Legislature(1995 - 1996)
04/26/1995 01:50 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL 130
"An Act relating to agency review of public comment on
the adoption, amendment, and repeal of regulations;
relating to the examination of proposed regulations,
amendments of regulations, and orders repealing
regulations by the Administrative Regulation Review
Committee and the Department of Law; relating to the
submission to, and acceptance by, the lieutenant
governor of proposed regulations, amendments of
regulations, and orders repealing regulations; and
requiring agencies to make certain determinations
before adopting regulations, amendments of regulations,
or orders repealing regulations."
Representative Kelly explained HB 130. He noted that the
creation of regulations heretofore has been carried out
within the bureaus of state government beyond the light of
public scrutiny. He noted that though public input has
always been a part of the regulation process, the system is
inherently flawed. Regulations have the force of law, but
he thought in our form of government law must emanate from
the people through their elected officials.
Representative Kelly continued, in the current system,
unelected regulation writers have the last word in the
process, not the people. HB 130 would attempt to remedy
that by bringing elected officials back into the loop and
making them politically accountable to the people for the
regulations that impact their lives. The legislation would
begin the process of regulatory reform.
Representative Kelly provided Committee members a sectional
analysis of the proposed legislation.
PAM NEAL, PRESIDENT, ALASKA STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
testified in support of HB 130. She pointed out that
regulatory reform was a priority of the State Chamber of
Commerce this year.
DEBORAH BEHR, REGULATIONS ATTORNEY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW,
11
provided a review of HB 130. She pointed out that the
Administration was "neutral" on the bill, although the Lt.
Governor's Office is supportive of legislative reform. She
noted that the amendment she provided to the sponsor
[Attachment #6] would address the Department's concerns
regarding the applicability for regulations. Ms. Behr noted
that the bill would not provide any dramatic changes to the
current system. The Governor currently has the authority to
return regulations to the individual department
commissioners. Ms. Behr thought that the legislation would
well address the cost of compliance.
Representative Brown asked how an agency would be able to
adopt regulations without receiving public comment. Ms.
Behr responded that each department would meet with their
individual commissioners and at that time, the commissioner
would be briefed. Following passage of the legislation,
those meetings would be mandated.
(Tape Change, HFC 95-101, Side 1).
DEENA HENKINS, SECTION CHIEF, DRINKING WATER AND WASTEWATER,
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, explained that the
Department has a great deal of experience in compiling
comments and providing a written response to those comments.
A number of standards are covered by the federal public
participation in regulations which requires a written
response to comments. She indicated that depending on the
complexity and controversy of the regulations, the process
would range in cost from several thousand dollars to ten
thousand dollars. The process also can take a substantial
amount of time to compile which would then cause problems
meeting deadlines.
JOHN LINDBACK, CHIEF OF STAFF, OFFICE OF THE LT. GOVERNOR,
reiterated that the Administration is neutral on the
legislation, and would look forward to including the
legislation with other regulatory reform bills which have
been proposed this session. He added that the
Administration is interested in the regulatory reform, thus
building a consensus to the process.
The Lt. Governor has indicated that the legislation would
reflect how public perception currently exists on the
process. He pointed out that most people assume that this
power is current law. Mr. Lindback then addressed the
fiscal notes. He enumerated that amendments to the bill
most often have a cost associated with them. He asked that
the fiscal notes from each agency adequately reflect the
action of the Legislature.
Representative Brown asked the amount of time needed for a
12
review. Mr. Lindback agreed that implementation could be a
potential problem. He thought that it would work better if
a position was assigned specifically to follow the
regulations. That position would be responsible to follow
all regulations throughout the legislature and know their
impact during that process.
Representative Mulder asked if there was any portion of the
legislation that the Administration found objectional. Mr.
Lindback reiterated that the Administration was neutral on
the legislation. Representative Kohring asked what would
happen if a regulation was turned down by the Governor.
Representative Kelly explained that then the comments from
the Legislative Review Committee would go to the Governor.
Under the proposed legislation, the Legislative Review
Committee would be brought into the loop sooner.
Representative Kelly responded to Representative Brown's
inquiry about the intention to cost. He added that industry
has requested for regulation writers to make a determination
of the cost for compliance. He indicated that would be very
expensive and that the intention during the public process
period, was to have the regulation writers address the cost
of those regulations. He noted that he would prefer a
complete "cost of analysis" for the regulations although
stated that resources are limited.
Representative Brown asked how the language would affect
each department's ability to raise their fees. Mr. Lindback
acknowledged that the legislation would clarify that there
would be a cost to each private person. Representative
Brown voiced her concerns regarding the cost versus the
benefits of the legislation.
BRUCE CAMPBELL, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE PETE KELLY, commented
that the legislation's intention was focused on how to
assist the agencies and provide them with guidance. Cost is
an area in which the agency and staff have little knowledge
in the private sector. They are aware of the statutory
guidance regarding their benefits although the cost issues
are of the most concern to those that accrue them.
ELMER, LINDSTROM, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF THE
COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES,
stressed that most regulations result from the passage of
new regulations dealing with new policy. He pointed out
that was not the case for DHSS. Less than one third of the
regulatory packages developed by that Department are the
result of new legislation. A majority of the regulations
come from an ongoing review. More importantly, over time,
then result from regulations which are necessary as budget
actions taken by the executive or legislative branch of
13
government. He thought that the new provisions would not
help in alleviating the frustrations resulting from the
types of regulations most often experienced in that
Department.
Representative Kohring observed that Mr. Lindstrom had
pointed out that the majority of DHSS's regulations are
drawn up outside the legislative process. He added that the
proposed legislation would alleviate that in the future.
HB 130 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|