Regulations: effective dates and legislative review.
The intended adjustment in the legislative review process aims to promote greater oversight and accountability over state regulations. If passed, AB77 would substantially alter the current framework that allows regulations to become effective quarterly, potentially reducing the speed at which regulations can be implemented. Proponents argue this will provide more time for legislative scrutiny, ensuring that major regulations align with the interests of California's businesses and citizens. However, there are concerns that these changes could extend the timeline for necessary regulatory adjustments, thus hindering timely responses to pressing issues.
Assembly Bill No. 77, introduced by Assembly Member Fong, seeks to amend the Government Code to redefine how regulations are reviewed and when they take effect in California. This bill specifically targets the procedures outlined in the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs the adoption and repeal of regulations by state agencies. Under the proposed changes, major regulations—defined as those expected to have economic impacts exceeding $50 million—would need to be submitted to the Legislature for review before being filed with the Secretary of State. Furthermore, it would change the effective date from a quarterly basis to a 90-day period after filing, barring any legislative action to override the regulation.
Discussion around AB77 reveals a mix of support and opposition. Supporters, including some business groups, view the bill positively as it could prevent unexpected regulatory changes from impacting their operations without adequate legislative oversight. Conversely, critics, particularly some government agencies and public interest groups, argue that the bill could lead to bureaucratic delays, negatively impacting the swift implementation of essential regulations designed to protect public welfare and the environment. The sentiment is thus characterized by a tension between ensuring regulatory efficiency and maintaining legislative oversight.
Contention primarily stems from differing views on the balance of power between state regulation and local governance. Proponents believe that tightening legislative review will better align regulations with economic realities, while opponents argue that it may undermine the ability of regulatory agencies to act swiftly and effectively. Additionally, the potential for legislative override of regulations adds another layer of complexity, as it could politicize regulatory actions, affecting public interest protections that require timely action.