Authorizing rule-making changes to terms, procedures and reporting duties in higher education
Impact
The implications of SB 543 on state laws involve a more detailed regulatory framework for higher education governance. It places strict requirements on educational agencies regarding their rule-making processes, including mandating public hearings and the submission of comprehensive reports prior to rule approval. This is intended to enhance accountability while also facilitating a more robust dialogue between the agencies and the public. By allowing for ongoing review and potential disapproval of legislative rules by the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability (LOCEA), the bill helps maintain a check on the agencies' powers and ensures compliance with established guidelines.
Summary
Senate Bill 543 aims to amend the Code of West Virginia regarding the rule-making authority of various educational agencies, specifically focusing on the processes and responsibilities tied to legislative rules in higher education. The bill outlines changes to how agencies propose, adopt, and review rules, thereby enhancing transparency and procedural clarity. These changes are designed to ensure that rules are aligned with legislative intent while allowing for greater public participation during the rule-making process. The provisions necessitate responses to public comments and require detailed fiscal notes for each proposed rule, underscoring the potential economic impacts of the rules.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding SB 543 appears to be largely favorable among legislators who advocate for increased transparency and accountability in state governance. The requirement for agencies to substantiate their rule proposals with fiscal impact statements and to respond to public feedback has been positively received. However, there are concerns expressed by some stakeholders regarding the potential bureaucratic burdens that these requirements may impose on educational agencies, which could affect their efficiency and responsiveness.
Contention
While SB 543 is generally supported for its enhanced oversight measures, some notable points of contention arise from differing perspectives on the balance between accountability and operational efficiency. Critics have voiced concerns that the added procedural requirements might slow down the rule-making process, thus impacting the agility of agencies in responding to immediate educational needs. Furthermore, there are apprehensions that the increased focus on public comment could lead to challenges in attaining consensus on complex educational regulations, potentially hindering timely implementation of necessary changes.
Administrative rules; creating the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act of 2025; requiring Legislative Office of Fiscal Transparency to conduct certain analyses. Effective date.