Michigan House Bill HB5817

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/16/26
• Refer: 4/16/26

Caption

Administrative procedure: rules; process for promulgating rules; modify. Amends secs. 39 & 45 of 1969 PA 306 (MCL 24.239 & 24.245) & adds secs. 47a & 67c. TIE BAR WITH: HB 5818'26

Impact

The implications of HB 5817 include potentially streamlined processes for rule-making while also safeguarding public interests through increased legislative oversight. Specifically, the provisions ensuring cost assessments and evaluations of impacts on small businesses intend to reduce unnecessary burdens that new regulations might impose. The five-year rescission clause for rules, unless extended, aims to keep regulations relevant and responsive to current economic conditions, encouraging agencies to periodically reassess the necessity of their rules. This is expected to reduce regulatory clutter while maintaining essential oversight in state administration.

Summary

House Bill 5817 proposes amendments to the Administrative Procedures Act of 1969, focusing on the process by which state agencies promulgate rules. The bill is designed to enhance transparency and accountability in rule-making by mandating agencies to file a request for rule-making electronically with the office of regulatory reinvention. This request must outline the statutory basis for the proposed rule, the problem it seeks to address, and a cost-benefit analysis, ensuring that changes are justified and impactful. Additionally, the bill requires that proposed rules must undergo formal certification by the legislative service bureau before enforcement, which adds another layer of scrutiny to the administration of state laws.

Contention

Despite its intentions, the bill may face contention regarding the added bureaucratic layers it introduces, which some may view as obstacles to efficient governance. Critics argue that the requirement for extensive documentation and peer review could delay necessary regulations due to prolonged approval processes. Some stakeholders, particularly small businesses and regulatory agencies, might express concerns about the resources required to comply with these new mandates, questioning whether the benefits of such a rigorous process might outweigh the costs. On the other hand, proponents argue that these measures are crucial for responsible governance and protecting the public interest.