Hydroelectric generated energy of any capacity allowed to be considered an eligible energy technology.
Summary
HF251 amends Minnesota’s administrative rulemaking statutes to require legislative approval before an adopted rule can take effect. Under the bill, a rule would not become effective merely after publication in the State Register and completion of the normal rulemaking process; it would also need approval by a law enacted after the notice of adoption is published. The bill also updates related provisions governing how agencies publish adopted rules, how changes from proposed rules are described, and when a rule becomes effective if the final version differs from the version originally published.
The measure applies this new approval requirement to rules for which a notice of adoption is published on or after the bill’s effective date, which is the day after final enactment. In practical terms, it would add a legislative checkpoint to the final stage of agency rule adoption, affecting state agencies that promulgate rules under Minnesota’s Administrative Procedure Act and potentially slowing or limiting implementation of agency regulations unless the legislature affirmatively approves them.
Impact
The bill would change Minnesota Statutes sections 14.18, 14.27, and 14.389 to make legislative approval a condition for the effectiveness of adopted administrative rules. This would alter the current rulemaking framework by adding a statutory requirement that rules receive approval through enacted law after notice of adoption is published, affecting agencies, the governor, and the State Register publication process. The change would apply prospectively to rules noticed for adoption on or after the effective date.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the bill appears to reflect a generally skeptical or restrictive view of agency rulemaking, favoring stronger legislative control over administrative regulations. No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the available materials. The caption in the bill metadata does not match the statutory text, suggesting the context may be incomplete or mismatched, but the operative language clearly focuses on legislative oversight of rules.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the balance of power between the legislature and executive agencies. Supporters would likely view the bill as restoring accountability and ensuring elected lawmakers approve significant regulatory actions, while opponents would likely argue it creates an additional hurdle that could delay needed rules, reduce agency flexibility, and complicate the administrative process. Another likely issue is whether requiring a separate law for rule approval would burden the legislative calendar and create uncertainty for agencies and regulated parties.