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
The legislation seeks to ensure that state-imposed rules do not exacerbate the financial burden on municipalities. As many municipalities are grappling with limited funding capacities, especially after the property tax cap changes which have reduced allowable increases from 4% to 2%, the bill is seen as a necessary precaution. By demanding a careful consideration of economic impacts from proposed state rules, the bill aims to safeguard local financial health and operational viability.
Summary
Assembly Bill A3217 aims to amend existing legislation concerning state mandates on municipalities in New Jersey. The bill requires state agencies to adopt approaches that not only meet the objectives of statutory law but also significantly reduce any adverse economic impacts on municipalities. Previously, the law specifically referred only to 'small municipalities'; A3217 expands this requirement to include all municipalities uniformly. This adjustment is intended to address the financial struggles that municipalities face, particularly in light of recent changes to property tax regulations that have constricted local budgets.
Contention
Controversy may arise surrounding the adequacy of the proposed rule flexibility analysis and whether it will sufficiently protect municipalities from undue financial strain. Critics may argue that, while the bill presents a broader mandate relief, it does not ensure that state agencies will implement truly flexible and responsive approaches. Proponents believe that comprehensive assessments of economic impacts will lead to better decision-making at the state level, potentially alleviating the financial pressures on local governments.
Carry Over
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.
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.
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.