Administrative rules; providing for termination of permanent administrative rules subject to certain schedule; providing for renewal process. Effective date. Emergency.
Summary
SB896 creates a statewide “sunset” system for permanent administrative rules. Under the bill, any permanent rule already in effect or adopted after the bill’s effective date would automatically terminate on a staggered schedule, with 20% of state agencies’ rules expiring each year from February 1, 2026 through February 1, 2030. The Secretary of State would be responsible for developing the schedule, subject to approval by legislative leaders and the chairs of the Administrative Rules Committees in both chambers.
The bill also establishes a renewal process. A rule may be renewed for additional five-year terms, or shorter terms, only by enactment of a joint resolution of the Legislature. Agencies may request renewal one to two years before expiration and must explain why renewal is needed, include a cost-benefit analysis, and publish the request on their website. The bill preserves the Legislature’s existing authority to repeal rules before they expire and requires advance notice from the Secretary of State to agencies, though lack of notice would not stop a rule from expiring.
Impact
SB896 would significantly change how permanent administrative rules remain in force under Oklahoma law by imposing automatic expiration dates unless the Legislature affirmatively renews them. It would add a new codified section to Title 75, create a recurring legislative review mechanism for agency rules, and require agencies to justify continued rulemaking authority with public notice and cost-benefit analysis. The bill would affect all state agencies with permanent rules, the Secretary of State, and the Legislature’s Administrative Rules process.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests generally favorable sentiment toward the bill in committee, as it passed the Senate committee 7-2 on a do-pass recommendation. The bill’s structure indicates support for increased legislative oversight and periodic review of agency rules, which is often framed as a transparency and accountability measure. At the same time, the recorded opposition suggests some concern about the administrative burden and the broad automatic expiration of rules.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the automatic termination of permanent rules, which could be viewed by supporters as a way to force regular legislative review but by opponents as disruptive to agency operations and regulatory continuity. Another likely concern is the workload created by requiring agencies to submit renewal requests, publish them, and prepare cost-benefit analyses, especially on a staggered statewide schedule. The bill also centralizes significant scheduling authority in the Secretary of State with approval from legislative leaders, which may raise procedural or separation-of-powers concerns for some stakeholders.