Rein in Rulemaking and Excessive Regulation

Minnesota has one of the most complicated rulemaking processes in the country. State rules cover many aspects of commerce, government and the lives of ordinary citizens. The sheer number of rules that affect Minnesotans has grown steadily.

In 2000 the Legislature established a Rules Reform Task Force comprised of legislators, Governor's Office staff, state agency representatives, business people and citizens. The task force concluded that Minnesota must maintain a balance:

• Allowing agencies to implement the will of the Legislature, while maintaining legislative oversight of agency authority.
• Providing the public with substantial access and participation in the rulemaking process, while allowing agencies to implement rules efficiently and cost-effectively.
• Achieving industry compliance, while reducing overall regulatory burdens.

A rulemaking reform bill introduced and passed in the 2001 session contained many task force recommendations, including provisions relating to variance procedures, a process to challenge unadopted rules, and a new notice and comment process to repeal obsolete rules. The following indicators will help track how the new law is helping us meet the goals identified by the Rules Reform Task Force. Learn more about the task force report and other information regarding administrative rulemaking at: http://www.commissions.leg.state.mn.us/rtf/rtf.htm

The Big Accounting Initiative Score

Click here to see The Big Accounting scores for all initiatives

Goal: Increase agency accountability for administrative rulemaking, ensure that legislative intent is followed, and serve citizens more responsibly.

State agencies to which the legislature has granted interpretative authority.

Petitions claiming that agencies are enforcing rules that have never been adopted.

Goal: Increase communication between agencies, the regulated community and the public-at-large without unnecessarily lengthening the rulemaking process.

State agencies providing access to public rulemaking documents on the Web.

Goal: Reduce regulatory burdens on regulated entities, protect the public and achieve compliance with state agency goals.

Variances to rules that are requested and granted under the general variance law (Minnesota Statutes 2001, Chapter 14.055).

State agencies to which the legislature has granted interpretative authority.

Note: To date, only one agency has been granted interpretive authority. In 1990, the Legislature allowed the Department of Revenue to issue Revenue Notices, similar to those published by the IRS. (Minn. Stat., section 14.03, subd. 3 (b) (6)). These notices allow the department to promptly answer taxpayers questions about how the agency will interpret a particular rule or law. Taxpayers have been able to get more information quickly, and to rely on what they were told (Minn. Stat., section 270.0604).

When people and businesses get timely information from regulators, they are more likely to comply with regulations. The Ventura administration would like to increase the number of state agencies that are granted interpretative authority by the legislature, in order to create a more efficient and effective regulatory process.

Petitions claiming that agencies are enforcing rules that have never been adopted

Note: Sometimes citizens feel that agencies are enforcing rules that have never been formally adopted. This indicator measures how often unadopted rule petitions are filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings.

Agencies are required to adopt rules through a process outlined in the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Because this process is often lengthy, expensive and inefficient, some state agencies have used methods such as interpretive bulletins or policy guidelines in place of administrative rulemaking. Stakeholders have complained that there is no way to challenge enforcement of an unadopted rule without going to court.

The 2001 Legislature passed a new law (Minn. Stat., section 14.381) providing a quick and inexpensive procedure to get decision on whether a rule has not been properly adopted. An administrative law judge decides when an agency policy is merely the application of a statute to specific facts and when it is a rule that must be adopted under the APA. The Ventura administration wants to minimize the number of petitions claiming that agencies are enforcing rules that have never been adopted.

State agencies providing access to public rulemaking documents on the Web.

Note: This indicator tracks the number of state agencies that provide access to public rulemaking online, and the rulemaking information that is available on the Internet. 19 cabinet level departments have rules. 61 boards and commissions have rules.

The Administrative Procedures Act aims to "increase public access to governmental information" and "public participation in the formulation of administrative rules." Every time an agency promulgates a rule, it must follow prescribed procedures for involving the regulated community and the public-at-large. Not only does this create an open and responsive government, but rules that have wide public comment are often the best and most easily enforced.

Although many state agencies already provide certain rulemaking information on the Internet, most public rulemaking dockets are not available online. The state's paper-intensive system makes it difficult for citizens to easily access rulemaking documents, particularly those who live outside the metro. By increasing Internet access to a larger number of rulemaking documents and linking this information to the state agency home pages, citizens would have easier access to information about agency rules and timelines, and thus greater opportunities for input.

Variances to rules that are requested and granted under the general variance law (Minnesota Statutes 2001, Chapter 14.055).

Note: Agencies may grant variances from their rules. Some agencies have specific statutory variance authority and standards, and the Administrative Procedures Act that provides general variance authority and standards for all other agencies. In 2001, the legislature made it even easier for an agency to grant variances. This indicator will track the number variances to rules that are requested by regulated parties under this new general variance law, and the percentage of variances that are actually granted.

"Hard and fast" rules are often overly onerous, costly and impracticable. Often, agencies would be able to increase stakeholder compliance if they could administer rules more flexibly. For example, agencies with rigidly defined rules may be unable to give a party more time to comply with a rule or use an alternative way to meet the purpose of the rule. As a result, agencies cannot reach their compliance goals and regulated parties are dissatisfied with agencies' enforcement practices.

In the 2001 session, the Legislature passed a general variance law to provide more concrete variance procedures, allowing agencies to use this tool more effectively. Providing more flexibility to agencies will reduce regulatory burdens and increase industry compliance. Monitoring and analyzing the number of variance requests and the percentage of variances granted will help policy-makers to determine if our variance procedures are having the intended effect.