Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fiscal Note Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates bill to clarify sponsors’ access to fiscal‑note sources; members ask for broader language
Summary
Representative Daley introduced House Joint Resolution 2 to make information underlying fiscal notes more accessible to sponsors and committees. Members and legislative counsel discussed scope, proprietary limits and a 24‑hour/business‑day timing provision; the committee did not advance the resolution at this meeting.
Representative Daley presented House Joint Resolution 2, a refile aimed at improving sponsors’ access to the information and basis behind fiscal notes produced for bills.
Daley said the resolution responds to instances when sponsors could not obtain the data or reasoning behind fiscal estimates and that the measure was intended to make the basis of fiscal notes more transparent to sponsors, fiscal analysts and committees.
Committee members questioned whether the draft as written limited sponsors’ access by listing only specific topics for consultation. Senator McKay and others suggested removing narrowly enumerated subparts so sponsors could consult more broadly with Legislative Fiscal Analysts (LFA) and Legislative Research and General Counsel (LRGC). Daley and LRGC counsel Megan Bolen said the language originally sought to balance openness with legal or proprietary limitations on some source material; Bolen indicated counsel could make the wording broader if that matched sponsor intent.
Several senators raised concern that fiscal analysts sometimes decline to share source information that informs fiscal notes. Senator Wyler asked why analysts would refuse to provide supporting information; Bolen said she was not aware of a standing rule that prohibited sharing, though there may be other constraints and she would investigate. Senators pressed for clearer rules so sponsors are not denied access to information that affects fiscal notes.
The draft also clarifies timing: a referenced 24‑hour or one‑business‑day period is intended to align with current legislative practice and to avoid counting Saturdays as business days, which would extend the response period over weekends. Senators suggested removing the enumerated limits and explicitly permitting broad consultation with LFA and LRGC so sponsors can challenge or better understand fiscal calculations.
There was no final vote on HJR 2 at this meeting. After committee questions and no public comment, Senator McKay moved to proceed to the next agenda item; the motion to move the agenda was adopted and the committee left further drafting and negotiation to the sponsor and counsel for work during the interim.
