Requires State agencies, when developing and proposing rules, to utilize approaches that will accomplish objectives of statutory law while minimizing adverse economic impact on municipalities.
Impact
By enforcing a broader application of existing mandates, A3699 intends to secure municipal budgets from being strained by unforeseen compliance costs due to new State rules. The expectation is that State agencies will adopt practices that align with statutory objectives while being mindful of the financial ramifications for municipalities. The bill sponsors indicate that this is particularly crucial considering recent legislative measures that have capped tax levies for local budgets, thereby restricting funding sources for municipalities.
Summary
Assembly Bill A3699 proposes significant changes to how State agencies must approach rule-making that impacts municipalities. Currently, laws focus on minimizing adverse economic impacts predominantly on 'small' municipalities. However, A3699 seeks to remove the designation of size, thereby requiring all municipalities to be considered equally under this mandate. This change acknowledges that all areas are likely to face economic pressures and ensures that State agencies comprehensively evaluate the financial impact of proposed regulations.
Contention
Notably, the removal of the 'small' designation in the bill’s language has raised concerns among some legislators. Critics argue that this could lead to increased regulatory burdens on larger municipalities in situations where certain economic adjustments were previously contemplated for smaller localities. Moreover, there is apprehension that the flexibility analysis mandated could become a bureaucratic hurdle that slows down the rule-making process and complicates compliance efforts, ultimately hampering local governance.
Requires State agencies, when developing and proposing rules, to utilize approaches that will accomplish objectives of statutory law while minimizing adverse economic impact on municipalities.
Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act This bill modifies the rulemaking requirements and procedures of federal agencies under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, including how agencies consider economic impact with respect to small entities. Specifically, the bill requires agencies to consider the direct, and the reasonably foreseeable indirect, economic effect of a rule on small entities when determining whether a rule is likely to have a significant economic impact. Further, the regulatory flexibility analysis for rules with a significant economic impact must include a detailed description of alternatives to a proposed rule that minimize any adverse significant economic impact or maximize any beneficial significant economic impact on small entities. The bill also expands the types of agency actions (e.g., revisions to land management plans) that are subject to a regulatory impact analysis. The bill removes the authority for an agency to waive the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements and requires the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration to issue rules for compliance with such requirements. The bill also modifies the procedures for the (1) gathering of comments for a proposed rule, (2) periodic review of agency rules, and (3) judicial review of final rules.
Regulatory Accountability Act This bill expands and provides statutory authority for notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures to require federal agencies to consider (1) whether a rulemaking is required by statute or is within the discretion of the agency, (2) whether existing laws or rules could be amended or rescinded to address the problem, and (3) reasonable alternatives to a new rule. For proposed major or high-impact rules that have a specified significant economic impact or adverse effect on the public health or safety, an agency must publish notice of such rulemaking to invite interested parties to propose alternatives and ideas to accomplish the agency's objectives; allow persons interested in high-impact or certain major rules to petition for a public hearing with oral presentation, cross-examination, and the burden of proof on the proponent of the rule; adopt the rule that maximizes net benefits within the scope of the statutory provision authorizing the rule, unless the agency explains the costs and benefits that justify adopting an alternative rule and such rule is approved by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA); and publish a framework and metrics for measuring the ongoing effectiveness of the rule. Agencies must notify OIRA with certain information about a proposed rulemaking, including specified discussion and preliminary explanations concerning a major or high-impact rule. Further, OIRA must establish certain rulemaking guidelines. Additionally, the bill (1) revises the scope of judicial review of agency actions, and (2) establishes requirements for agencies issuing guidance.
Relating to economic development in the state by creating economic development opportunities in counties that contain colonias and by developing the workforce by increasing adult literacy rates.
Requires State agencies, when developing and proposing rules, to utilize approaches that will accomplish objectives of statutory law while minimizing adverse economic impact on municipalities.