Amends existing law to establish provisions regarding temporary rules, to revise provisions regarding temporary rules, and to provide for the sunset review of rules.
Senate Bill 1076 amends Idaho’s Administrative Procedure Act provisions governing temporary rules. The bill states that temporary rules should be used only in emergency or other limited situations where negotiated rulemaking is not feasible, and it expands the circumstances under which a temporary rule may take effect before legislative review. Those circumstances include an imminent threat to public health, safety, or welfare, compliance with deadlines in state or federal law, reducing regulatory burdens on individuals or businesses, protecting citizens’ rights, and responding to a natural disaster.
The bill also revises procedures for fee rules, publication, and follow-up rulemaking. It requires agencies to publish temporary rules in the first available bulletin, to send copies to the legislative services office, and to begin proposed rulemaking at the same time or as soon as practicable after adopting a temporary rule unless the rule will expire before a permanent rule could be finalized. It further limits repeated re-adoption of the same or substantially similar temporary rule after expiration, unless specific conditions are met, and allows an aggrieved person to challenge a temporary rule adoption as final agency action. The act is declared an emergency and takes effect July 1, 2025.
This bill would modify Idaho Code section 67-5226 and change how state agencies may issue temporary rules under the Idaho Administrative Procedure Act. It narrows and clarifies the justification for emergency-style rulemaking, imposes additional publication and reporting requirements, and restricts repeated use of temporary rules after expiration. Agencies, the governor, and the Legislative Services Office would all have defined roles in the temporary-rule process, while regulated individuals and businesses could be affected by faster or more limited temporary regulatory changes and by the new ability to challenge temporary-rule adoption.
The voting history suggests broad support for the bill. It passed the Senate 35-0 and the House 60-8, indicating a strong bipartisan consensus overall. The bill’s framing emphasizes accountability, legislative oversight, and limiting temporary rules to limited or emergency situations, which likely contributed to its favorable reception.
The main policy tension is between agency flexibility and legislative oversight. Supporters appear to favor tighter controls on temporary rules, more transparency, and limits on repeated temporary rulemaking, while any opposition likely centered on concerns that the bill could make it harder for agencies to respond quickly to urgent public health, safety, welfare, or regulatory deadline issues. The specific expansion of permissible grounds for temporary rules, alongside new limits on re-adoption, reflects an attempt to balance those competing interests.