Legislature(2003 - 2004)
02/19/2004 03:40 PM Senate STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 287-REGULATION REVIEW
CHAIR GARY STEVENS announced SB 287 to be up for consideration.
He noted there was a committee substitute (CS) and asked for a
motion to adopt it as the working document.
SENATOR BERT STEDMAN made a motion to adopt CSSB 287, version
23-LS1566\D as the working document. There being no objection,
it was so ordered.
CHAIR GARY STEVENS asked Mr. Stancliff to explain the changes in
the CS and noted there was a revised fiscal note accompanying
the CS.
DAVE STANCLIFF, staff to sponsor Senator Gene Therriault, said
the CS addresses several of the comments expressed at the prior
meeting.
To reduce the fiscal impact and not involve legislative legal in
reviews that don't need their expertise, all boards and
commissions were removed from the review process. The boards of
fish and game were removed in the CS and they represent almost
21 percent of all regulation proposals that the attorney
general's (AG) office reviews in a year. With that workload
reduction, the fiscal note is reduced by about $100,000.
Page 2, lines 10-18 addresses the means of communication. He
explained that the bill requires a review, but the communication
between legislative legal and the AG's office is informal rather
than in writing unless there is no resolution.
The third change is on page 2, lines 19-22 and relates to
communication between Legislative Legal Services and the
Department of Law, the Administrative Regulation Review
Committee, the Senate President, and the Speaker of the House of
Representatives. For reasons of confidentiality, documents
between the Legislative Legal Services and any of the parties
named are to be considered working documents. He reported that
conversations are ongoing regarding changes suggested by the
Department of Law. Because those changes might further reduce
the fiscal impact, the sponsor has said he would make the
changes prior to the hearing in the Finance Committee if he
elects to incorporate them.
Page 2, lines 23-25 makes it clear that reviews conducted by the
Legislative Legal Services will not delay the adoption,
amendment, or repeal of a regulation.
On page 1, line 9 states that the Department of Law will not be
encumbered with the task of copying and providing documents to
legislative legal.
He concluded his comments by reemphasizing that the sponsor is
still working with the Department of Law and he is aware that
many of their suggestions are designed to reduce the fiscal
impact.
CHAIR GARY STEVENS thanked Mr. Stancliff and noted that although
this was the second time the committee had heard the bill, it
would be helpful for him to recap the purpose of the legislation
and what it is attempting to accomplish.
MR.STANCLIFF explained that the legislation is based on the
premise that the Executive Branch, through the Department of
Law, provides a good balance regarding their perspective into
the legislative system. But the same level of oversight and
involvement ceases during the interim when regulations begin to
flow.
In comparison, the Minnesota Legislative Branch co-writes
regulation with the Executive Branch while the Colorado
Legislature conducts an annual review of regulations. SB 278 is
an effort to raise the quality and standard of regulations to
comport with what the Legislature intended in statute. To
accomplish this end, the Legislative Branch would review
regulations before the public comment period. This, he asserted,
is nothing more than a quality review by the legislative legal
team.
SENATOR BERT STEDMAN remarked this would require additional
state hiring, but the fiscal note indicates there isn't any
physical space available in the legislative legal office. He
asked for a comment on increasing efficiency versus increasing
state overhead.
MR. STANCLIFF replied that is a concern, but incorporating other
suggestions from the Department of Law may reduce the fiscal
note to the point that finding new space for the new hires won't
be an issue. With regard to cost, he suggested that, "Just as in
a business, an investment sometimes up front translates into a
great savings on down the line." He acknowledged that the
Finance Committee might insist that existing space be found
before they agree to move the bill.
SENATOR GRETCHEN GUESS questioned excluding all boards,
commissions, councils or other public corporations. She noted
the Board of Fish and the Board of Education are both boards
within a department and she was curious how that would work.
Because the Board of Education approves regulations the
Department of Education makes, she questioned whether regulation
such as the implementation of the high school qualifying exam
would be excluded.
MR. STANCLIFF replied if the regulation or proposed rule is
generated from a board or commission, it would be exempt from
this rule regardless of whether or not it is part of an agency.
He reported this broad-brush application was a policy call to
reduce cost. It is agency driven regulations promulgated as a
matter of agency policy that have been problematic, he asserted.
Further, board and commission members take their jobs very
seriously and they usually have an assistant attorney general
assigned to work with them.
SENATOR GUESS maintained the writing is too broad and she would
like the committee to consider that and have Mr. Stancliff take
that assertion back to the sponsor. She didn't believe any
comments in the previous hearing suggested that all education
regulations be excluded from the bill, but that is what appears
to have happened. The Board of Fish and the Board of Education
are very different and she asked that be taken into
consideration.
She then asked if councils and public corporations included the
Alaska Railroad Corporation, Alaska Housing Finance Corporation
(AHFC), and Permanent Fund Corporation.
MR. STANCLIFF agreed and said those political subdivisions that
have been created over the years and exempted from the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) are excluded from the review
process.
SENATOR GUESS asked if the Council on Sexual Assault and
Domestic Violence would be an example of a council.
MR. STANCLIFF said yes, he thought the drafter, Tam Cook, was
trying to separate any quasi-regulatory body that had been
created from the "hard agency" regulatory provisions.
SENATOR GUESS expressed concern about the three extra positions
and asked him to elaborate on the "savings down the road" he
referred to earlier. She reviewed the fiscal note and said, "For
the record, when it gets to Senate Finance - 10 months of a
legal secretary seems interesting..."
MR. STANCLIFF said there has been some discussion of how this
might be funded. He pointed to the chart that shows some of the
ways that agencies are financially affected when the AG reviews
them. He contended that the direct savings would probably come
from having a better process. When people know their work will
be reviewed, they do a better job.
The indirect savings, he asserted, are enormous. "The cost of
one poorly written, wrongfully constructed regulation, applied
at the wrong time, that causes litigation is unbelievable." He
called this a "better government provision."
CHAIR GARY STEVENS observed that legislative legal works less
than full time during the interim and he wondered if there might
not be a way to use them more fully.
MR. STANCLIFF thought there was room for further negotiation in
the interest of making the bill more fiscally palatable.
CHAIR GARY STEVENS asked if there were other questions or
comments.
SENATOR GUESS made a final comment regarding eliminating all
boards, commissions, councils, and public corporations. She
advised, "You might want to go for what you think is right and
see if we can negotiate somewhere around that because I'm pretty
concerned about it."
CHAIR GARY STEVENS announced Senator John Cowdery had joined the
meeting.
3:50pm
ANNETTE KREITZER, chief of staff to Lt. Governor Leman, answered
Senator Guess's question about boards and commissions saying
there is nothing in the public process that would preclude
Legislative Legal from reviewing boards and commissions. As they
look at amending the bill, they would keep that in mind, she
said.
For the record she stated that Lt. Governor Leman and his staff
would continue to work with the sponsor as the bill moves along.
SENATOR GUESS said she appreciates the comment and she sees the
purpose of the bill, but her worry is that if all boards and
commissions are taken off the table that won't change because
people are busy.
CHAIR GARY STEVENS announced he would like to move the bill on
to the Finance Committee.
SENATOR COWDERY made a motion to move CSSB 287, \D version, from
committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal
note. There being no objection, it was so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|