HB 3569
Requires an agency that appoints a rules advisory committee with regard to rules implementing legislation to invite certain legislators to participate on the committee as nonvoting members.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
43%
Oppose
57%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill requires state agencies that create rules implementing legislation to invite the first chief sponsor of that legislation to participate as a nonvoting member of the rules advisory committee. It also applies to the Small Business Rules Advisory Committee when used for rules implementing legislation. The bill aims to increase public involvement in rule development by ensuring legislative representation on these committees.
Key provisions
- Agencies must invite the first chief sponsor of legislation to serve as a nonvoting member of rules advisory committees.
- This applies to the Small Business Rules Advisory Committee when used for rules implementing legislation.
- The bill amends ORS 183.333 to require agencies to consider public input and seek committee recommendations on fiscal impact.
- Agencies must seek committee recommendations on the potential fiscal impact of rules, particularly those with adverse effects on small businesses.
- The bill clarifies the role of advisory committees in reviewing proposed administrative rules.
- It establishes a process for agencies to appoint a fiscal impact advisory committee if objections are raised to a proposed rule's fiscal impact.
- The Small Business Rules Advisory Committee is designated as a potential advisory committee for agencies.
Who is affected
- State agencies
- Legislators (specifically, the first chief sponsor of legislation)
- Small businesses
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Cosponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of HB 3569 express strong enthusiasm for the bill, emphasizing its importance and benefits. They urge the committee to take note of their support, with several testifiers highlighting the need for a new member on the Senate Committee on Rules to ensure the committee's effective functioning. Some also acknowledge the value of expert input in informing decision-making processes, suggesting that this measure can help facilitate more informed discussions. Overall, supporters view HB 3569 as a crucial step towards improving the committee's operations and advancing its goals.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
The opposition to HB 3569 raises concerns about the potential for undue influence, power imbalances, and erosion of transparency. that requiring the Chief Sponsor to serve on the Rules Advisory Committee may not accurately reflect the legislative intent behind a bill, as final language and intent can change during the session. They also express worries that non-voting seats on these committees could be exploited by corporate attorneys or other special interests, undermining public trust and transparency. Furthermore, opponents point out that this provision would create an unnecessary power imbalance, potentially hindering open dialogue and collective effort in shaping legislation, and may even lead to constitutional issues and constitutional concerns about the neutrality of the rulemaking process.