The impact of AB 2893, if enacted, would centralize the process of regulatory assessment, obligating state agencies to provide a thorough examination of how new regulations affect California's economy. This includes a comprehensive review of job creation or losses, as well as the effect on new and existing businesses. The law mandates that for major regulations proposed after November 1, 2013, an economic impact assessment must accompany the proposal when submitted. Additionally, the bill introduces a requirement for 30 days of additional public comment whenever a regulation is updated following departmental feedback, thus promoting greater transparency and public involvement in the regulatory process.
Summary
Assembly Bill 2893, introduced by Assembly Member Daly, aims to amend Sections 11346.3 and 11346.5 of the Government Code, which pertains to the Administrative Procedure Act. This bill seeks to enhance the procedures surrounding the preparation and evaluation of regulatory proposals by requiring state agencies to conduct a standardized regulatory impact analysis. Such an analysis will assess the economic implications of proposed regulations, including potential impacts on business, job creation, and overall economic development in California. Agencies will also need to proactively consider and incorporate the feedback received from the Department of Finance into their analyses and proposals. This is an important step towards ensuring that regulatory measures are both effective and economically conscientious.
Sentiment
The general sentiment surrounding AB 2893 is characterized by a strong inclination towards improving the efficiency and clarity of governmental regulations. Supporters argue that the standardized approach to regulatory impact analysis will alleviate the confusion often faced by businesses in understanding compliance requirements. However, there are concerns that additional layers of oversight may slow down the regulatory process and increase bureaucratic hurdles. Consequently, the sentiment from various stakeholders reflects a careful balance between ensuring effective regulations and maintaining a conducive environment for business and economic growth.
Contention
Key points of contention regarding AB 2893 revolve around the balance of regulatory scrutiny and the operational freedom of state agencies. Critics argue that the enhanced procedural requirements may lead to delays in the implementation of necessary regulatory actions, thus stalling important initiatives that require immediate attention. Furthermore, there is debate about whether the increased public comment periods will genuinely enhance regulatory outcomes or merely prolong the rule-making process without additional benefits. Supporters, on the other hand, stress the need for a more accountable and transparent government that evaluates the economic consequences of its regulations.