entries) appears inconsistent with the bill text below; this summary is based on the actual bill language provided.

Purpose / Intent

The bill modernizes statutory language governing the method of recording public documents by removing an explicit reference to “micrographic process” and replacing it with a competency-based standard that allows documents to be recorded “in a format approved by the Secretary of the Commonwealth.” The apparent intent is to update the statute to accommodate contemporary recording formats (for example, digital/electronic formats) and to vest the Secretary of the Commonwealth with authority to approve acceptable formats.

Key provisions

  • Amends Section 15 of Chapter 36 of the Massachusetts General Laws (as in the 2022 Official Edition) by:
    • Striking the words “micrographic process”.
    • Inserting after the word “entered” the phrase: “in a format approved by the Secretary of the Commonwealth.”
  • No additional substantive changes or technical/regulatory language appear in the provided text.

Who is affected

  • Secretary of the Commonwealth: gains explicit statutory authority to approve acceptable formats for the recording/entry of documents.
  • Registries, clerks, and record-keeping offices (e.g., registries of deeds, municipal clerks): may change procedures to conform to approved formats.
  • Individuals and entities filing documents (attorneys, title companies, businesses, members of the public): may need to submit documents in formats authorized by the Secretary.
  • Records-management, archival, and IT operations within state and local government: potential operational and systems impacts (format conversion, storage, preservation, access).

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Modernization: Enables transition from microfilm-centric language to flexible format approval (likely facilitating digital recording and storage).
  • Administration: Requires the Secretary to promulgate or publish format standards and guidance; timelines and technical standards are not specified in the bill text.
  • Interoperability & preservation: Practical adoption will raise issues about long-term preservation, authenticity, security, accessibility, and retention schedules that may require follow-on regulations or technical rules.
  • Costs and transition: May reduce costs (less physical media) but could require upfront investment in systems and staff training.
  • Legal/technical alignment: Other statutes and regulations that still reference “microfilm” or specific recording processes may need review to avoid conflicts.

Legislative history (from docket)

  • Filed/Presented: 01/17/2025 by Sen. Jacob R. Oliveira.
  • Petitions from several state legislators noted on the docket.
  • Committee referrals and hearings are listed in the docket (State Administration and Regulatory Oversight; subsequent committee activity noted). The docket contains multiple, partly inconsistent entries; consult the official legislative calendar or bill page for the authoritative status and next steps.

Related/ancillary notes

  • The provided metadata references unrelated federal sponsors and other bill numbers; those appear to be misattributed to this Massachusetts bill. For authoritative sponsors, actions, and text, rely on the Massachusetts General Court bill page for S.2201 (2025–2026).

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

Sign in to ask a question.