BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1537
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 10, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND CONSUMER
PROTECTION
Mary Hayashi, Chair
AB 1537 (Cook) - As Amended: March 28, 2012
SUBJECT : Government Accountability Act of 2012.
SUMMARY : Requires any major regulation proposed on or after
January 1, 2013, to include a provision repealing the regulation
two years after the date it is approved by the Office of
Administrative Law (OAL). Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires any major regulation, as defined, proposed on or
after January 1, 2013, to include a provision repealing the
regulation two years after the date it is approved by the OAL.
2)Voids the repeal date of the regulation if the Legislature
enacts a statute, that takes effect prior to the repeal date,
expressly validating and approving the content of the
regulation thereby allowing the regulation to continue in
effect until any later time as may be provided by the
validating statute.
3)Requires the OAL to return any regulation to the adopting
agency if the provision for repeal of the regulation is not
included, as specified.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Governs the procedure for the adoption, amendment, or repeal
of regulations by state agencies and for the review of those
regulatory actions by OAL, under the Administrative Procedures
Act (APA).
2)Requires state agencies proposing to adopt, amend, or repeal
any administrative regulation to assess the potential for
adverse economic impact on California business enterprises and
individuals, as specified.
3)Defines "major regulation" to mean any proposed adoption,
amendment, or repeal of a regulation subject to review by the
OAL that will have an economic impact on California business
enterprises and individuals in an amount exceeding $50
AB 1537
Page 2
million, as estimated by the agency.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
Purpose of this bill . According to the author, "Every year,
California agencies issue hundreds of new regulations affecting
individuals and small businesses. In 2011 alone, over 500 new
regulations were issued, many of which cost businesses and
taxpayers millions of dollars. These regulations are an
increasing burden, particularly on small businesses. The bulk
of these regulations stay on the books in perpetuity,
effectively giving legislative power to executive branch
agencies.
"AB 1537, the Government Accountability Act of 2012, would put
an end to the practice of executive branch agencies usurping the
Legislature's lawmaking power. The OAL, which must review all
executive branch regulations, would be required to reject any
proposed major regulation unless it includes a provision
repealing the regulation after 2 years. Any major regulation
must be expressly approved by the Legislature in statute to
extend beyond two years."
Background . This bill requires proposed major regulations to
include a provision repealing the regulation within two years.
This repeal date would be voided however, if the Legislature
enacts a statute that expressly validates and approves the
content of the regulation.
State agencies are tasked with adopting appropriate regulations
based on the statutory decisions of the Legislature. Adding a
mandatory two-year repeal date to each proposed major regulation
leaves the original statute unadministered unless the
Legislature again enacts a statute expressly validating and
approving the content of the regulation. Requiring the
Legislature to revisit previously adopted statutes is both
repetitive and unnecessary.
The APA governs the adoption of regulations by state agencies
for purposes of ensuring that they are clear, necessary, legally
valid, and available to the public. In seeking adoption of a
proposed regulation, state agencies must comply with procedural
requirements that include publishing the proposed regulation
AB 1537
Page 3
with a supporting statement of reasons; mailing and publishing a
notice of the proposed action 45 days before a hearing or before
the close of the public comment period; and submitting a final
statement to OAL which summarizes and responds to all
objections, recommendations, and proposed alternatives that were
raised during the public comment period. The OAL is then
required to approve or reject the proposed regulation within 30
days. Regulations take effect 30 days after being filed by the
OAL with the Secretary of State.
More specifically, the APA requires state agencies proposing to
adopt, amend, or repeal any administrative regulation to assess
the potential for adverse economic impact on California business
enterprises and individuals, and avoid imposing unnecessary or
unreasonable regulations. Agencies are required to consider the
proposal's impact on business, with consideration of industries
affected including the ability of California businesses to
compete with businesses in other states. Additionally, agencies
are required to assess whether and to what extent the proposed
regulation change will affect the creation or elimination of
jobs, the creation of new businesses or the elimination of
existing businesses, and the expansion of businesses currently
doing business within California.
Opposition . The Consumer Federation of California writes in
opposition, "Regulations are adopted in a process that requires
the agency to weigh not only the claims made by giant
corporations of 'adverse economic impacts,' but also the
positive impacts of residents' health, rights and economic
well-being. AB 1537 would turn a blind eye to the benefits to
Californians of regulating consumer fraud, invasions of privacy,
toxic exposures, access to health care, job safety, family
rights, and housing discrimination, to name only a few areas
where the public interest would be undermined. For example,
under AB 1537 an oil spill mitigation rule would automatically
be removed after two years, simply because of a purported one
million dollar 'adverse' impact on Chevron, which reported 2011
profits of $27 billion. AB 1537 would waste the Legislature's
time and taxpayers' money by creating perpetual re-adoption of
regulations that have been properly vetted under state law."
Previous legislation . AB 429 (Knight) of 2011, requires an
agency, for any regulation that it has identified as having a
gross cost of $15 million or more, an increased cost of 5% or
AB 1537
Page 4
more over the cost of an existing regulation, or both, to submit
a copy of the rulemaking record for that regulation to the
appropriate policy committee in each house of the Legislature
when the agency submits the regulation to the OAL for approval.
This bill was held in the Assembly Business, Professions and
Consumer Protection Committee.
AB 586 (Garrick) of 2011, requires standing committees of the
Legislature to hold informational hearings regarding proposed
regulation with a gross cost in excess of $10 million. This
bill was held in the Assembly Business, Professions and Consumer
Protection Committee.
Additionally, the following APA-related bills were referred to
the Assembly Business, Professions and Consumer Protection
Committee during the 2011 legislative session: AB 127 (Logue);
AB 213 (Silva); AB 273 (Valadao); AB 338 (Wagner); AB 410
(Swanson); AB 425 (Nestande); AB 530 (Smyth); AB 535 (Morrell);
AB 541 (Morrell); AB 586 (Garrick); AB 632 (Wagner); AB 1037 (V.
Manuel Perez); AB 1213 (Nielsen); AB 1322, (Bradford); and, SB
617 (Ron Calderon).
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
None on file.
Opposition
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
California Labor Federation
California State Association of Electrical Workers,
California State Pipe Trades council
Coalition of California Utility Employees
Consumer Federation of California
Health Access California
International Union of Elevator Constructors
Western States Council of Sheet Metal Workers
Analysis Prepared by : Rebecca May / B.,P. & C.P. / (916)
319-3301
AB 1537
Page 5