Rhode Island Senate Bill S3202

Rhode Island 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/3/26
• Refer: 4/3/26

Caption

RELATING TO STATE AFFAIRS AND GOVERNMENT -- ADMINISTRATIVE, PROCEDURES

Summary

S3202 amends Rhode Island’s Administrative Procedures Act to change how state agencies maintain their rules and regulations on the books. Instead of a periodic “refiling” requirement, the bill creates a confirmation-and-attestation process under which each agency must file an electronic notice with the secretary of state listing the rules that are currently in force and attesting that those rules have been reviewed and remain effective. The bill also requires agencies to provide advance notice before refiling rules and to identify any rules they will not be refiling. The measure repeals the existing statutory section that required all rules to be refiled on a fixed five-year cycle. It preserves the requirement that any actual adoption, amendment, repeal, or other rulemaking activity still must follow the normal administrative rulemaking procedures. The act would take effect immediately upon passage.

Impact

The bill would revise Chapter 42-35 of the General Laws by replacing the old periodic refiling statute, § 42-35-4.2, with an updated confirmation process in § 42-35-4.1. In practical terms, agencies would no longer be required to refile all rules on a set five-year schedule; instead, they would periodically confirm which rules remain active, under a schedule coordinated by the secretary of state. This affects state agencies, the secretary of state’s office, and members of the public who track or rely on agency regulations.

Sentiment

The available materials suggest a neutral, administrative measure with no recorded committee debate or votes in the provided context. The bill’s stated purpose is procedural modernization rather than a policy change affecting substantive rights or services. Based on the text alone, the bill appears aimed at improving clarity and administrative tracking of regulations, with no visible partisan or ideological controversy in the record provided.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the supplied transcripts or voting history because none were provided. Potential areas of concern, based on the text, could include whether the confirmation system reduces transparency compared with mandatory refiling, how much administrative burden it places on agencies, and how the secretary of state will manage compliance and notice scheduling. However, there is no evidence in the record provided that any legislator or stakeholder raised these issues.