Provide exception for agency adoption of administrative rules
Impact
The enactment of HB 739 is poised to have significant implications for the legislative oversight of administrative rules in Montana. It intends to enhance the efficiency of rulemaking by allowing vital administrative actions to proceed without waiting for the legislative session to address certain necessary regulations. This change is especially relevant for agencies that need to respond quickly to changing circumstances or to implement measures that have been mandated by previous legislation.
Summary
House Bill 739 aims to revise existing laws that govern legislative oversight of administrative rules within the state of Montana. The primary focus of the bill is to provide a specific exception that allows agencies to adopt administrative rules during the last quarter of the year leading up to a legislative session, which has traditionally been restricted. By amending Section 2-4-305 of the Montana Code Annotated (MCA), the bill seeks to streamline the rule adoption process and reduce delays that agencies may encounter due to timing restrictions.
Sentiment
General sentiment around HB 739 appears pragmatic, with support stemming from the perspective of facilitating government efficiency and responsiveness. Supporters of the bill argue that the amendments would enable state agencies to better serve the public by promptly implementing rules that address contemporary issues. However, concerns are raised about potential overreach and diminished legislative scrutiny of proposed rules, with some stakeholders arguing that relaxing the timeframes may undermine the thoroughness of the review process.
Contention
One notable point of contention revolves around the balance between efficiency in government operations and safeguarding public input and legislative oversight. Critics argue that allowing rule adoption without adequate time for public comment may lead to regulations that are not well-informed by stakeholder input. The bill's provisions, particularly regarding exempting rule adoption from usual legislative review norms, have sparked debates about the appropriate level of control that the legislature should maintain over administrative actions.
Proposed Administrative rules cost-benefit analysis requirement provision, certain rules adoption prohibition provision, and requiring notice to the legislature upon the adoption of certain rules
Cost-benefit analysis required for proposed administrative rules, adoption of certain rules prohibited, and notice to legislature upon adoption of exempt rules required.
Maryland Public Ethics Law - State Officials of and Candidates to be State Officials of the Judicial Branch - Conflicts of Interest and Financial Disclosure Statements
Maryland Public Ethics Law - State Officials of and Candidates to be State Officials of the Judicial Branch - Conflicts of Interest and Financial Disclosure Statements