Relating to administrative rules.
HB 3382 requires the Secretary of State to maintain an online Oregon Rulemaking Information System that lets the public search and view current rules, proposed rules, prior versions of rules from the previous year, rulemaking hearings and meetings, advisory committee minutes, fiscal and economic impact statements, agency-prepared summaries, and agency FAQs. It also directs agencies to make a broad set of rule-related materials easily accessible online, including statutes, rules, internal interpretations, internal guidance, explanatory materials, and contact information for staff who can help regulated persons comply with agency programs.
The bill also amends Oregon’s administrative rulemaking procedures to strengthen online notice and transparency requirements. Agencies must post rulemaking notices on searchable websites organized by date, subject, regulatory program, statute, and keywords; provide more complete notice materials; maintain records of comments and hearing submissions; and, in some cases, provide objective statements about rule goals and how success will be measured. The bill further updates the Oregon transparency website statute so it links to agency rule websites and related public-records information, and it expands transparency-related posting expectations for state agencies and certain local and quasi-public entities.
HB 3382 would primarily affect Oregon’s Administrative Procedures Act provisions in ORS 183.335 and 183.341, along with the transparency website statute in ORS 276A.253. It creates new duties for the Secretary of State and state agencies to publish and maintain rulemaking information online, and it adds new public-access requirements for agency rule materials, notices, and supporting documents. The bill also requires updates to the Oregon transparency website to link to agency rule information and public-records resources. Most provisions become operative on January 1, 2028, giving agencies time to prepare systems and processes.
The available voting history shows strong support in committee: the House committee vote was 7-0 to pass the bill with amendments and refer it to Ways and Means by prior reference. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, but the bill’s sponsorship by the Committee on Rules at the request of Oregon Business and Industry suggests an emphasis on improving clarity, accessibility, and predictability in rulemaking. Overall, the measure appears to have been received favorably as a transparency and administrative modernization bill.
The main areas of potential contention are administrative burden, implementation cost, and the scope of required online disclosure. Agencies must make extensive materials searchable and accessible, maintain records, and update FAQs and contact information, which could require staffing, technology, and coordination. The bill also expands transparency obligations to a wide range of entities through the Oregon transparency website, though it includes limits for confidentiality, proprietary information, and existing-resource constraints. Another possible point of debate is whether the added notice, documentation, and review requirements could slow rulemaking or create compliance challenges for agencies, especially smaller ones.