House State Affairs committee introduces multiple RS measures on supervision, reporting and rulemaking

The Idaho House State Affairs Committee voted to introduce multiple request statutes affecting contractor supervision, agency reporting and administrative rulemaking. Representatives who sponsored the measures presented summaries and the committee approved motions to introduce each RS by voice vote.

The most detailed presentations included RS 32,337, by Rep. Kyle Harris, which would alter state statute language on supervision for electrical contractors to match pending administrative rules. "All it's focusing on is the supervision aspect," Harris said, adding the proposed change would allow "less of a direct supervision and more of veil during business hours type of supervision," and could ease apprentice ratios on residential jobs (example given: "1 journeyman and 6 apprentices"). Harris said the change is intended to let journeymen move between jobs during the workday while maintaining oversight.

Rep. Elaine Scott (identified in the record as Representative Scott) presented RS 32,332 as part of a larger review of statutory reporting requirements. She said Legislative Services Office staff organized a review that identified roughly "370 locations in law where agencies were required to report, over 105 agencies," and found many reporting requirements were obsolete or not being used. RS 32,332 would require agencies to submit electronic copies of statutorily required reports to the Legislative Services Office (LSO) and, where a reporting date is not specified in law, set a December 15 deadline for submission. Scott described removing three specifically obsolete statutory reporting requirements cited in the bill (examples noted in committee testimony included a one‑time managed‑care report and earlier occupational‑licensing reports).

Representative Vito Barbieri introduced several RS measures aimed at changing how administrative rules are reviewed and when they expire. He described RS 32,100 as creating expirations (sunsets) for administrative rules and RS 32,098 as narrowing the period in which agencies and directors may promulgate certain rules after statutory changes. RS 32,099 would permit the legislature to use a concurrent resolution to reject an existing final rule and would preserve legislative ability to remove parts or whole rules, Barbieri said. During discussion the committee agreed to a friendly amendment changing two July 1 dates in RS 32,099 to June 30.

Committee motions to introduce the RS measures were made and seconded on the record and were carried by voice vote; no roll‑call tallies were recorded in the transcript. Sponsors said some measures will be followed by hearings with more detailed testimony and, for the reporting bill, a subsequent phase of code cleanup is planned.

Votes at a glance: - RS 32,337 (electrical contractor supervision): Motion to introduce made by Representative Pahanka; motion carried by voice vote. - RS 32,332 (centralized agency reporting to LSO; cleanup of obsolete reporting requirements): Motion to introduce made by Representative Mickelson; motion carried by voice vote. - RS 32,094 (amendment to birth certificate designation): Introduced by Representative Vito Barbieri; motion carried by voice vote. - RS 32,100 (sunset/expiration of administrative rules): Introduced by Representative Barbieri; motion carried by voice vote. - RS 32,098 (limits/timetables on agency rule promulgation): Motion to introduce by Representative Nicholson; motion carried by voice vote. - RS 32,099 (rule review and rejection process; dates amended to June 30): Introduced by Representative Barbieri; committee approved introduction with the date changes by voice vote.

Committee members and sponsors indicated hearings will follow for many of the measures so committees can vet details, and sponsors repeatedly noted this is part 1 of broader statutory cleanup work rather than final policy adoption.

Ending: Committee staff and sponsors flagged that additional drafting and follow‑up hearings are expected; sponsors asked committees to review related code sections to identify further "low hanging fruit" for a subsequent cleanup bill.