Committee debates bill to publish agency rules on department websites; sends bill back for rewrite

Representative Heather Scott, R‑District 2, introduced RS 32,091, a proposal that would require state departments and constitutional officers that maintain websites to publish administrative rules and policies on their own sites.

The measure aims "to make it more easier for citizens to understand what is required of them," Scott told the House State Affairs Committee, adding that publishing rules under each agency heading would help citizens and lawmakers alike navigate the link between policies and rules.

The bill text presented to the committee would require departments identified in Idaho Code to include on their websites "any administrative rules or policies promulgated by the department or officer" and to review the posted content at least annually to ensure it remains current. Scott read aloud a list of agencies and constitutional offices she said are affected, including the Department of Administration, Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of Labor, Department of Corrections, Department of Environmental Quality, Department of Finance, Department of Fish and Game, Department of Health and Welfare, Department of Insurance, Juvenile Corrections, Department of Transportation, Industrial Commission, Department of Lands, Idaho State Police, Department of Parks and Recreation, Department of Revenue and Tax, self‑governing agencies, Department of Water Resources and the State Board of Education.

Several committee members pressed on scope and potential public confusion between agency policy and binding administrative rule. Representative Boyle reminded the committee that the legislature previously passed a law stating that agency policy and guidance do not have the force of law, and asked that websites clearly state that distinction. "Could we put on their website that their policies and their guidance does not have the effect of law so that people don't get confused?" Boyle said.

Scott responded that she understood the concern and that the committee could amend the draft: "I could tell that last answer wasn't good enough… You are welcome to edit this because as you know we can make amendments to a bill and this committee and you could remove the policies altogether and I have no problem with that."

Representative Boyle later offered a substitute motion to add language requiring a statement on agency websites that "agency policy statements and guidance documents shall not have the force and effect of law." The committee discussed wording options and whether to quote the relevant Idaho Code provision verbatim to avoid confusion.

Rather than adopt substitute language on the floor, the committee approved an amended substitute motion to return RS 32,091 to the sponsor for reworking so the language can be finalized outside the meeting. The motion to return the RS to Representative Scott passed by voice vote; a roll call tally was not specified in the transcript.

The sponsor and staff indicated further steps could include limiting the requirement to posting administrative rules only (omitting policies) or adding a required disclosure clarifying that policies are not legally binding. Committee staff told members that posting rules on agency websites is workable as an incremental, two‑step approach: first require posting, then consider standardized disclosures or other refinements.

The committee did not adopt final statutory language at the hearing; the RS will return to Representative Scott for amendment and reintroduction.