The Statutory Revision Committee considered a proposal to allow local licensing authorities to offer alternate delivery methods (standard mail or electronic mail) in addition to certified mail, but committee members agreed the change would be a policy decision outside the committee's statutory revision charge and did not advance the draft.

Kristen Forstall of the Office of Legislative Legal Services explained the scope: a simple local proposal would have touched roughly 340 statutory provisions across 44 titles; determining whether to modernize each certified-mail requirement would require input from many state departments. Forstall presented an alternative narrower formulation the local licensing authority had suggested: allow an applicant to select the method of delivery and require the local authority to offer options (including electronic mail), but not mandate the change. Committee members and staff concluded the idea implicates policy choices best handled in a separate bill and outside the statutory revision committee's remit.

The committee did not adopt the draft; Forstall was asked to abandon the proposed statutory-revision bill. Committee leadership said a stand-alone bill or targeted policy process would be the appropriate vehicle for any broad modernization of certified-mail requirements.