Bill Text: AZ HB2321 | 2013 | Fifty-first Legislature 1st Regular | Introduced
Bill Title: Regulation; criteria; reauthorization
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Republican 1-0)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2013-01-24 - Referred to House GOV Committee [HB2321 Detail]
Download: Arizona-2013-HB2321-Introduced.html
|
REFERENCE TITLE: regulation; criteria; reauthorization |
|
State of Arizona House of Representatives Fifty-first Legislature First Regular Session 2013
|
|
HB 2321 |
|
|
|
Introduced by Representative Farnsworth
|
AN ACT
amending Title 9, chapter 7, article 4, Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding section 9-841; amending Title 11, chapter 11, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding section 11-1611; amending Title 41, chapter 6, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding section 41-1003.01; Changing the designation of title 41, chapter 27, article 3, Arizona Revised Statutes, to "LEGISLATIVE EXPIRATION OF NEW PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONs"; amending Title 41, chapter 27, article 3, Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding section 41-3103; relating to regulation.
(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Title 9, chapter 7, article 4, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 9-841, to read:
9-841. Regulation; criteria; reauthorization; defense
A. Notwithstanding any other law, a city or town may regulate an occupation, profession or activity, the use of property or a condition or state of affairs only under the following conditions:
1. The regulation is within the city's or town's lawful authority.
2. The primary purpose or the predominant effect of REGULATING the targeted activity or condition will not protect a discrete interest group from economic competition.
3. The primary purpose or the predominant effect of regulating the targeted activity or condition will not restrain competent adults for their own good.
4. The primary purpose or the predominant effect of regulating the targeted activity or condition will not promote some private interests to the detriment or disadvantage of others.
5. The targeted activity or condition is an actual threat to public health, safety or general welfare that is verifiable, substantial and not remote or dependent on speculation.
6. Market forces, common law, ordinances and statutes are not sufficient, absent the regulation, to reasonably reduce the threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare by the targeted activity or condition.
B. A city or town shall impose the least restrictive method of regulation consistent with reasonably reducing a threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare. The regulation shall comply with all of the following:
1. The regulation may furnish additional or augmented civil remedies to render common law or statutory civil actions more effective.
2. Only if furnishing more effective civil remedies will not reasonably reduce the threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare, the regulation may also impose clear, objective legal standards and enable the enforcement of violations by injunctive relief.
3. Only if the regulation will not reasonably reduce the threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare, the regulation may also enable the enforcement of clear, objective legal standards by any of the following:
(a) Inspections and enforcement of violations by civil penalty and injunctive relief.
(b) Permitting, licensing or other regulatory preapproval processes.
(c) Criminal sanctions.
C. A regulation reasonably reduces a threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare only if:
1. The regulation is reasonably expected to substantially reduce or eliminate the threat that the regulation targets.
2. The benefits of the regulation are roughly proportional to its short, medium and long‑term costs.
3. Enforcement of the regulation is capable of performance benchmarking.
D. The city or town shall not consider for enactment any regulation unless the city or town specifically and expressly finds that the proposed regulation meets the criteria established pursuant to this section. The city or town shall hold a public hearing to consider these criteria before the city or town imposes the regulation.
E. A city or town that is regulating an occupation, profession or activity, the use of property or a condition or state of affairs on the effective date of this section shall repeal that regulation on or before five years after the effective date of this section unless the city or town extends the regulation pursuant to subsection D of this section.
F. Any person who is subject to a civil or criminal proceeding arising from the enforcement of a regulation imposed in violation of this section shall have a defense to the enforcement action. Any court or ADJUDICATORY body considering or reviewing the defense shall rule on its merits without deference to any legislative, administrative or executive finding concerning the regulation. A court or adjudicatory body may award the prevailing party, other than the city or town, attorney fees and costs.
Sec. 2. Title 11, chapter 11, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 11-1611, to read:
11-1611. Regulation; criteria; reauthorization; defense
A. Notwithstanding any other law, a county may regulate an occupation, profession or activity, the use of property or a condition or state of affairs only under the following conditions:
1. The regulation is within the county's lawful authority.
2. The primary purpose or the predominant effect of regulating the targeted activity or condition will not protect a discrete interest group from economic competition.
3. The primary purpose or the predominant effect of regulating the targeted activity or condition will not restrain competent adults for their own good.
4. The primary purpose or the predominant effect of regulating the targeted activity or condition will not promote some private interests to the detriment or disadvantage of others.
5. The targeted activity or condition is an actual threat to public health, safety or general welfare that is verifiable, substantial and not remote or dependent on speculation.
6. Market forces, common law, ordinances and statutes are not sufficient, absent the regulation, to reasonably reduce the threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare by the targeted activity or condition.
B. A county shall impose the least restrictive method of regulation consistent with reasonably reducing a threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare. The regulation shall comply with all of the following:
1. The regulation may furnish additional or augmented civil remedies to render common law or statutory civil actions more effective.
2. Only if furnishing more effective civil remedies will not reasonably reduce the threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare, the regulation may also impose clear, objective legal standards and enable the enforcement of violations by injunctive relief.
3. Only if the regulation will not reasonably reduce the threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare, the regulation may also enable the enforcement of clear, objective legal standards by any of the following:
(a) Inspections and enforcement of violations by civil penalty and injunctive relief.
(b) Permitting, licensing or other regulatory preapproval processes.
(c) Criminal sanctions.
C. A regulation reasonably reduces a threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare only if:
1. The regulation is reasonably expected to substantially reduce or eliminate the threat that the regulation targets.
2. The benefits of the regulation are roughly proportional to its short, medium and long‑term costs.
3. Enforcement of the regulation is capable of performance benchmarking.
D. The county shall not consider for enactment any regulation unless the city or town specifically and expressly finds that the proposed regulation meets the criteria established pursuant to this section. The county shall hold a public hearing to consider these criteria before the county imposes the regulation.
E. A county that is regulating an occupation, profession or activity, the use of property or a condition or state of affairs on the effective date of this section shall repeal that regulation on or before five years after the effective date of this section unless the county extends the regulation pursuant to subsection D of this section.
F. Any person who is subject to a civil or criminal proceeding arising from the enforcement of a regulation imposed in violation of this section shall have a defense to the enforcement action. Any court or adjudicatory body considering or reviewing the defense shall rule on its merits without deference to any legislative, administrative or executive finding concerning the regulation. A court or adjudicatory body may award the prevailing party, other than the county, attorney fees and costs.
Sec. 3. Title 41, chapter 6, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 41-1003.01, to read:
41-1003.01. Regulation; criteria; reauthorization; defense
A. Notwithstanding any other law, an agency may regulate an occupation, profession or activity, the use of property or a condition or state of affairs by rule only under the following conditions:
1. The regulation is within the agency's lawful authority.
2. The primary purpose or the predominant effect of regulating the targeted activity or condition will not protect a discrete interest group from economic competition.
3. The primary purpose or the predominant effect of regulating the targeted activity or condition will not restrain competent adults for their own good.
4. The primary purpose or the predominant effect of regulating the targeted activity or condition will not promote some private interests to the detriment or disadvantage of others.
5. The targeted activity or condition is an actual threat to public health, safety or general welfare that is VERIFIABLE, substantial and not remote or dependent on speculation.
6. Market forces, common law and statutes are not sufficient, absent the regulation, to reasonably reduce the threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare by the targeted activity or condition.
B. An agency shall impose the least restrictive method of regulation consistent with reasonably reducing a threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare. The regulation shall comply with all of the following:
1. The regulation may furnish additional or augmented civil remedies to render common law or statutory civil actions more effective.
2. Only if furnishing more effective civil remedies will not reasonably reduce the threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare, the regulation may also impose clear, objective legal standards and enable the enforcement of violations by injunctive relief.
3. Only if the regulation will not reasonably reduce the threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare, the regulation may also enable the enforcement of clear, objective legal standards by any of the following:
(a) Inspections and enforcement of violations by civil penalty and injunctive relief.
(b) Permitting, licensing or other regulatory preapproval processes.
(c) Criminal sanctions.
C. A regulation reasonably reduces a threat posed to public health, safety or general welfare only if:
1. The regulation is reasonably expected to substantially reduce or eliminate the threat that the regulation targets.
2. The benefits of the regulation are roughly proportional to its short, medium and long‑term costs.
3. Enforcement of the regulation is capable of performance benchmarking.
D. The agency shall not consider for enactment any regulation by rule unless the agency specifically and expressly finds that the proposed regulation meets the criteria established pursuant to this section. The agency shall hold a public hearing to consider these criteria before the agency imposes the regulation.
E. An agency that is regulating an occupation, profession or activity, the use of property or a condition or state of affairs on the effective date of this section shall repeal that regulation on or before five years after the effective date of this section unless the agency extends the regulation pursuant to subsection D of this section.
F. Any person who is subject to civil or criminal proceeding arising from the enforcement of a regulation imposed in violation of this section shall have a defense to the enforcement action. Any court or adjudicatory body considering or reviewing the defense shall rule on its merits without deference to any legislative, administrative or executive finding concerning the regulation. A court or adjudicatory body may award the prevailing party, other than the agency, attorney fees and costs.
Sec. 4. Heading change
The article heading of title 41, chapter 27, article 3, Arizona Revised Statutes, is changed from "LEGISLATIVE EXPIRATION OF NEW PROGRAMS" to "LEGISLATIVE EXPIRATION OF NEW PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONS".
Sec. 5. Title 41, chapter 27, article 3, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 41-3103, to read:
41-3103. Requirements for regulations imposed by the legislature
Any new regulatory requirement that is established by the legislature shall include in its enabling legislation a specific expiration date for the regulatory requirement that is not more than five years after the effective date of the regulatory requirement's enabling legislation.
