An Act Establishing A Fixed Time Period For Agency Review Of Existing Regulations.
The passage of SB00272 would significantly impact the regulatory landscape by instituting a structured framework for reviewing regulations. It aims to ensure that outdated or ineffective regulations are identified and can be amended or repealed in a timely manner. This legislative approach aligns with broader administrative law reforms, promoting efficiency within regulatory agencies and ensuring that state regulations remain relevant and serve their intended purpose. By providing a periodic review requirement, it holds agencies accountable for the regulations they enforce.
SB00272 is an act aimed at establishing a fixed time period for the review of existing regulations by state agencies. The bill mandates that agencies submit a review of their regulations every four years, assessing the validity, effectiveness, and necessity of such regulations. Agencies are required to identify obsolete regulations, those that have not been used in recent years, and any that may not align with state or federal laws. This systematic review process is intended to streamline regulations and potentially reduce the regulatory burden on entities subject to these regulations.
The sentiment surrounding SB00272 appears to be largely positive among proponents of regulatory reform, who view the bill as a necessary step towards enhancing the efficiency of government operations. The structured review process is seen as a way to bring transparency and accountability to agency practices. However, concerns may arise regarding the potential challenges agencies face in adequately reviewing and addressing their regulatory responsibilities amidst resource constraints, which could present a risk to regulatory efficacy.
Some notable points of contention could include how agencies will manage the required reviews without additional funding or resources, as well as concerns from stakeholders about the implications of repealing regulations deemed obsolete. Additionally, there could be debate over what qualifies as satisfactory review measures and how public hearings will be structured in light of these proposed reviews. Ensuring meaningful participation from stakeholders during the review process may also become a focal point of discussion.