ELECTION OF MINE INSPECTORS                                                           S.B. 119 (S-2):

                                                                                                    SUMMARY OF BILL

                                                                                                  ON THIRD READING










Senate Bill 119 (Substitute S-2 as reported by the Committee of the Whole)

Sponsor:  Senator Ed McBroom

Committee:  Natural Resources




The bill would amend Public Act 163 of 1911, which pertains to the election of mine inspectors, to do the following:


 --    Require a mine inspector to be elected in any county where an operating metallic mineral, instead of iron or copper, mine was located.

 --    Allow a county board of commissioners to designate as inspector of mines for that county an inspector from another county if a vacancy occurred because of a lack of qualified candidates.

 --    Prescribe the qualifications for a mine inspector elected in a county where, on the bill's effective date, an abandoned, closed, or idled metallic mineral mine was located.

 --    Specify that an individual elected to another public office would not be eligible for appointment as an inspector of mines, as described above.

 --    Allow a county board of commissioners to designate as inspector for that county an inspector of mines for another county, if an inspector vacated office.


MCL 425.101 et al.                                                       Legislative Analyst:  Dana Adams




The bill would have no fiscal impact on the State and an indeterminate fiscal impact on local governments. For any county that has no iron or copper mines but has at least one other metallic mineral mine situated, there would be an added expense of holding elections for and paying an inspector of mines and his or her deputies. For any county that currently has an inspector of mines, but where only an abandoned, closed, or idled metallic mineral mines is situated, the requirements for the position would be reduced. The bill could allow a county in that situation to offer lower compensation for the position, which would reduce expenditures by the difference.


Date Completed:  2-24-21                                                   Fiscal Analyst:  Ryan Bergan




This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.