Legislature(2013 - 2014)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/21/2014 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB306 | |
| HB140 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 306 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 140 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 140
"An Act relating to the information that must be
included with certain notices provided for the
proposed adoption, amendment, or repeal of a
regulation."
2:03:31 PM
Representative Costello MOVED to ADOPT the proposed
committee substitute for HB 140, Work Draft 28-LS0478\I
(Bannister, 3/20/14). Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for
discussion.
2:04:08 PM
DANIEL GEORGE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE,
discussed the changes to the CS. Version I replaced version
O. He highlighted the changes and their locations within
the bill. He began with page 1 where sponsors Costello,
Wilson, Neuman and Olson were added. Section 2 was a new
section that removed the exemption for boards and
commissions in submitting a copy of regulations or orders
repeal when submitted to the governor for review. Sections
were renumbered throughout. He referred to page 3, section
5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 were new. Section 12 was amended
to reflect the additions. He pointed out that section 5,
page 3 included a change of the word "assure" to "ensure."
A copy of the proposed amendments would be posted on the
online public notice system. He stated that section 6
removed the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA), the
Board of Fisheries and the Board of Game from the exemption
in statute. Section 7 addressed contact with the public as
previously discussed in committee. Section 9 included the
distribution list for regulations adding the members of the
administrative regulation review committee to the list in
statute that were required to receive the notice. Section
10 was amended to clarify "chair" rather than "chairman."
If a regulation was filed by the lieutenant governor and
submitted to the chair, the section specified that "at the
time that the regulation was submitted for filing under the
current statute allowing a seven day to submit a comment to
the lieutenant governor."
2:07:50 PM
CHARLES GUINCHARD, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE COSTELLO,
testified on section 7. He pointed out paragraph (a) on
page 3, line 25 specifying that an "agency may contact
persons and the agency may answer questions from persons
during the period of drafting proposed legislation." He
pointed out page 4, line 1, paragraph (b), referring to
"once regulations have been proposed." An agency may
contact a person regarding proposed regulations and shall
answer a question regarding those regulations.
Co-Chair Stoltze commented that the statement was different
from the usual permissive.
Mr. Guinchard concurred.
2:09:37 PM
Representative Holmes appreciated the idea. She wished to
avoid challenges or lawsuits based on ex parte
communication. She appreciated the ease of public
accessibility.
Mr. Guinchard pointed out a change made in section 8. He
referred to page 4, line 10. Legislative legal counsel
pointed out that the existing statute referred to comment
in writing. A change was included to communicate that
agencies received comments in writing, electronically and
orally. He mentioned language stating "relevant to
regulation being drafted." The implementation could be
broad and the departments would consult with the Department
of Law on a case-by-case basis regarding the best course of
action. He understood that the section would require
communication with Department of Law about how best to
proceed.
2:11:39 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered. The CS was adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE LORA REINBOLD appreciated the efforts of her
staff and of the committee members. She stated that the
legislation was brought to her by small businesses and
restaurants in her area concerned with overregulation. She
advocated for an open regulatory process. The legislation
would increase transparency and allow the legislative
branch to work well with the executive branch.
2:14:30 PM
Representative Costello MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1, 28-
LS0478\I.1, 3/21/14:
Page 2, line 4:
Following "section"
Insert "within 30 days"
Language would read:
"The governor may return the regulations and orders of
repeal to the adopting agency before they are
submitted to the lieutenant governor for filing under
(a) of this section within 30 day (1) if they are
inconsistent with the faithful execution of the laws,
or (2) to enable the adopting agency to respond to
specific issues raised by the Administrative
Regulation Review Committee."
Page 2, line 31:
Following "inaccuracy"
Insert "or insufficiency"
Following "of the"
Insert "good faith"
Language would read:
"(f) Notwithstanding AS 44.62.300, a person may not
bring action in court to challenge the adoption,
repeal, or amendment of a regulation by a state agency
for inaccuracy or insufficiency of the good faith cost
estimates provided under (d)(3) of this section."
Page 4, line 30:
Delete "seven"
Insert "ten"
Language would read:
"(c) Within ten days after receiving a regulation, the
chair of the Administrative Regulation Review
Committee may submit to the lieutenant governor, by
legislative memorandum or letter, comments regarding
the regulations provided to the Administrative
Regulation Review Committee under (b) of this
section."
In addition to CS HB 140 (FIN) 28-LS0478\I the
following changes are requested by the sponsor:
The first change is to ensure the governor reviews
regulation expeditiously and does not inadvertently
slow down the regulation process.
The second change is requested from the Department of
Law to clarify that actions may not be brought to
challenge the good faith estimates.
The last change is requested to give the
Administrative Regulations Review Committee ten days
for review instead of seven days to ensure a thorough
review of the regulations.
Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Reinbold explained the amendment. She
pointed to page 2, line 4 inserting "within 30 days." She
continued with page 2, line 31 following "inaccuracy" the
word "inefficiency" was inserted to decrease exposure as a
state. Following "of the" the words "good faith" were
inserted. She continued with page 4; line 30, which changed
the time from seven to ten days.
2:16:27 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Amendment 1 was adopted.
2:17:21 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2:
Page 2, line 28:
Insert "(6) An email subject line, and a title in
a written publication, shall to the extent
possible give a reader a fair idea of the
substance of the regulation changed."
Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT a conceptual amendment
that Legislative Legal Services renumber the bill
accordingly. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Gara explained that the notice of regulation
change typically stated "notice of regulation change." He
proposed that emails list clearly the subject of the
regulation change in the subject line of the email.
Representative Gara MOVED to AMEND Amendment 2 changing the
word "possible" to "feasible". There being NO OBJECTION, it
was so ordered. The amendment to the amendment was ADOPTED.
2:20:04 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Amendment 2 was adopted.
Co-Chair Stoltze stated that the changes in the bill would
not have a fiscal impact the departments.
Representative Costello discussed the indeterminate fiscal
note for CSHB 140 (FIN).
2:21:20 PM
Representative Gara stated that he was confused about the
indeterminate nature of the fiscal note. He opined that the
bill should have no fiscal impact.
Representative Reinbold pointed out administrative order
number 266 by the governor to minimize the cost, time and
burden to encourage state agencies to work with all
stakeholders to meet the objective of Alaska statutes to
ensure that the state regulations were consistent with the
statutes and limited to carrying out the statutory purpose.
She believed that the agencies were absorbing costs of the
legislation.
2:22:54 PM
Representative Wilson disagreed. The fiscal note was based
on state impacts. The bill addressed the effects on local
districts. The indeterminate nature of the fiscal note was
due to the fact that the reports were not provided by the
agencies.
2:23:51 PM
Vice-Chair Neuman asked about page 3, section 6. He asked
why the Board of Fisheries and the Board of Game were
removed from the bill.
CRYSTAL KOENEMAN, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD, replied
that the RCA, the Board of Fisheries and the Board of Game
were exempted from providing a brief description with
public notices. Per the legislation, the boards would be
required to provide a brief description in their notice.
2:25:57 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to change the fiscal note from
indeterminate to zero.
Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED.
2:26:59 PM
Representative Edgmon stated that the agencies might
require additional funds.
Representative Gara WITHDREW his suggestion to change the
fiscal note.
Representative Costello appreciated the sponsor and the
members of the committee.
Vice-Chair Neuman MOVED to REPORT CSHB 140 (FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CSHB 140 (FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with one new indeterminate fiscal
note from the Office of the Governor.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| CS(FIN) HB 140 - Version I - 3.20.2014.pdf |
HFIN 3/21/2014 1:30:00 PM |
HB 140 |
| HB 140 Amendments 1-2 CS-I version.pdf |
HFIN 3/21/2014 1:30:00 PM |
HB 140 |