Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Administrative Rules topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

House debates reauthorization of administrative rules, targets four disputed rules

Utah House of Representatives · February 15, 1993
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Lawmakers reviewed substitute House Bill 115 to reauthorize most administrative rules and let several disputed rules sunset; sponsors identified four rules of concern including a telephone-solicitor regulation, a proposed referral-agent real-estate license, fingerprinting for childcare providers, and sovereign-land boundary practice around Utah Lake.

Sponsor remarks and extended Q&A dominated debate on substitute House Bill 115, a yearly reauthorization measure that would reauthorize most state administrative rules while allowing an exception list of rules to expire if legislative action is not taken.

Representative Harwood, the sponsor, said the rules-review process has identified hundreds of agency problems and that the substitute has been pared to four remaining items where the legislature and agencies disagree. He described the Telephone Fraud Act rule (R512-26) as extending agency authority beyond the statute’s exemptions and said the rule should sunset unless resolved legislatively. He also said the Division of Real Estate had created by rule a proposed referral-agent license that the legislature may need to decide by statute, and he highlighted a rule change that relaxed a statutory fingerprinting “must” for childcare-licensees to a discretionary “may.”

On sovereign lands, Harwood explained a dispute over the boundary definition for Utah Lake and said statute envisioned negotiation and agreements but that the division has adopted a ‘compromise level’ by rule. On fingerprinting for childcare providers he noted there is a pending Senate bill (SB84) that would align law with the rule; members were asked to weigh policy priorities and potential funding to restore statutory requirements if desired.

Members asked technical questions about whether the department could be required to carry out fingerprinting and about the process for resolving boundary disputes. The sponsor said agencies would have two months after the session to adopt alternative rules if needed.

The discussion concluded with the House moving the bill forward for consideration; the transcript records protracted discussion but not a final House vote on the substitute within the excerpted segments.