State Efficiency Legislation Report

September 14th, 2025

By: Thurston Powers

Introduction

Efficiency has emerged as a policy priority across state governments—mirroring the 'year of efficiency' occuring across the private sector. Because most states must balance their budgets and residents can readily move to lower‑tax jurisdictions, leaders across the political spectrum face the same constraints: sustain service quality, avoid tax increases, and demonstrate disciplined stewardship of public funds. Efficiency improvements—eliminating duplication, streamlining processes, and modernizing operations—offer the least‑controversial way to stretch dollars without cutting core services.

Newly introduced bills take oversight functions once centered on fraud, waste, and abuse and expand them to include operational performance and cost effectiveness. Legislatures and governors are also building permanent efficiency structures, strengthening performance management, pruning outdated regulations, and shifting to digital‑first workflows to reduce overhead and accelerate results. The initiatives below show how states are crafting concrete reforms to improve efficiency.

Trends and examples:

Methodology

Using the Scholars Edge search engine, I was able to search through all 50 states and the District of Columbia for bills that focused on efficiency. The initial search result consisted of 660 bills, which I pruned down to 195. While the 465 removed bills were largely focused on efficiency of some sort, I was interested in a very specific subset of efficiency bills. I focused on "meta optimizers" as opposed to targetted bills. For example, a meta optimizer would be like the an inspector general, legislative auditor, changing how all regulations are managed, how all contracts and producement is handled, or a commission on efficiency. On the other hand, a bill that aims to streamline the aspects of the state's Department of Education would be a targeted bill. Targeted bills are fairly common- most agencies are designed with accountability and performance reviews in their establishment.

Concepts used

Prompt used

I am interested in legislative bills that focus on improving the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations. This includes measures that establish, restructure, or empower entities such as committees, commissions, task forces, advisory boards, oversight councils, agencies, departments, or special offices whose mission is to identify and implement cost savings, streamline bureaucratic processes, improve inter-agency coordination, or modernize government functions. I am also looking for bills that require or authorize studies, audits, reports, or pilot programs aimed at evaluating government performance, uncovering duplicative or overlapping responsibilities, reducing administrative burdens, or analyzing regulatory inefficiencies. Such initiatives may include the exploration or adoption of automation and technology solutions, consolidation of services, process reengineering, or the elimination of unnecessary rules and procedures. In short, I want to capture bills that propose structural or procedural mechanisms—whether permanent bodies, temporary study groups, or mandated evaluations—that are explicitly designed to make government more efficient, less costly, and more responsive. If it doesn't specifically state that the goal of the legislation is to promote government efficiency, mark it as false.

Alabama

Index of Bills

Senate - 12 - State and local agencies; conditioning the issuance of permit to operate business on having been granted a different permit from another agency prohibited

Legislation ID: 18692

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

SB12 seeks to eliminate unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles in the business licensing process by prohibiting governmental bodies from conditioning the issuance of certain licenses on the acquisition of other licenses from different governmental entities. This aims to facilitate easier access to business operations and reduce regulatory burdens.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Prohibits governmental bodies from requiring additional licenses from other agencies for issuing a license.
  • Prohibits state and local agencies from conditioning the issuance of a license on the acquisition of another license from a different governmental body.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-06 Currently Indefinitely Postponed
2025-02-11 County and Municipal Government 1st Amendment
2025-02-11 Read for the Second Time and placed on the Calendar
2025-02-11 Reported Out of Committee House of Origin
2025-02-04 Pending Committee Action in House of Origin
2025-02-04 Read for the first time and referred to the Senate Committee on County and Municipal Government

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly addresses the reduction of bureaucratic hurdles and regulatory inefficiencies by eliminating duplicative licensing requirements, which is a clear government efficiency measure.

Mechanism of Influence: By prohibiting conditional licensing, the bill streamlines government processes and reduces administrative burdens, making government operations more efficient and responsive for applicants.

Evidence:

  • prohibiting governmental bodies from conditioning the issuance of certain licenses on the acquisition of other licenses from different governmental entities
  • prohibits any governmental body from requiring an individual to obtain a license from another governmental body as a precondition for issuing their own license

Ambiguity Notes: The bill’s language is clear in its intent to reduce regulatory overlap; however, it does not establish a new entity or require a study, audit, or report. Its mechanism is direct regulatory reform.

Senate - 280 - Alabama Teacher Paperwork Streamlining Act, State Department of Education required to develop unified digital platform for consolidating and sharing documentation relating to the Alabama Literacy Act, Alabama Numeracy Act, Individualized Education Programs, and other educational programs

Legislation ID: 171230

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

The Alabama Teacher Paperwork Streamlining Act aims to create a unified digital platform to consolidate documentation requirements for various educational programs, including the Alabama Literacy Act and Section 504 Plans. The bill mandates collaboration with local boards of education and stakeholders to eliminate redundant documentation, standardize forms, and develop a data-sharing system to reduce repetitive input by teachers. It also establishes a teacher advisory committee to assess the effectiveness of these measures and ensures compliance by local education boards, with annual audits conducted by the State Department of Education.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Annual audits by the State Department of Education to ensure compliance.
  • Committee must consist of a majority of non-administrative teachers.
  • Committee must consist of at least 75% nonadministrative teachers.
  • Committee to meet quarterly and submit recommendations to the State Superintendent of Education.
  • Committee to meet quarterly and submit reports to the State Superintendent.
  • Conduct annual audits to ensure compliance.
  • Conduct annual reviews of paperwork requirements.
  • Corrective actions for non-compliance may include retraining of administrators.
  • Develop a system of data sharing among various educational programs.
  • Establishes a system for data sharing among educational programs.
  • Establishes compliance requirements for local boards of education.
  • Implement corrective actions for non-compliance.
  • Legislature to provide funding for the State Department of Educations initiatives.
  • Local boards must comply with the streamlined paperwork system.
  • Mandates collaboration with local boards of education and stakeholders to eliminate redundant paperwork.
  • Mandates collaboration with local boards of education to create a user-friendly system.
  • Mandates compliance from local boards of education with the streamlined paperwork system.
  • Mandates quarterly meetings to evaluate paperwork reduction effectiveness.
  • Mandates the creation of a unified digital platform for documentation.
  • Mandates the elimination of redundant documentation and standardization of forms.
  • Members to be appointed reflecting diversity in various demographics.
  • Repeals Section 16-6B-11, which established the Paperwork Reduction Committee.
  • Requires annual audits by the State Department of Education to ensure compliance.
  • Requires annual reviews of paperwork requirements involving teacher input.
  • Requires collaboration with local education boards to create a unified digital platform.
  • Requires legislative funding for the State Department of Education to support the unified digital platform and training for teachers.
  • Requires the formation of a teacher advisory committee with representatives from various school districts.
  • Requires the State Department of Education to develop a unified digital platform for documentation.
  • Requires the State Department of Education to streamline documentation for various educational programs.
  • Support for local boards of education in streamlining paperwork.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-14 Enacted
2025-05-06 Education Policy Engrossed Substitute Offered
2025-05-06 Motion to Adopt - Adopted Roll Call 1161
2025-05-06 Enrolled
2025-05-06 Delivered to Governor
2025-05-06 Signature Requested
2025-05-06 Orr Concur In and Adopt - Adopted Roll Call 924
2025-05-06 Ready to Enroll

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly aims to improve government efficiency by consolidating and streamlining bureaucratic processes related to teacher paperwork, establishing permanent and advisory bodies, and mandating audits and compliance mechanisms.

Mechanism of Influence: It creates a unified digital documentation platform, standardizes forms, eliminates redundant paperwork, and establishes a teacher advisory committee for ongoing evaluation. It also requires annual audits to ensure compliance and continuous improvement.

Evidence:

  • The bill mandates collaboration with local boards of education and stakeholders to eliminate redundant documentation, standardize forms, and develop a data-sharing system to reduce repetitive input by teachers.
  • Establishes a teacher advisory committee to assess the effectiveness of these measures and ensures compliance by local education boards, with annual audits conducted by the State Department of Education.
  • Purpose ... are to streamline paperwork burdens on teachers and improve teacher morale and retention.
  • Establishes compliance requirements for local boards of education.
  • Mandates the creation of a unified digital platform for documentation.
  • Requires the State Department of Education to streamline documentation for various educational programs.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Alaska

Index of Bills

Senate - 107 - ALASKA SUNSET COMMISSION

Legislation ID: 18084

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill No. 107 creates the Alaska Sunset Commission within the executive branch to conduct reviews and audits of state entities. The Commission will assess the necessity of these entities, their operations, and make legislative recommendations. The bill also establishes penalties for obstructing the Commissions work, ensuring accountability and transparency in state operations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Commission consists of seven members appointed by the governor and confirmed by the legislature.
  • Failure to cooperate can result in a fine of up to $5,000.
  • If an entity is recommended for discontinuation, the report must include a winding-down period and procedures for record transfer.
  • Includes the Alaska Sunset Commission in the definition of public agency.
  • Individuals convicted under AS 11.56.845 cannot be appointed to state service unless a waiver is granted.
  • Individuals must provide full cooperation to the Alaska Sunset Commission.
  • Mandates disclosure of disciplinary actions for failure to cooperate with the Commission.
  • Mandates inclusion of draft legislation to implement the commissions recommendations.
  • Members must have expertise in relevant fields and serve staggered five-year terms.
  • Prohibits appointing individuals convicted under AS 11.56.845 to state service without a waiver.
  • Prohibits coercion or threats against individuals providing information to the Commission.
  • Prohibits state employees from intentionally failing to cooperate with the Commission.
  • Public access to state employee information, including disciplinary actions for violations of AS 39.25.160.
  • Requires individuals to fully cooperate with the Alaska Sunset Commission in providing requested information.
  • Requires the commission to deliver the report within 10 days of a legislative session following the audit year.
  • The commission can require cooperation from state officials and agencies.
  • The commission must evaluate the public need for the continuation or restructuring of entities.
  • The commission must prepare and deliver a report on its findings to the legislature within a specified timeframe.
  • The commission must review at least one entity each year.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-17 (S) NR: WIELECHOWSKI, GRAY-JACKSON
2025-05-17 (S) Minutes (SSTA)
2025-05-17 (S) AM: KAWASAKI
2025-05-17 (S) REFERRED TO FINANCE
2025-05-17 (S) STA RPT CS 1AM 1DP 2NR NEW TITLE
2025-05-17 (S) DP: BJORKMAN
2025-05-17 (S) STATE AFFAIRS at 10:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
2025-05-17 (S) FN1: (GOV)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly creates a permanent commission whose explicit mission is to review, audit, and make recommendations regarding the necessity and efficiency of state entities. It is structurally designed to promote government efficiency and accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating regular reviews and audits, the Commission can identify inefficiencies, redundancies, and opportunities for cost savings or improved operations. Its recommendations could lead to the restructuring, consolidation, or elimination of agencies, as well as process improvements.

Evidence:

  • creates the Alaska Sunset Commission within the executive branch to conduct reviews and audits of state entities
  • assess the necessity of these entities, their operations, and make legislative recommendations
  • ensuring accountability and transparency in state operations

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's language is clear in establishing the Commission's purpose as related to efficiency and oversight. The scope of 'necessity' and 'operations' could be broad, but the intent is explicit.

Senate - 37 - STRATEGIC PLANS FOR STATE AGENCIES

Legislation ID: 18017

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill No. 37 amends various sections of the Alaska Statutes to improve the management and accountability of state agencies through strategic planning and performance evaluation. It mandates the development of comprehensive strategic plans and mission statements for state entities, requires regular updates and public participation in budget preparation, and emphasizes results-based government by evaluating agency performance against established goals and objectives.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Budget must be public information by December 15.
  • Each state entity must allocate resources to implement strategic plans.
  • Entities must report quarterly on their progress toward performance plans.
  • Governor must review and approve strategic and performance plans.
  • Governors budget must cover all estimated receipts and proposed expenditures.
  • Legislature must analyze strategic plans and financial plans.
  • Legislature must review and analyze agency mission statements and performance plans.
  • Legislature shall authorize programs and financial plans necessary for performance.
  • Legislature to provide a budget review function that promotes results-based government.
  • Mandates descriptions of services provided under those agreements and entities involved.
  • Mandates public participation in budget development.
  • Mission statements must guide agency operations.
  • Office must assist in budget preparation and strategic planning.
  • Office must maintain publicly available records of plans and performance.
  • Requires divisions of wildlife conservation and sport fish to list reimbursable services agreements in their budgets.
  • Requires orderly establishment and review of strategic plans and financial goals for state agencies.
  • State entities must submit strategic plans and mission statements every gubernatorial term and at least every two years.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-12 (S) -- Invited & Public Testimony --
2025-05-12 (S) FINANCE at 09:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
2025-05-12 (S) < Above Bill Removed From Agenda >
2025-04-30 (S) STA RPT 1AM 1DP 1NR
2025-04-30 (S) NR: GRAY-JACKSON
2025-04-30 (S) DP: BJORKMAN
2025-04-30 (S) AM: KAWASAKI
2025-04-30 (S) REFERRED TO FINANCE

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes and empowers structural mechanisms (strategic planning, performance evaluation, reporting) with the stated goal of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: Requires all executive branch departments and the University of Alaska to develop and regularly update strategic plans and mission statements, submit performance reports, and participate in results-based budgeting and evaluation. Mandates legislative and gubernatorial oversight and public participation.

Evidence:

  • mandates the development of comprehensive strategic plans and mission statements for state entities
  • requires regular updates and public participation in budget preparation
  • emphasizes results-based government by evaluating agency performance against established goals and objectives
  • Legislature must review and analyze agency mission statements and performance plans
  • Each state entity must allocate resources to implement strategic plans. Entities must report quarterly on their progress toward performance plans.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 51 - ESTABLISH SUNRISE REVIEW BOARD

Legislation ID: 18030

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill No. 51 proposes the creation of the Sunrise Review Board within the Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development. This board will review proposed legislation related to professional and occupational licensure to ensure that changes are necessary, least-restrictive, and beneficial to the public. The bill outlines the composition of the board, the procedures for requesting reviews, and the criteria for evaluating proposed changes to licensure.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Board consists of seven members including directors from various state departments and public members appointed by the governor.
  • Conduct reviews upon request from specified individuals or entities.
  • Evaluate the possibility of harm from unregulated practice.
  • Include a detailed description of the proposed change and its necessity.
  • Members appointed will serve staggered terms of one to three years.
  • Members serve without compensation but are entitled to per diem and travel expenses.
  • Prepare a review report including comparisons to other states and cost analyses.
  • Recommend the least-restrictive regulatory measures.
  • Requests must identify the requestor and their relationship to the profession or occupation.
  • Review proposed changes to licensure introduced in the legislature.
  • Submit the report to the legislature within specified timeframes.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-24 (S) L&C, FIN
2025-01-24 (S) REFERRED TO LABOR & COMMERCE
2025-01-24 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates a permanent board specifically charged with reviewing and evaluating proposed regulatory changes for efficiency and necessity, with an explicit goal of reducing unnecessary regulatory barriers.

Mechanism of Influence: The Sunrise Review Board acts as a structural mechanism to streamline government oversight of professional licensing, aiming to prevent unnecessary or overly restrictive regulations, thereby improving government efficiency and reducing administrative burdens.

Evidence:

  • 'The board is tasked with reviewing proposed changes to licensure legislation, ensuring that no changes are reviewed more than once every four years unless requested otherwise.'
  • 'The board must evaluate potential harm from unregulated practice and recommend the least-restrictive means of regulation if necessary.'
  • 'Legislative findings that reducing barriers to entry for professional and occupational licensure is beneficial for economic development and job growth.'
  • 'Prepare a review report including comparisons to other states and cost analyses.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its intent to promote efficiency by recommending only necessary and least-restrictive regulations. The language is clear about the board's mission and procedures.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

Arizona

Index of Bills

Senate - 1323 - performance audits; auditor general

Legislation ID: 158719

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

SB1323 amends section 41-1279.03 of the Arizona Revised Statutes, detailing the Auditor Generals responsibilities, including conducting annual audits of state agencies, performance audits of transportation excise tax expenditures, and evaluating the use of taxpayer money by various governmental entities. The bill emphasizes the importance of compliance with federal and state regulations and mandates regular reporting to the legislature and the governor.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Allows charging reasonable fees for special audits.
  • Annual evaluations of per diem compensation and reimbursements.
  • Conducts reviews of past and future transportation expenditures.
  • Consultants can be hired with committee approval.
  • Mandates annual financial and compliance audits for all state agencies.
  • Mandates a written report to be submitted by the fourth Monday of December each year.
  • Mandates performance audits of counties and cities receiving highway user revenue.
  • Mandates submission of a status report on implementation of audit recommendations within two years.
  • Presents findings and recommendations to legislative leaders.
  • Requires annual financial and compliance audits for all state agencies.
  • Requires approval from the legislative committee for adopting rules and hiring consultants.
  • Requires a report to be submitted annually to the governor and the legislative committee.
  • Requires cooperation from the Department of Transportation and other entities receiving highway user revenues.
  • Requires performance audits of transportation excise tax expenditures every five years.
  • Requires school districts to notify the Auditor General of their agreement or disagreement with audit findings.
  • Requires school districts to post audit findings on their websites.
  • Requires the Auditor General to prepare an audit plan for committee approval.
  • Require written status reports on the implementation of audit recommendations.
  • School districts must post spending profiles on their websites.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-04 House2nd Read
2025-03-03 House1st Read
2025-02-11 Senate Maj Caucus Date
2025-02-11 Senate Min Caucus Date
2025-02-11 Senate Consent Object Date
2025-02-10 Senate Consent Calendar Date
2025-02-03 Senate2nd Read
2025-01-30 Senate1st Read

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes and empowers the Auditor General to conduct audits, require reports, and ensure compliance, all with the explicit goal of improving government performance and accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating audits, reports, and follow-up on recommendations, the bill creates structural and procedural mechanisms aimed at identifying inefficiencies, reducing waste, and improving the effectiveness of government operations.

Evidence:

  • The Auditor General is required to report annually to the governor and the legislative committee, summarizing activities and findings from audits conducted during the fiscal year.
  • Mandates cooperation from various governmental bodies to provide necessary information for audits and studies conducted by the Auditor General.
  • Establishes a schoolwide audit team to monitor school districts spending in classrooms and requires them to report on the implementation of audit recommendations.
  • Mandates annual financial and compliance audits for all state agencies.
  • Requires performance audits of transportation excise tax expenditures every five years.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Arkansas

Index of Bills

Senate Joint Resolutions - 10 - A CONSTITUTION AMENDMENT CONCERNING EFFICIENCY IN GOVERNMENT; AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE CREATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY.

Legislation ID: 36399

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This Senate Joint Resolution proposes an amendment to the Arkansas Constitution aimed at improving government efficiency. It outlines the creation of the Department of Government Efficiency, which will be responsible for implementing strategies and policies to streamline government operations and services. The amendment will be submitted to voters for approval in the next general election.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Requires the establishment of a Department of Government Efficiency to oversee and promote efficiency initiatives within state government.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-05 Sine Die adjournment
2025-02-05 Read first time
2025-02-05 Filed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a new department whose explicit mission is to enhance operational efficiency across state agencies.

Mechanism of Influence: By creating a Department of Government Efficiency, the legislation introduces a structural mechanism with a clear mandate to identify and implement cost savings, streamline processes, and modernize government functions.

Evidence:

  • aimed at improving government efficiency
  • creation of the Department of Government Efficiency
  • tasked with enhancing operational efficiency across state agencies

Ambiguity Notes: The summary does not specify the exact strategies or powers of the new department, but the purpose is unambiguously stated as government efficiency.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

California

Index of Bills

Assembly - 24 - Balanced Budget Accountability Act of 2025.

Legislation ID: 24063

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 24 proposes a constitutional amendment aimed at balancing Californias state budget through various measures. These include cutting and capping total annual labor costs in the state budget, requiring state agencies to competitively source or contract out services, and mandating a two-thirds legislative approval for the state budget and any new program fees.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Cuts and caps total annual labor costs in the state budget.
  • Requires a two-thirds vote of the Legislature for both the state budget and new program fees.
  • Requires state government agencies to competitively source or contract out services.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-23 In committee: Set, first hearing. Held without recommendation.
2025-04-09 Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.
2025-04-08 From committee chair, with authors amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. Read second time and amended.
2025-03-25 Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.
2025-03-24 From committee chair, with authors amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. Read second time and amended.
2025-03-24 Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and TRANS.
2024-12-03 From printer. May be heard in committee January 2.
2024-12-02 Read first time. To print.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly targets government efficiency and cost savings by mandating labor cost reductions and requiring agencies to seek competitive sourcing for services.

Mechanism of Influence: By capping labor costs and requiring competitive sourcing, the bill would force agencies to find more efficient and potentially less expensive ways to provide services. These structural changes are intended to streamline operations and reduce government expenditures.

Evidence:

  • Cuts and caps total annual labor costs in the state budget.
  • Requires state government agencies to competitively source or contract out services.

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill outlines broad strategies (labor cost caps, competitive sourcing), it does not specify the creation of new entities or detailed processes for implementation. However, the requirement for competitive sourcing implies procedural changes within agencies.

Assembly - 34 - Air pollution: regulations: consumer costs: review.

Legislation ID: 24073

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 34 amends Section 39602.5 of the Health and Safety Code to require the Legislative Analyst to analyze the consumer costs associated with any proposed air quality standards, regulations, or rules before the State Air Resources Board can adopt them. This aims to balance environmental regulations with potential economic impacts on consumers.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Mandates that the adopted measures be necessary, technologically feasible, and cost-effective.
  • Prohibits adoption of any standard, regulation, or rule until a consumer cost analysis is completed and submitted.
  • Requires the state board to adopt measures to meet federal air quality standards by specified attainment dates.
  • Requires the state board to adopt standards that can likely be achieved by the compliance date set forth in the rule.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-17 Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.
2025-03-13 From committee chair, with authors amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on NAT. RES. Read second time and amended.
2025-02-03 Referred to Com. on NAT. RES.
2024-12-03 From printer. May be heard in committee January 2.
2024-12-02 Read first time. To print.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes a procedural mechanism (mandatory cost analysis by the Legislative Analyst) that must occur before new regulations are adopted, with the explicit purpose of evaluating and potentially improving the cost-effectiveness of government regulatory actions.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring a formal cost analysis prior to the adoption of new air quality regulations, the bill introduces an additional oversight and evaluation step intended to promote fiscal responsibility and efficient rulemaking. This could help prevent unnecessary or overly burdensome regulations, aligning with the goal of making government more efficient and responsive to economic concerns.

Evidence:

  • 'the Legislative Analyst to analyze the consumer costs associated with any proposed air quality standards, regulations, or rules before the State Air Resources Board can adopt them.'
  • 'prohibits the state board from adopting any new air quality standards or regulations until the Legislative Analyst has conducted a cost analysis for consumers and submitted it to the Legislature.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill focuses specifically on cost analysis related to consumer impacts of air quality regulations, rather than a broader government efficiency or structural reform. However, the procedural requirement is explicitly intended to improve the efficiency of regulatory processes.

Assembly - 587 - University of California: administrative expenditures: reduction.

Legislation ID: 24615

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 587 seeks to add Article 3.8 to the Education Code, which requests the University of California to reduce its annual administrative costs by at least 10% below the amount spent in the 2025–26 fiscal year, before the 2028–29 fiscal year. This measure aims to ensure more funds are allocated to educational purposes rather than administrative overhead.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Requires the University of California to reduce administrative costs by at least 10%.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-08-25 From Consent Calendar.
2025-08-25 Ordered to third reading.
2025-08-20 Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.
2025-08-19 From committee: Be ordered to second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and ordered to Consent Calendar.
2025-07-15 From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (July 14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
2025-06-18 From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on M. & V.A. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (June 18). Re-referred to Com. on M. & V.A.
2025-06-04 Referred to Coms. on ED. and M. & V.A.
2025-05-23 In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly targets government efficiency by mandating a reduction in administrative costs, which falls squarely within the scope of measures designed to make government operations less costly and more effective.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring the University of California to cut administrative spending, the bill seeks to streamline operations, reduce overhead, and ensure resources are directed toward core educational functions, thereby increasing efficiency.

Evidence:

  • 'requests the University of California to reduce its annual administrative costs by at least 10% below the amount spent in the 2025–26 fiscal year, before the 2028–29 fiscal year.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent and mechanism: reduce administrative costs by a specified percentage. It does not specify the exact methods for achieving this reduction, leaving implementation details to the university.

Assembly - 733 - Agency reports.

Legislation ID: 24751

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Assembly Bill 733 mandates that each state agency submit an annual list of overdue reports to the Legislature by April 1, including status summaries and compliance plans. This measure is intended to improve legislative oversight and may lead to the withholding of appropriations for agencies that fail to submit timely reports.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Allows the Assembly and Senate Budget Committees to require agencies to explain failures in report submissions.
  • Enables the Legislature to consider report compliance when determining budget appropriations.
  • Includes a status summary and an explanation for each overdue report.
  • Mandates a compliance plan with a timeline for submitting overdue reports.
  • Requires state agencies to submit a list of overdue reports by April 1 each year.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-24 Referred to Com. on G.O.
2025-02-19 From printer. May be heard in committee March 21.
2025-02-18 Read first time. To print.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes a procedural mechanism (annual reporting of overdue agency reports) specifically designed to improve government efficiency and accountability through enhanced legislative oversight.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring agencies to track and explain overdue reports, and tying compliance to potential budget consequences, the bill incentivizes timely reporting and better agency performance, which can streamline oversight and improve responsiveness.

Evidence:

  • 'This measure is intended to improve legislative oversight.'
  • 'Committees may summon agencies that fail to submit timely reports to explain their non-compliance, and the Legislature may withhold appropriations based on this information.'
  • 'State agencies must submit a list of all overdue reports to the Legislature annually by April 1, including status summaries and compliance plans for each report.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit about its intent to improve oversight and accountability, which are components of government efficiency. However, it focuses on report submission rather than broader operational reforms, so its impact on overall efficiency may depend on how strictly the Legislature enforces compliance.

Colorado

Index of Bills

House - 1107 - Rule Adoption & Review Requirements

Legislation ID: 13254

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill modifies the existing procedures for how principal departments in Colorado adopt and review their rules. Key changes include requiring a cost-benefit analysis for each proposed rule or amendment, removing exemptions from this requirement, emphasizing the cost burden of rules during reviews, and mandating that legislative committees vote on department recommendations regarding rule reviews. Additionally, departments must report on revenue generated from fees related to rules.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Departments must assess whether rules should be continued, modified, or repealed based on their effectiveness and cost burden.
  • Departments must report on revenue generated from permit and license fees.
  • Departments must report on the results of their rule reviews, including recommendations for rule changes.
  • Legislative committees must vote on recommendations from departments regarding rules.
  • Removes exemptions for certain types of rules from the cost-benefit analysis requirement.
  • Requires a cost-benefit analysis for all proposed rules and amendments.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-10 House Committee on State, Civic, Military, & Veterans Affairs Postpone Indefinitely
2025-01-27 Introduced In House - Assigned to State, Civic, Military, & Veterans Affairs

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes and strengthens procedural mechanisms (cost-benefit analysis, mandatory reviews, reporting, and legislative votes) specifically aimed at improving government efficiency and effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring cost-benefit analyses, regular reviews with a focus on cost-effectiveness, and transparent reporting, the bill directly targets inefficiencies, unnecessary rules, and administrative burdens. Legislative oversight via committee votes further ensures accountability and responsiveness.

Evidence:

  • 'requiring a cost-benefit analysis for each proposed rule or amendment'
  • 'mandating that legislative committees vote on department recommendations regarding rule reviews'
  • 'departments must assess whether rules should be continued, modified, or repealed based on their effectiveness and cost burden'

Ambiguity Notes: The language is explicit about the intent to assess cost-effectiveness and reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens, leaving little ambiguity regarding the goal of promoting government efficiency.

House - 1216 - State Agencies Implement Zero-Based Budgeting

Legislation ID: 17103

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 25-1216 mandates that starting in the fiscal year 2026-27, specific state agencies must implement zero-based budgeting, and by 2027-28, all state agencies are required to do so. The bill outlines the responsibilities of the Office of State Planning and Budgeting to train agencies in this method, submit annual reports on its effectiveness, and ensure public access to budget requests. It also establishes the role of the state auditor in auditing compliance with these requirements.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Mandates periodic audits by the state auditor to ensure compliance with zero-based budgeting requirements.
  • Requires all state agencies to implement zero-based budgeting in 2027-28 and thereafter.
  • Requires all zero-based budgeting requests to be publicly accessible on the General Assemblys website.
  • Requires annual reports on the effectiveness of zero-based budgeting starting in 2027-28.
  • Requires the Department of Revenue, Department of Education, and Department of Transportation to implement zero-based budgeting in 2026-27.
  • Requires the Office of State Planning and Budgeting to provide training for state agencies on zero-based budgeting.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-28 House Committee on Appropriations Postpone Indefinitely
2025-02-11 Introduced In House - Assigned to Appropriations

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's explicit goal is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations by requiring agencies to justify all expenses annually, potentially reducing unnecessary spending and increasing transparency.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating zero-based budgeting, the bill restructures the budgeting process to require detailed justification for every expense, which is a procedural mechanism intended to identify cost savings and eliminate inefficiencies. The required audits and reports further institutionalize ongoing evaluation and accountability.

Evidence:

  • '...specific state agencies must implement zero-based budgeting...'
  • '...all state agencies are required to do so [by 2027-28].'
  • '...Office of State Planning and Budgeting to train agencies...submit annual reports on its effectiveness...'
  • '...state auditor in auditing compliance...'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill clearly states its intent and mechanisms for promoting efficiency, with little ambiguity. However, the actual impact will depend on implementation and follow-through by agencies and oversight bodies.

Senate - 135 - Colorado Government Efficiency Authority

Legislation ID: 17163

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill creates the Colorado Government Efficiency Authority, governed by a board of directors composed of private sector representatives and advisory members from state agencies. The authoritys responsibilities include examining state agency operations, identifying efficiencies, collaborating with federal agencies for cost savings, and soliciting public input on government efficiency. The authority is not funded by state agencies and can accept external funding to support its operations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Board members serve without compensation and are required to meet specific qualifications.
  • The authority is governed by a board consisting of appointed representatives from the private sector and advisory members from state agencies.
  • The authority must hold public hearings and develop a process for public recommendations.
  • The authority must prioritize leveraging federal funding for its operations.
  • The board must examine every state-funded agencys operations to maximize resource use.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-25 Senate Committee on State, Veterans, & Military Affairs Postpone Indefinitely
2025-02-05 Introduced In Senate - Assigned to State, Veterans, & Military Affairs

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's explicit purpose is to improve government efficiency by creating a dedicated authority to examine operations, identify efficiencies, and recommend improvements.

Mechanism of Influence: Creates a permanent structural mechanism (the Authority) with the clear mandate to evaluate and enhance government efficiency, including public engagement, intergovernmental collaboration, and resource optimization.

Evidence:

  • The authoritys responsibilities include examining state agency operations, identifying efficiencies, collaborating with federal agencies for cost savings, and soliciting public input on government efficiency.
  • The board must examine every state-funded agencys operations to maximize resource use.
  • making recommendations to improve government efficiency.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 216 - Eliminate Reprinting of Education Laws

Legislation ID: 174769

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 25-216 proposes to amend Colorado Revised Statutes by repealing the requirement for the Commissioner of Education to annually reprint laws enacted by the General Assembly concerning education. This change is intended to reduce costs associated with printing and distributing these laws, which are to be funded by the state public school fund. The bill also includes an appropriation adjustment reflecting a decrease in funding for these printing costs.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Act becomes effective on July 1, 2025.
  • Decreases appropriation by $35,480 for reprinting and distributing education laws.
  • Decreases funding for reprinting and distributing education laws.
  • Decreases the cash funds appropriation for reprinting and distributing education laws by $35,480.
  • Eliminates the need for annual reprinting of educational laws by the commissioner.
  • Eliminates the need for annual reprinting of education laws.
  • Eliminates the requirement for annual reprinting of education laws.
  • Reduces the budget allocated for reprinting educational laws by $35,480.
  • Reduces the budget allocation for reprinting education laws by $35,480.
  • Reduces the budget for the department of educations management and administration related to reprinting laws.
  • Removes funding obligation for annual printing costs from the state public school fund.
  • Removes funding obligations for publishing education laws.
  • Removes the obligation for annual reprinting of education laws.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-24 Governor Signed
2025-04-16 Signed by the Speaker of the House
2025-04-16 Sent to the Governor
2025-04-15 Signed by the President of the Senate
2025-04-10 House Third Reading Passed - No Amendments
2025-04-09 House Second Reading Special Order - Passed - No Amendments
2025-04-08 House Committee on Appropriations Refer Unamended to House Committee of the Whole
2025-04-03 Introduced In House - Assigned to Appropriations

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to reduce costs by eliminating an unnecessary bureaucratic process (annual reprinting of education laws), thereby increasing government efficiency and reducing administrative burdens.

Mechanism of Influence: By repealing the annual reprinting requirement and the related funding obligation, the bill streamlines government operations and saves public funds, directly addressing inefficiency in an existing process.

Evidence:

  • This change is intended to reduce costs associated with printing and distributing these laws
  • Eliminates the requirement for annual reprinting of education laws
  • Decreases the cash funds appropriation for reprinting and distributing education laws by $35,480

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 306 - Performance Audits of Certain State Agencies

Legislation ID: 174621

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 25-306 mandates that the State Auditor conduct performance audits of two specific state divisions: the Air Pollution Control Division during the years 2026 and 2031, and the Division of Unemployment Insurance during 2027 and 2032. These audits are intended to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of these divisions in fulfilling their statutory obligations, ensuring they comply with relevant statutes, and evaluating their processes and resource allocations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Allows for additional audits at the State Auditors discretion.
  • Assess compliance with statutes and evaluate the impact of processes on stakeholders.
  • Assess compliance with statutes and the impact of processes on stakeholders.
  • Assesses compliance with statutory obligations and the impact on stakeholders.
  • Assesses whether funding and staffing levels are adequate for effective program administration.
  • Assesses whether funding and staffing levels are sufficient for effective program administration.
  • Audits must assess compliance with statutes and the effectiveness of processes.
  • Conduct audits in 2026 and 2031.
  • Conduct audits in 2027 and 2032.
  • Conduct initial performance audit in 2026 and a follow-up audit in 2031.
  • Conduct initial performance audit in 2027 and a follow-up audit in 2032.
  • Determine compliance with statutes and assess the adequacy of funding and staffing levels.
  • Evaluate funding and staffing levels for program administration.
  • Evaluates compliance with statutory obligations and identifies potential inefficiencies.
  • Evaluates the impact of division processes on stakeholder access to program benefits.
  • Investigates whether additional resources were requested and appropriated from the General Assembly.
  • Mandates a report to the Legislative Audit Committee after each audit.
  • Requires submission of audit reports to the legislative audit committee.
  • Requires the state auditor to conduct audits in 2026 and 2031.
  • Requires the state auditor to conduct audits in 2027 and 2032.
  • Requires the state auditor to conduct performance audits in 2026 and 2031.
  • Requires the State Auditor to conduct performance audits in 2026 and 2031.
  • Requires the state auditor to conduct performance audits in 2027 and 2032.
  • Requires the State Auditor to conduct performance audits in 2027 and 2032.
  • Requires the State Auditor to conduct performance audits in specified years.
  • Submit a written report to the legislative audit committee after each audit.
  • Submit a written report to the legislative audit committee upon completion of each audit.
  • The audit must assess compliance with statutes and the divisions statutory purpose.
  • The audit must assess compliance with statutes, impact on stakeholders, and adequacy of funding and staffing.
  • The audit must determine compliance with statutes and the divisions statutory purpose.
  • The audit must evaluate compliance with statutes, stakeholder access to benefits, and the adequacy of funding and staffing.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-04 Governor Signed
2025-05-13 Signed by the Speaker of the House
2025-05-13 Sent to the Governor
2025-05-13 Signed by the President of the Senate
2025-05-06 House Third Reading Passed - No Amendments
2025-05-06 Senate Considered House Amendments - Result was to Concur - Repass
2025-05-05 House Second Reading Special Order - Passed with Amendments - Committee
2025-05-03 House Committee on Finance Refer Amended to House Committee of the Whole

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly mandates audits to assess and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government divisions, which aligns directly with the goal of promoting government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring regular performance audits and reports, the bill creates a structural mechanism to identify inefficiencies, evaluate compliance, and recommend improvements, thereby fostering more effective and responsive government operations.

Evidence:

  • mandates that the State Auditor conduct performance audits
  • assess the effectiveness and efficiency of these divisions
  • evaluating their processes and resource allocations
  • Mandates a report to the Legislative Audit Committee after each audit

Ambiguity Notes: None

Connecticut

Index of Bills

House - 5047 - AN ACT CREATING A TASK FORCE TO STUDY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE STATE WORKFORCE.

Legislation ID: 81514

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill proposes the creation of a task force dedicated to examining how the increased use of artificial intelligence and automation may affect the size and scope of the state workforce. It aims to assess both the practicality and fiscal implications of these technological advancements within state operations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Analyze fiscal impact of increased AI usage.
  • Establish a task force to study AI and automation effects on workforce.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-08 Referred to Joint Committee on Labor and Public Employees

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates a task force specifically to examine how AI and automation could affect the efficiency, cost, and structure of state government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By analyzing the fiscal impact and practicality of AI adoption, the task force could recommend measures for streamlining operations, reducing costs, and modernizing government functions.

Evidence:

  • The bill mandates the formation of a task force to investigate the effects of artificial intelligence on the state workforce.
  • Analyze fiscal impact of increased AI usage.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not explicitly state that the goal is to promote government efficiency, but the focus on fiscal impact and operational effects of automation strongly implies this intent. However, if strict language about efficiency is required, this may be borderline.

House - 5412 - AN ACT CONCERNING THE COLLECTION COSTS OF STATE TAXES AND FEES.

Legislation ID: 80341

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill mandates that each state agency assess the costs associated with collecting the taxes and fees they administer. The findings will be reported to the finance, revenue, and bonding committee, which will then propose legislation to abolish any tax or fee where the collection costs exceed the revenue generated.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Mandates reporting findings to the finance, revenue and bonding committee.
  • Requires state agencies to assess collection costs for each tax and fee.
  • Requires the committee to propose legislation to eliminate non-viable taxes and fees.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-17 Referred to Joint Committee on Finance, Revenue and Bonding

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly mandates structural and procedural mechanisms (agency cost assessments, committee review, and legislative proposals) intended to improve government efficiency by eliminating financially inefficient taxes and fees.

Mechanism of Influence: It empowers agencies to conduct cost analyses, requires reporting, and compels legislative action to abolish inefficient revenue mechanisms, thereby streamlining government operations and potentially reducing unnecessary administrative burdens.

Evidence:

  • each state agency assess the costs associated with collecting the taxes and fees they administer
  • findings will be reported to the finance, revenue, and bonding committee
  • propose legislation to abolish any tax or fee where the collection costs exceed the revenue generated

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its goal to eliminate taxes or fees that cost more to collect than they generate, clearly linking its purpose to government efficiency.

House - 5422 - AN ACT REESTABLISHING THE LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM REVIEW AND INVESTIGATIONS COMMITTEE.

Legislation ID: 77726

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This act reestablishes the Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee as a permanent standing committee of the General Assembly, tasked with conducting program reviews and investigations of state departments and agencies. The committee will evaluate the effectiveness of programs, recommend legislative changes, and ensure compliance with audit findings. It also establishes protocols for how the committee operates, including the appointment of members, quorum requirements, and the handling of confidential information.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must take corrective actions based on committee findings.
  • Allows the committee to issue subpoenas for testimony and documents.
  • A majority constitutes a quorum for the committees actions.
  • Audit reports must be submitted to both the Governor and the Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee.
  • Biennial compliance audits must be conducted for quasi-public agencies, with reports submitted to the committee.
  • Biennial compliance audits of quasi-public agencies must be conducted.
  • Classifies refusal to comply as a class A misdemeanor.
  • Department heads must act on findings of inadequate controls or waste as cited in program reviews.
  • Department heads must take corrective actions for identified deficiencies.
  • Department heads must take necessary corrective actions for identified deficiencies.
  • Directs committee staff to conduct program reviews and investigations.
  • Ensures witnesses can review transcripts of their testimony before public release.
  • Establishes penalties for witnesses who fail to appear or testify as required.
  • It can request information from state agencies and must report findings to the General Assembly.
  • It can request information from state agencies and retain consultants as needed.
  • It must report annually to the General Assembly by February fifteenth.
  • It must report the results of investigations electronically.
  • It must review staff reports and confer with state agencies for information.
  • It should establish policies for report distribution and may request information from state departments.
  • Maintains confidentiality of investigation records until completion.
  • Mandates access to public records for the committees work.
  • Mandates that audit reports be submitted to the committee.
  • Members serve two-year terms and must be appointed at the beginning of odd-numbered year sessions.
  • Members serve two-year terms, with appointments made at the beginning of each odd-numbered year.
  • Members serve two-year terms, with appointments made at the start of odd-numbered years.
  • Members serve two-year terms, with initial appointments by February 4, 2026.
  • Members serve two-year terms, with initial appointments made by February 4, 2026.
  • Protects the identity of public employees providing information to the committee.
  • Quasi-public agencies must submit compliance audit reports to the committee.
  • Quasi-public agencies must undergo biennial compliance audits.
  • Records and information obtained during investigations are not subject to public disclosure until the investigation is complete.
  • Records obtained during investigations are not subject to public disclosure until completion.
  • Records obtained during investigations are protected until completion.
  • Requires a committee of six Senate members and six House members, with specific appointment procedures.
  • Requires biennial compliance audits of quasi-public agencies by the Auditors of Public Accounts.
  • Requires the committee to report annually to the General Assembly.
  • Subpoenaed individuals can review the transcript of their testimony.
  • The committee can compel attendance and testimony through subpoenas.
  • The committee can direct staff to conduct reviews and investigations.
  • The committee can initiate investigations based on requests from the General Assembly or its committees.
  • The committee can issue subpoenas for witnesses and documents relevant to investigations.
  • The committee can issue subpoenas to compel attendance and testimony.
  • The committee can issue subpoenas to compel witness attendance and document production.
  • The committee consists of six Senate members and six House members.
  • The committee consists of six Senate members and six House members, appointed by their respective leaders.
  • The committee must assess compliance with audit requirements within thirty days of receiving audit reports.
  • The committee must assess these audit reports for compliance with the law.
  • The committee must conduct program reviews and investigations as directed by the General Assembly.
  • The committee must direct staff to conduct program reviews and investigations.
  • The committee must direct staff to conduct reviews and investigations.
  • The committee must report annually to the General Assembly.
  • The committee must report annually to the General Assembly by February 15.
  • The committee must report investigation results electronically to the General Assembly.
  • The committee must report investigation results to the General Assembly.
  • The committee must report on the results of investigations and recommendations electronically.
  • The committee must report results of investigations to the General Assembly.
  • The committee must report to the General Assembly if actions are deemed unsuitable.
  • The committee shall consist of six Senate members and six House members, appointed by respective leaders.
  • The committee will consist of six Senate members and six House members, appointed by their respective leaders.
  • The identity of individuals providing information to the committee must remain confidential.
  • The identity of informants must remain confidential.
  • The Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee must assess audit reports for compliance.
  • They must be given reasonable time to question the accuracy of the transcript.
  • Witnesses have the right to review their testimony transcripts before public release.
  • Witnesses must testify and produce documents as required without privilege against self-incrimination.
  • Witnesses must testify without privilege against self-incrimination.
  • Witnesses who refuse to comply may be charged with a class A misdemeanor.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-29 Referred by House to Committee on Appropriations
2025-04-07 House Calendar Number 337
2025-04-07 Reported Out of Legislative Commissioners Office
2025-04-07 Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, House
2025-04-07 File Number 548
2025-03-31 Referred to Office of Legislative Research and Office of Fiscal Analysis 04/07/25 12:00 PM
2025-03-20 Filed with Legislative Commissioners Office
2025-03-19 Joint Favorable

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a permanent legislative committee whose explicit mission is to review, investigate, and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of state government operations and programs.

Mechanism of Influence: The committee is empowered to conduct program reviews and investigations, require audits, recommend legislative changes, and ensure corrective actions are taken. This creates a structural mechanism for ongoing evaluation and improvement of government efficiency.

Evidence:

  • tasked with conducting program reviews and investigations of state departments and agencies
  • evaluate the effectiveness of programs, recommend legislative changes, and ensure compliance with audit findings
  • require audits of quasi-public agencies and mandates reporting to the committee
  • Department heads must take corrective actions for identified deficiencies

Ambiguity Notes: None

House - 7184 - AN ACT CONCERNING GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT.

Legislation ID: 77767

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill aims to reestablish the Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee, conduct reviews of nonprofit human services providers contracts, streamline reporting requirements, and ensure accountability in state agency contracts with nonresident bidders. It mandates several reports to be submitted to the General Assembly, promoting transparency and efficiency in government operations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Annual reporting on nonresident bidder contracts starting February 1, 2026.
  • A report of findings and recommendations must be submitted by February 1, 2026.
  • A report summarizing the review findings and recommendations must be submitted by February 1, 2027, and every five years thereafter.
  • Auditors to submit reports on grant audits to the General Assembly annually.
  • Conduct a review of required reports triennially starting January 1, 2026.
  • Establish a Municipal Grant Portal by January 1, 2026.
  • Include a searchable database of grant applications and study findings.
  • Includes a searchable database of municipal grants and study findings.
  • Limits municipalities to one state grant for the same study within three years.
  • Mandates annual reporting on nonresident bidder contracts starting February 1, 2026.
  • Mandates a report by February 1, 2026, with findings and recommendations.
  • Mandates a report by February 1, 2027, with findings and recommendations.
  • Mandates a report on findings and recommendations by February 1, 2027.
  • Mandates a report summarizing findings and recommendations by February 1, 2027.
  • Mandates a report to be submitted by February 1, 2026.
  • Mandates a triennial review of reporting requirements starting January 1, 2026.
  • Mandates audits of municipal grants starting October 1, 2025.
  • Mandates compliance from all state agencies purchasing health and human services.
  • Mandates compliance from all state purchasing agencies.
  • Municipalities must provide necessary information for audits.
  • Municipalities must report study completion and findings by October 1, 2025.
  • Portal must be established by January 1, 2026.
  • Requires a feasibility study on reestablishing the Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee.
  • Requires a feasibility study to be completed by February 1, 2026.
  • Requires annual reporting on contracts awarded by the Department of Transportation.
  • Requires annual reporting on contracts awarded to nonresident bidders.
  • Requires annual reporting on nonresident bidder contracts by February 1, starting in 2026.
  • Requires annual reporting on nonresident bidder contracts over $50,000.
  • Requires annual reporting on nonresident bidder contracts starting February 1, 2026.
  • Requires a report by February 1, 2027, summarizing findings and recommendations.
  • Requires a report on the feasibility study to be submitted by February 1, 2026.
  • Requires a report on the review findings and any reporting changes by February 1, 2027.
  • Requires a report on the review results by February 1, 2027, and triennially thereafter.
  • Requires a report summarizing findings and implementation status of consulting recommendations within one year of receiving the report.
  • Requires a report summarizing findings within one year after receiving the final report from the consultant.
  • Requires a report summarizing the consultant report findings within one year of receipt.
  • Requires a report summarizing the review findings and recommendations by February 1, 2027.
  • Requires a report summarizing the review findings and recommendations by February 1, 2027, and triennially thereafter.
  • Requires a report to be submitted to the relevant joint standing committee.
  • Requires a review by January 1, 2026, and every three years thereafter.
  • Requires a review of contracts with at least two state agencies each year.
  • Requires a review of purchase of service contracts by January 1, 2026, and every five years thereafter.
  • Requires a review of service contracts every five years starting January 1, 2026.
  • Requires a study to be conducted by the Office of Legislative Management.
  • Requires a study to be conducted by the Office of Legislative Management regarding the reestablishment of the committee.
  • Requires municipalities to provide necessary information for audits.
  • Requires municipalities to report completion of studies funded by state grants and findings to relevant authorities.
  • Requires municipalities to report study findings for audit purposes.
  • Requires payment to providers within 45 days of service delivery.
  • Requires state agencies to comply with established policies for payment within 45 days of receiving a claim.
  • Requires state agencies to submit a report summarizing findings and implementation status within one year of receiving a consultant report.
  • Requires submission of a report summarizing findings and implementation status within one year of receiving a consultant report.
  • Requires the establishment of a Municipal Grant Portal by January 1, 2026.
  • Requires the establishment of the Municipal Grant Portal by January 1, 2026.
  • Requires the establishment of the portal by January 1, 2026.
  • Requires the establishment of uniform policies by July 1, 2025.
  • Requires the establishment of uniform policies for health services contracts by July 1, 2025.
  • Submit a report on findings and recommendations by February 1, 2027, and every three years thereafter.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-29 Referred by House to Committee on Appropriations
2025-04-03 Reported Out of Legislative Commissioners Office
2025-04-03 File Number 521
2025-04-03 House Calendar Number 329
2025-04-03 Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, House
2025-03-28 Referred to Office of Legislative Research and Office of Fiscal Analysis 04/02/25 5:00 PM
2025-03-19 Filed with Legislative Commissioners Office
2025-03-18 Joint Favorable Substitute

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes or studies the reestablishment of oversight entities (e.g., Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee) and requires audits and reviews intended to increase government efficiency and accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating audits, studies, reporting, and the creation of uniform policies, the bill directly targets the identification of inefficiencies, duplications, and administrative burdens, and seeks to streamline and modernize government processes.

Evidence:

  • 'conduct reviews of nonprofit human services providers contracts, streamline reporting requirements, and ensure accountability in state agency contracts'
  • 'audit municipalities that receive state grants to determine the use of funds'
  • 'review the reporting requirements imposed on nonprofit human services providers to identify and eliminate duplicative or burdensome reports'
  • 'study the feasibility of reestablishing the Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee'
  • 'establish uniform policies for managing and evaluating health and human services purchased from private providers'

Ambiguity Notes: The language is explicit in linking the purpose of these mechanisms to government efficiency, transparency, and accountability. There is little ambiguity regarding intent.

House - 7232 - AN ACT CONCERNING EFFORTS TO STREAMLINE STATE CONTRACTING.

Legislation ID: 80449

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

The bill mandates a review of the state contracting process and payment policies concerning state agency contracts with service providers and nonprofit organizations. It aims to identify ways to streamline and expedite these processes, ensuring timely contract approvals and payments. The review will assess staffing levels, procurement complications, payment delays, and the feasibility of master contracts and carry-forward funding.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Assesses the feasibility of master contracts and the allocation of funds from previous fiscal years.
  • Assess feasibility of master contracts and carry-forward funding for service providers.
  • Assess payment policies that delay processing.
  • Assess the feasibility of master contracts and the carry-forward of funds from previous fiscal years.
  • Assess the feasibility of master contracts that can be amended and the allocation of funds from previous fiscal years.
  • Conduct a review of state agency contracts and payment policies.
  • Conduct a review of state agency contracts and payment policies with service providers and nonprofit organizations.
  • Conduct a review of the state contracting process and payment policies.
  • Conduct a review of the state contracting process and payment policies for state agency contracts.
  • Conduct a review of the state contracting process for all state agency contracts.
  • Determine adequacy of state agency staffing for drafting and processing contracts.
  • Determine adequacy of state agency staffing levels for drafting and processing contracts.
  • Determine if staffing levels are adequate for drafting and processing contracts.
  • Determine the adequacy of state agency staffing levels for drafting and processing contracts.
  • Evaluate the feasibility of using master contracts and allocating carryforward funds.
  • Examine issues in payment policies that delay processing after contract approval.
  • Examine payment policy issues that delay timely processing of payments post-contract approval.
  • Examines payment policy issues that delay timely payments to service providers.
  • Examine staffing levels for drafting and processing contracts.
  • Explore the feasibility of using master contracts and allocating funds from previous fiscal years to support ongoing programs.
  • Identifies complications in the tiered procurement process involving multiple agencies.
  • Identify complications arising from the tiered procurement process that involve multiple agencies and the Attorney General.
  • Identify complications from payment policies that delay processing payments.
  • Identify complications from the tiered procurement process.
  • Identify complications from the tiered procurement process requiring multiple agency reviews.
  • Identify complications in the tiered procurement process requiring multiple agency reviews.
  • Identify issues in payment policies that delay timely payments to service providers and nonprofit organizations.
  • Mandates an examination of staffing levels for adequate contract processing.
  • Requires the Secretary to consult with the Commissioner of Administrative Services, State Comptroller, and Attorney General.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-03 Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, Senate
2025-06-03 Transmitted Pursuant To Joint Rule 17
2025-06-03 House Passed
2025-06-03 Senate Calendar Number 610
2025-05-06 Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, House
2025-05-06 Reported Out of Legislative Commissioners Office
2025-05-06 House Calendar Number 535
2025-05-06 File Number 836

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill mandates a review specifically to identify ways to streamline and expedite government contracting and payment processes, which directly targets government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring a comprehensive review and assessment of current practices, identifying inefficiencies, and exploring new mechanisms (e.g., master contracts, carry-forward funding), the bill creates a procedural mechanism to improve government operations and reduce administrative burdens.

Evidence:

  • 'mandates a review of the state contracting process and payment policies'
  • 'aims to identify ways to streamline and expedite these processes'
  • 'assess staffing levels, procurement complications, payment delays, and the feasibility of master contracts and carry-forward funding'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's language is clear in its intent to improve efficiency; however, the scope of potential reforms (such as what constitutes 'streamlining') could be interpreted broadly depending on implementation.

Senate - 132 - AN ACT ESTABLISHING A TASK FORCE CONCERNING THE REGULATION ADOPTION PROCESS.

Legislation ID: 77732

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This act establishes a task force tasked with studying the current regulation adoption process as governed by chapter 54 of the general statutes. The task force will consist of appointed members, including legal experts and state officials, and will make recommendations for legislative improvements. The task force is required to submit its findings by January 1, 2026.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • All initial appointments must be made within thirty days after the effective date.
  • A report of findings and recommendations must be submitted by January 1, 2026.
  • Chairpersons to be selected by the Speaker and President pro tempore.
  • Includes members appointed by legislative leaders and state officials.
  • Initial appointments to the task force must be completed within thirty days of the bills effective date.
  • Initial appointments to the task force must be made within thirty days of the effective date.
  • Members include appointments from both the House and Senate leadership and legal experts.
  • Must include a professor of administrative law appointed by the minority leader of the House.
  • Report on findings and recommendations due by January 1, 2026.
  • Task force must examine the role of the legislative regulation review committee.
  • Task force to make recommendations for legislative changes.
  • The administrative staff of the standing legislative regulation review committee will support the task force.
  • The first meeting must be held within sixty days after the effective date.
  • The task force is responsible for making recommendations for improvements.
  • The task force must consist of specific appointed members including professors of administrative law and legislative leaders.
  • The task force must consist of specific appointed members, including professors of administrative law and legislative leaders.
  • The task force must evaluate the existing regulation adoption and review processes.
  • The task force must hold its first meeting within sixty days of the bills effective date.
  • The task force must submit a report with recommendations by January 1, 2026.
  • The task force must submit its report to the relevant legislative committee by January 1, 2026.
  • The task force will terminate upon submission of the report or on January 1, 2026, whichever is later.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-10 Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, Senate
2025-04-10 Senate Calendar Number 342
2025-04-10 Reported Out of Legislative Commissioners Office
2025-04-10 File Number 638
2025-04-04 Referred to Office of Legislative Research and Office of Fiscal Analysis 04/09/25 5:00 PM
2025-03-28 Filed with Legislative Commissioners Office
2025-03-27 Joint Favorable
2025-03-10 Public Hearing 03/14

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes a temporary body (a task force) with the purpose of studying and recommending ways to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the government’s regulation adoption process.

Mechanism of Influence: The task force will analyze the current regulatory process, identify inefficiencies, and propose legislative changes to streamline or modernize how regulations are adopted, potentially reducing administrative burdens and improving responsiveness.

Evidence:

  • 'establishes a task force to study and recommend improvements to the regulation adoption process'
  • 'task force will consist of various appointed members, including professors of administrative law and state officials.'
  • 'task force to make recommendations for legislative changes.'
  • 'Report on findings and recommendations due by January 1, 2026.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent to study and recommend improvements to a government process (regulation adoption), which inherently relates to efficiency and effectiveness. However, the precise recommendations will depend on the task force’s findings.

Senate - 1499 - AN ACT IMPLEMENTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE STATE CONTRACTING STANDARDS BOARD.

Legislation ID: 77728

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Raised Bill No. 1499 proposes amendments to existing statutes governing state contracting procedures, including the establishment of procurement definitions, the authority of the Chief Procurement Officer, and the responsibilities of the State Contracting Standards Board. It seeks to enhance transparency, efficiency, and compliance in state procurement practices by updating definitions, repealing outdated statutes, and clarifying the roles of state agencies in the procurement process.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must provide procurement information to the board upon request.
  • All agreements must be maintained as public records.
  • Appropriations for the board must be based on estimates from the executive director.
  • Board can exercise rights related to procurement policies that were previously held by state contracting agencies.
  • Board is tasked with reviewing and recommending changes to procurement policies and practices.
  • Board must review and recommend changes to procurement legislation and regulations.
  • Board to recommend repeal of conflicting procurement statutes.
  • Board to review and recommend legislation concerning procurement processes.
  • Chief Procurement Officer must be appointed for a term not exceeding six years.
  • Chief Procurement Officer to be appointed for a term not exceeding six years.
  • Contracts must not allow contractors to benefit from influencing claims outcomes.
  • Contracts over $250,000 must meet established evaluation criteria including cost and accountability.
  • Corporation must adopt its own rules and procedures for procurement and asset disposition.
  • Defines key procurement terms to standardize understanding across state contracting agencies.
  • Disclosure of client information is prohibited if it violates legal or ethical standards.
  • Empowered to adopt regulations concerning procurement.
  • Mandates open or competitive bidding for agreements unless impractical or not in the corporations best interest.
  • Officer must report to the board and is responsible for overseeing procurement compliance.
  • Prohibits the Governor from reducing allotment requisitions for the board.
  • Prohibits the Governor from reducing allotment requisitions related to the board.
  • Prohibits the Governor from reducing allotments related to the board.
  • Prohibits the Governor from reducing allotments related to the State Contracting Standards Board.
  • Requires appropriations to be based on estimates from the boards executive director.
  • Requires appropriations to be based on estimates from the executive director of the board.
  • Requires appropriations to be based on estimates from the executive director of the State Contracting Standards Board.
  • Requires a two-thirds board vote for certain approvals.
  • Requires state contracting agencies to provide procurement information to the board upon request.
  • Requires state contracting agencies to provide timely procurement information to the board upon request.
  • Requires the executive director of the board to transmit expenditure estimates to the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management.
  • Responsible for ensuring compliance with procurement statutes and training agency procurement officers.
  • Responsible for monitoring compliance with procurement statutes and regulations.
  • Responsible for overseeing compliance with procurement policies.
  • Rules adopted are considered public records.
  • State agencies must provide procurement information to the board upon request.
  • State contracting agencies must provide procurement information to the board upon request.
  • The board must recommend repeals of conflicting or obsolete procurement statutes.
  • The Chief Procurement Officer must be appointed for a term not exceeding six years.
  • The Chief Procurement Officer serves a term not exceeding six years and reports to the State Contracting Standards Board.
  • The Governor is prohibited from reducing the boards allotments.
  • The officer is responsible for auditing, training, and ensuring compliance with procurement policies.
  • The officer is responsible for overseeing compliance with procurement policies.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-07 Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, Senate
2025-05-07 Reported Out of Legislative Commissioners Office
2025-05-07 No New File by Committee on Appropriations
2025-05-06 Filed with Legislative Commissioners Office
2025-05-05 Joint Favorable
2025-05-01 Referred by Senate to Committee on Appropriations
2025-04-03 Reported Out of Legislative Commissioners Office
2025-04-03 File Number 498

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations in the area of procurement, through structural and procedural changes.

Mechanism of Influence: It establishes and empowers the State Contracting Standards Board and the Chief Procurement Officer to oversee, standardize, and streamline procurement processes, clarify definitions, and recommend further improvements. These mechanisms are directly designed to reduce inefficiency, ensure compliance, and modernize procurement functions.

Evidence:

  • 'Grants the State Contracting Standards Board the authority to oversee and manage procurement processes across state contracting agencies, ensuring compliance and efficiency.'
  • 'Chief Procurement Officer ... Responsible for ensuring compliance with procurement statutes and training agency procurement officers.'
  • 'Board is tasked with reviewing and recommending changes to procurement policies and practices.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is specific in its focus on procurement efficiency and compliance, and the language about 'ensuring efficiency' and 'standardizing definitions' is clear in intent. Its scope is limited to procurement rather than all government operations, but procurement is a major area of government efficiency efforts.

Senate - 614 - AN ACT REESTABLISHING THE LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM REVIEW AND INVESTIGATIONS COMMITTEE AND REQUIRING PERFORMANCE AUDITS BY THE AUDITORS OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.

Legislation ID: 80825

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill aims to reestablish the Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee, which is tasked with reviewing and auditing state agency programs. It also mandates the Auditors of Public Accounts to conduct performance audits and produce reports on state agencies efficiency, effectiveness, and compliance. The bill includes provisions for public hearings where findings and recommendations will be discussed.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Mandates performance audits for state agencies focusing on efficiency, effectiveness, performance, and compliance.
  • Requires the audited agency to attend the hearing to respond to the findings and recommendations.
  • Requires the Auditors of Public Accounts to present their findings and recommendations at these hearings.
  • Requires the committee to review state agency programs for efficiency, effectiveness, performance, and compliance.
  • Requires the production of reports on findings and recommendations.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-15 Referred to Joint Committee on Government Oversight

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly creates and empowers bodies (the committee and auditors) to evaluate and improve government efficiency and effectiveness through mandated audits and reviews.

Mechanism of Influence: By conducting performance audits and requiring public hearings on agency efficiency and effectiveness, the bill establishes structural mechanisms to identify inefficiencies and recommend improvements in government operations.

Evidence:

  • Mandates performance audits for state agencies focusing on efficiency, effectiveness, performance, and compliance.
  • Requires the committee to review state agency programs for efficiency, effectiveness, performance, and compliance.
  • Requires the production of reports on findings and recommendations.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Delaware

Index of Bills

House - 4 - AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 29 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.

Legislation ID: 200608

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends Title 29 of the Delaware Code to establish the Office of Inspector General, which will serve as an independent agency tasked with overseeing state agencies. It defines the offices purpose, powers, and responsibilities, and sets forth procedures for investigations, reporting, and ensuring confidentiality in complaints, thereby fostering public trust in government operations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • All investigative records are confidential and exempt from FOIA.
  • All investigative records are confidential and exempt from public disclosure.
  • Annual report must be published on the website by March 1.
  • Annual report must be submitted by March 1 each year.
  • Clarifies that legal advice provisions do not apply to the Office of Inspector General and the State Public Integrity Commission.
  • Complaints can be made by any individual or entity.
  • Complaints can be made by anyone; must notify complainant if not investigated.
  • Establishes the need for an independent Office of Inspector General.
  • Inspector General can issue subpoenas.
  • Inspector General serves a 5-year term with eligibility for reappointment.
  • Inspector General to be appointed and confirmed by the General Assembly.
  • Investigate complaints related to fraud, waste, and misconduct.
  • Maintain a toll-free number for public complaints.
  • Mandates a report addressing potential revisions to the Office and its resources.
  • Mandates the office to protect public interests and enhance trust.
  • Must maintain a toll-free number and website for complaints.
  • Must maintain confidentiality of complainant identities.
  • Must provide access to records within 5 business days of request.
  • Must resign before running for public office.
  • No fees for submitting complaints.
  • Panel consists of various appointed members, including legal and public representatives.
  • Panel to submit names of 3 candidates to the Governor.
  • Report must include number of complaints and investigations.
  • Report must include statistics on complaints and investigations.
  • Requires adequate appropriations for effective operation.
  • Requires the JLOSC to submit the review report to the General Assembly, the Governor, and other relevant parties.
  • Requires the Joint Legislative Oversight and Sunset Committee to conduct a full review of the Office of Inspector General by July 1, 2032.
  • Selection panel must convene 90 days before term expiration.
  • Selection panel must submit three candidates to the Governor.
  • Shall pursue civil actions for violations.
  • Specific conditions for removal from office are outlined.
  • State agencies must provide access to records within 5 business days of request.
  • The Inspector General can issue subpoenas for evidence.
  • The Inspector General must be confirmed and is independent from state agencies.
  • The Inspector General must maintain confidentiality of complainants.
  • The Inspector General must remain impartial and neutral.
  • The Inspector General serves a 5-year term and is eligible for reappointment.
  • The office must be adequately funded to operate effectively.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-07-01 Passed By House. Votes: 30 YES 1 NO 9 ABSENT 1 VACANT
2025-06-25 Reported Out of Committee (Appropriations) in House with 4 On Its Merits
2025-06-20 Assigned to Appropriations Committee in House
2025-06-18 Reported Out of Committee (Administration) in House with 2 Favorable, 3 On Its Merits
2025-06-05 Assigned to Administration Committee in House
2025-05-22 Passed By Senate. Votes: 20 YES 1 ABSENT
2025-05-22 Amendment SA 3 to SB 4 - Passed By Senate. Votes: 20 YES 1 ABSENT
2025-05-22 Amendment SA 2 to SB 4 - Passed By Senate. Votes: 20 YES 1 ABSENT

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly creates a new government office (Inspector General) with the purpose of overseeing state agencies, investigating complaints, and reporting on government operations, all aimed at preventing fraud and improving public trust. These mechanisms are directly aligned with improving government efficiency and effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By enabling independent investigations, requiring annual reporting, and mandating reviews by the Joint Legislative Oversight and Sunset Committee, the bill establishes structural and procedural tools to identify inefficiencies, waste, or misconduct in state government, and to recommend improvements.

Evidence:

  • Establishes the necessity of the Office of Inspector General to prevent fraud and enhance public trust in state government.
  • Mandates the Inspector General to produce an annual report detailing activities and investigations conducted.
  • Requires the Joint Legislative Oversight and Sunset Committee to conduct a full review of the Office of Inspector General by July 1, 2032.
  • Details the powers and responsibilities of the Inspector General in investigating state agencies and managing complaints.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's stated purpose is to prevent fraud and enhance public trust, which are closely linked to government efficiency, though it does not use the word 'efficiency' directly. However, the creation of oversight mechanisms and mandated reporting are typical government efficiency measures.

Florida

Index of Bills

House - 1325 - Succession to Office of Governor, Auditing, and Government Efficiency

Legislation ID: 215147

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Joint Resolution 1325 proposes significant amendments to the Florida State Constitution, including the repeal of the Lieutenant Governors office and the Government Efficiency Task Force. It seeks to create a new position of Commissioner of Government Efficiency, revise the processes for government auditing and efficiency, and adjust the succession protocol for the Governors office in cases of vacancy or impeachment. The changes will be submitted for voter approval in upcoming elections.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • All departments must participate in planning processes.
  • All trust funds must terminate within four years unless specified otherwise.
  • An auditor must be appointed to audit public records and perform related duties.
  • Annual budget requests must reflect long-range financial outlooks.
  • Appropriations for recurring purposes from nonrecurring funds require a three-fifths vote.
  • At least 5% of last fiscal years net revenue must be retained in the fund.
  • At least 5% of the last fiscal years net revenue must be retained in the stabilization fund.
  • Budget documents must be provided 72 hours before final passage.
  • Budget requests must reflect long-range financial outlooks.
  • Creation of trust funds requires a three-fifths vote of the legislature.
  • Each house of the legislature must choose its officers biennially.
  • General appropriation bills must be provided 72 hours before final passage.
  • Impeachment requires a two-thirds vote from the House.
  • The governor must recommend biennial revisions to the planning document.
  • The governor must recommend revisions to the planning document biennially.
  • The principal balance cannot exceed 10% of the last fiscal years net revenue.
  • The seat of government must be in Tallahassee, unless relocated by the governor during emergencies.
  • The seat of government must be maintained in Tallahassee unless relocated by the Governor during emergencies.
  • The Senate must try all impeachments and requires a two-thirds vote for conviction.
  • The Senate must try impeachments within six months.
  • Trust funds cannot be created without a three-fifths vote of each house.
  • Trust funds must terminate within four years unless otherwise specified.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-16 S Died in Rules
2025-05-03 S Indefinitely postponed and withdrawn from consideration
2025-04-22 S Received
2025-04-16 S Referred to Rules
2025-04-16 H Message sent to senate
2025-04-16 S In Messages
2025-04-16 H Added to Third Reading Calendar
2025-04-16 H Read 3rd time

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly proposes the creation of a new Commissioner of Government Efficiency, replacing the repealed Government Efficiency Task Force. This new position is directly tasked with overseeing and improving government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing a dedicated official (Commissioner of Government Efficiency), the legislation creates a structural mechanism for identifying and implementing cost savings, streamlining processes, and modernizing government operations. The repeal of the Task Force and establishment of a new position suggests a procedural or organizational shift aimed at enhancing efficiency.

Evidence:

  • 'repeal of the Lieutenant Governors office and the Government Efficiency Task Force'
  • 'create a new position of Commissioner of Government Efficiency'
  • 'revise the processes for government auditing and efficiency'

Ambiguity Notes: The abstract does not provide the precise powers or duties of the new Commissioner, so the scope of influence is somewhat ambiguous. However, the title and context strongly imply a focus on efficiency.

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill mandates long-range state planning and regular updates, which are procedural mechanisms aimed at improving government responsiveness and potentially efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: Requiring the governor to recommend biennial revisions to a long-range planning document encourages ongoing evaluation and adaptation of government operations, supporting efficiency and responsiveness.

Evidence:

  • 'Mandates the creation of a long-range state planning document and regular updates.'
  • 'The governor must recommend biennial revisions to the planning document.'

Ambiguity Notes: While long-range planning is not exclusively about efficiency, the requirement for regular review and revision is a procedural mechanism that often serves efficiency goals.

Analysis 3

Why Relevant: The bill revises processes for government auditing and efficiency, which are classic mechanisms for evaluating and improving government performance.

Mechanism of Influence: Changes to auditing processes can uncover inefficiencies, duplicative responsibilities, and opportunities for cost savings, directly supporting the bill's stated goal of improving government efficiency.

Evidence:

  • 'revise the processes for government auditing and efficiency'

Ambiguity Notes: Details on how auditing processes are revised are not provided in the summary, so the exact scope of efficiency improvements is unclear.

House - 1461 - Industries and Professional Activities

Legislation ID: 215214

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

CS/HB 1461 introduces significant changes to the Department of Business and Professional Regulation by renaming, removing, and redesignating various boards and councils. It also modifies licensing authority, removes certain continuing education requirements, and updates application processes for various professions, including engineering, accounting, and cosmetology. The bill seeks to enhance efficiency and reduce regulatory burdens on professionals while ensuring compliance with updated standards.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Applicants must complete fingerprinting for state and national background checks.
  • Mandates that all applications be submitted through the Departments online system.
  • Mandates that international applicants for CPA licensure meet specific criteria.
  • Mobile barbershops must have a permanent business address and file a monthly itinerary with the department.
  • Mobile barbershops must maintain a permanent business address and submit a monthly itinerary to the Department.
  • Removes continuing education requirements for certain licenses.
  • Requires initial applicants for cosmetology licenses to submit fingerprints for background checks.
  • Requires the Department to provide a summary of statutory law changes to the Division of Professions after each legislative session.
  • Revises education and work experience requirements for CPA licensing.
  • Updates the criteria for continuing education for licensed professionals.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-16 H Died in Commerce Committee
2025-05-03 H Indefinitely postponed and withdrawn from consideration
2025-04-15 H Reported out of State Administration Budget Subcommittee
2025-04-15 H Now in Commerce Committee
2025-04-15 H Favorable by State Administration Budget Subcommittee
2025-04-11 H Added to State Administration Budget Subcommittee agenda
2025-04-11 H Referred to Commerce Committee
2025-04-11 H Referred to State Administration Budget Subcommittee

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly seeks to enhance efficiency and reduce regulatory burdens by renaming, removing, and redesignating boards and councils, and by repealing unnecessary statutes. These structural and procedural changes are designed to streamline government operations and reduce costs.

Mechanism of Influence: By consolidating or eliminating boards and councils, granting direct licensing authority to the Department, and repealing obsolete statutes, the bill reduces bureaucratic layers and administrative burdens. These actions are intended to make government oversight more efficient and responsive.

Evidence:

  • 'The bill seeks to enhance efficiency and reduce regulatory burdens on professionals while ensuring compliance with updated standards.'
  • 'Renames, removes, and redesignates several boards, commissions, and councils within the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, streamlining their functions and locations.'
  • 'Repeals numerous statutes related to various professional boards and regulatory requirements that are now deemed unnecessary or redundant.'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill clearly states its intent to improve efficiency and reduce regulatory burdens, some measures (like new regulations for mobile barbershops) could add complexity. However, the overall thrust is toward streamlining and modernization.

House - 433 - Administrative Procedures

Legislation ID: 214704

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

HB 433 amends various sections of the Florida Statutes related to administrative procedures, particularly concerning the rulemaking process. It introduces definitions for repromulgation and technical change, mandates agencies to follow specific timelines for rule development and notice, and requires the publication of statements of estimated regulatory costs. The bill also outlines procedures for emergency rules and the incorporation of materials by reference, aiming to improve transparency and efficiency in regulatory processes.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must identify rules required for repromulgation in their annual plans.
  • Agencies must provide a copy of proposals for lower cost alternatives to the committee.
  • Agencies must provide statements of estimated regulatory costs to the committee.
  • Agencies must submit a report to the Legislature by a specified date each year.
  • Defines repromulgation as the publication and adoption of existing rules after review.
  • Defines technical change as corrections that do not affect the substance of a rule.
  • Defines technical change to include only grammatical, typographical, or citation corrections.
  • Eligibility during training is contingent upon satisfying conditions set by the department.
  • Emergency rules cannot be effective for more than a specified timeframe and are not renewable.
  • Emergency rules must be published in the Florida Administrative Register.
  • If not publicly accessible, a statement of the reasons must be included.
  • Include agency website links for public access to these statements.
  • Include a list of rules scheduled for review.
  • Mandates that materials incorporated by reference must be available for public access or provide alternative access information.
  • Materials must be submitted in prescribed electronic formats and publicly accessible.
  • No automatic expiration of rules without explicit legislative authority.
  • Notices of renewal for emergency rules must be published before expiration.
  • Publish notice of rule development within 30 days of legislative enactment.
  • Requires agencies to publish a notice of rule development and proposed rules within specified timeframes.
  • Requires a holistic review of permitting processes and submission of a report to the Governor and Legislature.
  • Requires claimants to engage in systematic job search efforts.
  • Requires publication of emergency rules in the Florida Administrative Code.
  • Requires training to be approved by the department according to prescribed criteria.
  • Revised statements of estimated regulatory costs must be published.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-29 H Laid on Table, refer to CS/SB 108
2025-04-24 H Bill referred to House Calendar
2025-04-24 H Added to Second Reading Calendar
2025-04-21 H 1st Reading
2025-04-18 H CS Filed
2025-04-18 H Laid on Table under Rule 7.18(a)
2025-04-18 H Reported out of State Affairs Committee
2025-04-17 H Favorable with CS by State Affairs Committee

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes procedural requirements and mandates studies/reports (e.g., holistic review of permitting) designed to improve regulatory efficiency and reduce unnecessary burdens.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring agencies to review and repromulgate rules, consider lower cost alternatives, and submit reports on permitting processes, the bill creates structural mechanisms to identify and implement efficiency improvements.

Evidence:

  • Requires a holistic review of permitting processes and submission of a report to the Governor and Legislature.
  • Agencies must identify rules required for repromulgation in their annual plans.
  • Requires agencies to consider lower cost regulatory alternatives and publish revised statements of estimated regulatory costs.

Ambiguity Notes: Most provisions are explicitly tied to increasing efficiency or reducing costs, such as the requirement for lower cost alternatives and the holistic review/reporting mandate.

senate - 166 - Administrative Efficiency in Public Schools

Legislation ID: 26457

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill introduces amendments to multiple sections of Florida Statutes to streamline processes for district school boards, reduce certain reporting requirements, and clarify the roles and responsibilities of educational entities. Key changes include exemptions from rule adoption requirements for district school boards, modifications to the duties of the State Board of Education, and adjustments to requirements for student assessments and school financial reporting.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Activities must address updated skills for instructional leadership and effective school management.
  • Assess impact on educator performance and student outcomes.
  • Authorizes the State Board of Education to modify the timeframe for purchasing instructional materials.
  • Define inservice objectives and expected measurable improvements.
  • District school boards must still adopt rules to implement their general powers.
  • Evaluate quality and effectiveness of programs.
  • Exempts district school boards from the requirements for rules in Chapter 120 when adopting rules with public input.
  • Include an evaluation component to assess effectiveness.
  • Incorporate small learning communities and problem-solving strategies.
  • Integrate phonemic awareness and phonics into reading instruction.
  • List must include parent notifications, website postings, and reporting requirements.
  • Must inform superintendents by August 1 each year.
  • Must relate to specific performance data for assigned students.
  • Requires compliance with provisions related to instructional multiyear contracts.
  • Requires notification of the assessment schedule within a specified time interval.
  • Requires school districts to certify attendance records for Voluntary Prekindergarten Education Programs.
  • Requires submission of a tentative district educational facilities plan.
  • Requires the Department of Education to notify superintendents by August 1 each year.
  • Requires the department to maintain a list of all requirements related to actions by district school boards or superintendents.
  • Requires the department to produce specified reports and provide links to them on district websites.
  • Systematic consultation must be provided.
  • Training must be based on the science of reading.
  • Utilize technology-based delivery systems.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-16 • Died in Messages
2025-05-03 • Indefinitely postponed and withdrawn from consideration
2025-04-03 • Read 2nd time -SJ 322 • Amendment(s) adopted (169686, 189656, 332758, 498362) -SJ 323 • Read 3rd time -SJ 328 • CS passed as amended; YEAS 37 NAYS 0 -SJ 328 • Immediately certified -SJ 330
2025-04-03 • Read 2nd time • Amendment(s) adopted (169686, 189656, 332758, 498362) • Read 3rd time • CS passed as amended; YEAS 37 NAYS 0 • Immediately certified
2025-04-03 • In Messages
2025-04-03 • In Messages • In Possession List
2025-04-02 • CS by Fiscal Policy read 1st time
2025-04-01 • Placed on Special Order Calendar, 04/03/25

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly reduces procedural requirements (such as reporting, auditing, and rule adoption) for school districts and clarifies the roles of educational entities, which are classic measures to improve government efficiency and reduce administrative burdens.

Mechanism of Influence: By removing or simplifying requirements (e.g., deleting the requirement for district accountability plans, removing the internal auditor mandate, exempting school boards from certain rulemaking procedures), the bill aims to streamline operations, reduce duplicative or unnecessary processes, and allow school boards to focus resources more effectively.

Evidence:

  • 'The requirement for district school boards to provide an accountability plan to the Commissioner of Education is deleted.'
  • 'District school boards are exempt from certain rule-adoption requirements when making rules with public input.'
  • 'The requirement for district school boards to employ an internal auditor under certain circumstances is deleted.'
  • 'The Department of Education is required to maintain and provide a list of statutory and rule requirements to school districts.'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill contains many provisions, several are directly aimed at reducing administrative or procedural requirements. Some changes (such as modifying reporting or notification timelines) are less explicitly tied to efficiency, but the overall thrust of the bill is toward streamlined government operations in education.

Georgia

Index of Bills

house - 949 - Trump, President Donald; Elon Musk; creation of the Department of Government Efficiency; commend

Legislation ID: 189965

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Resolution 949 acknowledges the establishment of the Department of Government Efficiency, highlighting the collaborative efforts of President Donald Trump and Elon Musk. The resolution emphasizes the importance of streamlining federal operations, reducing waste, and enhancing productivity while ensuring accountability and transparency in government spending. It encourages ongoing public-private partnerships to further these goals.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-04 House Hopper

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The resolution directly addresses the improvement of government efficiency through the establishment of a dedicated department, support for modernization, and encouragement of collaboration aimed at reducing waste and bureaucracy.

Mechanism of Influence: By commending and encouraging efforts to streamline operations and modernize government, the resolution supports structural and procedural mechanisms for efficiency, such as the Department of Government Efficiency and public-private partnerships.

Evidence:

  • acknowledges the establishment of the Department of Government Efficiency
  • emphasizes the importance of streamlining federal operations, reducing waste, and enhancing productivity
  • encourages ongoing public-private partnerships
  • expresses support for the ongoing efforts to streamline government functions and eliminate unnecessary bureaucracy

Ambiguity Notes: While the resolution expresses support and encouragement, it does not itself establish new entities or mandate specific actions; rather, it acknowledges and supports ongoing efforts.

Hawaii

Index of Bills

Senate - 165 - Department of Government Efficiency; Fiscal Responsibility

Legislation ID: 136139

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This resolution urges the Hawaii State Legislature to create a State Department of Government Efficiency in response to public sentiment favoring scrutiny of government expenditures and a desire to minimize wasteful spending. The resolution highlights the need for careful financial management in light of projected tax cuts and emphasizes the importance of ensuring that taxpayer dollars are used effectively.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Mandates the department to identify and address wasteful spending practices.
  • Requires the formation of a department dedicated to evaluating government expenditures.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-14 Referred to LMG, LAB, referral sheet 22
2025-03-07 Offered

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The resolution directly proposes the establishment of a new government entity (Department of Government Efficiency) with the explicit mission to promote government efficiency by scrutinizing expenditures and reducing wasteful spending.

Mechanism of Influence: By creating a dedicated department, the legislation would institutionalize ongoing oversight, evaluation, and reform of government spending practices, targeting inefficiencies and promoting cost savings.

Evidence:

  • calls for the establishment of a State Department of Government Efficiency to oversee and investigate government spending
  • Mandates the department to identify and address wasteful spending practices
  • Requires the formation of a department dedicated to evaluating government expenditures

Ambiguity Notes: The language is clear that the department's purpose is government efficiency; however, the specific powers, structure, and methods are not detailed in the abstract.

Senate - 169 - Department of Government Efficiency; Fiscal Responsibility

Legislation ID: 135955

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This resolution highlights the need for a thorough examination of government expenditures in Hawaii, as a significant majority of voters support reducing spending rather than increasing taxes. With projected state income tax cuts leading to substantial revenue losses, the resolution calls for a dedicated department to oversee and promote government efficiency in managing taxpayer dollars.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-14 Referred to LMG, LAB, referral sheet 22
2025-03-07 Offered

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The resolution explicitly proposes the creation of a new department with the mission to promote government efficiency in spending.

Mechanism of Influence: If enacted, this would establish a permanent government entity focused on identifying and implementing cost-saving measures, streamlining expenditures, and ensuring effective use of taxpayer funds.

Evidence:

  • Urges the creation of a State Department of Government Efficiency to oversee government spending.
  • highlights the need for a thorough examination of government expenditures
  • justifying the need for a dedicated department

Ambiguity Notes: The resolution urges rather than mandates the creation of the department, so its implementation would depend on subsequent action. However, the stated goal is clear and directly tied to government efficiency.

Senate - 418 - AG; Regulatory Review Program; Hawaii Administrative Rules; State Agencies; Reports; Rules; Appropriations

Legislation ID: 28534

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill establishes a program overseen by the Department of the Attorney General to periodically review all administrative rules adopted by state agencies. It mandates that each agency reviews at least 20% of its rules annually, allowing for the identification and repeal of outdated or unnecessary regulations. The program seeks to streamline rules, improve clarity, and ensure compliance with statutory authority. Additionally, the bill requires annual reporting and public input in the review process, along with appropriations for its implementation.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Appropriates necessary funds from the general revenues of the State of Hawaii for the regulatory review program.
  • Mandates each state agency to review at least 20% of its rules annually.
  • Mandates notification of noncompliance by state agencies to the governor and legislature.
  • Requires state agencies to report on rules reviewed, recommendations for retention, modification, or repeal, and justifications.
  • Requires the acceptance of public comments for at least sixty days during the review process.
  • Requires the adoption of rules pursuant to chapter 91, Hawaii Revised Statutes, for program implementation.
  • Requires the Department of the Attorney General to evaluate all administrative rules adopted by state agencies.
  • The Department of the Attorney General must compile and submit an annual regulatory review report to the governor and legislature.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-10 Report adopted; Passed Second Reading, as amended (SD 1) and referred to WAM/JDC.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill is directly designed to improve government efficiency by establishing a structured program for the periodic review and potential repeal of unnecessary or outdated regulations.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating regular reviews, reporting, and public input, the bill creates a mechanism to streamline bureaucratic processes, reduce regulatory burdens, and ensure agencies operate under up-to-date and necessary rules. The oversight by the Attorney General's office and annual reporting further institutionalize efficiency and accountability.

Evidence:

  • 'mandates that each agency reviews at least 20% of its rules annually, allowing for the identification and repeal of outdated or unnecessary regulations.'
  • 'The program seeks to streamline rules, improve clarity, and ensure compliance with statutory authority.'
  • 'requires annual reporting and public input in the review process.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its intent to streamline rules and remove unnecessary regulations, leaving little ambiguity about its efficiency goals.

Senate - 487 - Government Efficiency; Regulations; AI; LRB; Appropriation

Legislation ID: 27116

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill appropriates funds for the legislative reference bureau to procure an AI tool that will analyze the Hawaii Revised Statutes and Hawaii Administrative Rules. The goal is to identify provisions that are obsolete, duplicative, or inconsistent with existing laws. The bureau will report its findings and recommendations to the legislature by a specified deadline.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Allocates necessary funds for AI procurement.
  • Funds must be expended by the legislative reference bureau for the purposes outlined in the Act.
  • Mandates a report of findings and recommendations to the legislature.
  • Report must be submitted no later than twenty days prior to the regular session of 2027.
  • Requires the legislative reference bureau to utilize AI to analyze Hawaii Revised Statutes and Hawaii Administrative Rules.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-21 Referred to LMG, FIN, referral sheet 2

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's explicit purpose is to streamline government operations by identifying and recommending the removal of obsolete, duplicative, or inconsistent legal provisions, which directly promotes government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By using AI to analyze statutes and administrative rules, the bill aims to uncover inefficiencies and redundancies in the law, leading to recommendations for legislative action that can reduce administrative burdens and improve the clarity and effectiveness of government operations.

Evidence:

  • The Acts purpose is to provide funding for an AI tool to analyze and streamline state laws and regulations.
  • The goal is to identify provisions that are obsolete, duplicative, or inconsistent with existing laws.
  • Mandates a report of findings and recommendations to the legislature.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent to promote efficiency by targeting obsolete and duplicative laws. The requirement for a report with recommendations further grounds its relevance to government efficiency.

Idaho

Index of Bills

House - 364 - DOGE task force

Legislation ID: 95783

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill proposes the creation of the Department of Government Efficiency Legislative Task Force (DOGE) within Idahos government. The task force will consist of nine legislative members tasked with reviewing agency functions, regulatory processes, and budget authority to promote effective governance. The bill outlines the structure, membership, and responsibilities of the task force, including the establishment of subgroups focused on regulatory accountability, budget accountability, and government operations. The task force will operate until November 30, 2029, with a sunset provision included.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Members must be appointed by July 1, 2025, and serve until November 30, 2026, with subsequent annual appointments.
  • The task force may divide into three subgroups to address specific efficiency issues in state governance.
  • The task force must consist of nine members: three from the House of Representatives, three from the Senate, and three from the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee.
  • The task force must meet at least twice a year and may hold special meetings as needed.
  • The task force will have two cochairs, one from the House and one from the Senate.
  • The task force will operate until November 30, 2029, after which it will be dissolved.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-11 Introduced, read first time; referred to: State Affairs
2025-03-11 Received from the House passed; filed for first reading
2025-03-10 Rules Suspended: Ayes 62 Nays 3 Abs/Excd 5, read in full as required –PASSED - 43-23-4AYES– Alfieri, Andrus, Barbieri, Beiswenger, Boyle, Bruce, Burgoyne, Cannon, Clow, Cornilles, Crane(12), Crane(13), Dygert, Ehardt, Ehlers, Erickson, Fuhriman, Furniss, Garner, Harris, Hawkins, Healey, Hill, Holtzclaw, Horman, Manwaring, Mendive, Mickelsen, Miller, Mitchell, Palmer, Petzke, Pohanka, Price, Sauter, Scott, Shepherd, Shirts, Skaug, Tanner(13), Tanner(14), Wisniewski, Mr. SpeakerNAYS– Achilles, Berch, Cayler, Cheatum, Church, Egbert, Gannon, Handy, Hostetler, Leavitt, Marmon, Mathias, McCann, Monks, Nelsen, Pickett, Rasor, Raybould, Raymond, Rubel, Thompson, Weber, WheelerAbsent– Galaviz, Green, Redman, Vander WoudeFloor Sponsor - Crane(12)Title apvd - to Senate
2025-03-10 Read second time; Filed for Third Reading
2025-03-07 Reported out of Committee with Do Pass Recommendation, Filed for Second Reading
2025-03-05 Reported Printed and Referred to State Affairs
2025-03-04 Introduced, read first time, referred to JRA for Printing

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly creates a legislative task force with the stated goal of enhancing government efficiency in Idaho.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing a dedicated body to review agency operations, regulatory processes, and budget authority, and by empowering it to create subgroups on regulatory and budget accountability, the bill sets up structural mechanisms to identify inefficiencies, recommend improvements, and potentially streamline government functions.

Evidence:

  • 'establishes the Department of Government Efficiency Legislative Task Force to enhance governance efficiency in Idaho.'
  • 'reviewing agency functions, regulatory processes, and budget authority to promote effective governance.'
  • 'subgroups focused on regulatory accountability, budget accountability, and government operations.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent and structure; the language directly states the purpose is to promote effective governance and efficiency, leaving little ambiguity about its relevance to government efficiency.

House - 413 - State employee reduction, travel

Legislation ID: 95828

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill introduces the Idaho Personnel Reduction Act, which mandates state departments to identify and eliminate vacant full-time equivalent positions that have been unfilled for over 180 days. Additionally, it requires detailed reporting of state employee travel expenses to ensure transparency and accountability in government spending.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Departments must provide a detailed account of total travel expenses, including purpose, destinations, and specific costs.
  • Departments must report vacant positions that have been unfilled for over 180 days.
  • Eliminated positions must have their salary budgets reduced from the annual budget submission.
  • If a position has been vacant for less than a year, departments may retain it if they fund it from existing resources.
  • Travel occurrences must be identified, along with any expenses covered by external entities.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-25 Received from the House passed; filed for first reading
2025-03-25 Introduced, read first time; referred to: Finance
2025-03-24 Rules Suspended: Ayes 70 Nays 0 Abs/Excd 0, read in full as required –PASSED - 65-4-1AYES– Alfieri, Andrus, Barbieri, Beiswenger, Boyle, Bruce, Burgoyne, Cannon, Cayler, Cheatum, Church, Clow, Cornilles, Crane(12), Crane(13), Dygert, Egbert, Ehardt, Ehlers, Erickson, Fuhriman, Furniss, Galaviz, Garner, Green(Lesmeister), Handy, Harris, Hawkins, Healey, Hill, Holtzclaw, Horman, Hostetler, Leavitt, Manwaring, Marmon, Mathias, McCann, Mendive, Mickelsen, Miller, Mitchell, Monks, Nelsen, Palmer, Petzke, Pickett, Pohanka, Price, Rasor, Raybould, Redman, Sauter, Scott, Shepherd, Shirts, Skaug, Tanner(13), Tanner(14), Thompson, Vander Woude, Weber, Wheeler, Wisniewski, Mr. SpeakerNAYS– Achilles, Berch, Gannon, RubelAbsent– RaymondFloor Sponsor - HormanTitle apvd - to Senate
2025-03-24 Read second time; Filed for Third Reading
2025-03-21 Reported out of Committee with Do Pass Recommendation, Filed for Second Reading
2025-03-19 Reported Printed and Referred to Appropriations
2025-03-18 Introduced, read first time, referred to JRA for Printing

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: This bill explicitly aims to improve government efficiency and reduce waste by eliminating unfilled positions and increasing transparency in travel spending.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating the elimination of long-term vacant positions, the bill directly streamlines government operations and reduces unnecessary expenditures. The required travel expense reporting creates a structural mechanism for oversight and potential cost savings.

Evidence:

  • requiring state departments to identify and eliminate long-term vacant positions to improve efficiency and reduce waste
  • mandates state departments to report detailed travel expenses ... aiming to identify and eliminate waste in travel spending

Ambiguity Notes: The intent to promote efficiency and reduce waste is clearly stated in both provisions. The language is specific about the mechanisms (elimination of positions, mandatory reporting) and their intended outcomes.

House - 470 - State personnel, reduction, travel

Legislation ID: 130627

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill introduces two new sections to Idaho Code: the Idaho Personnel Reduction Act, which mandates annual reporting of vacant full-time equivalent positions in state departments, and a section on reporting state employee travel expenses. The goal is to identify and eliminate wasteful spending in government to save taxpayer dollars and increase public trust in government operations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Departments must detail each vacant position by job title, length of vacancy, job description, funding availability, reasons for vacancy, and whether the FTP will be retained or reduced in the budget submission.
  • Departments must detail total travel expenses, specific travel occurrences and purposes, travel destinations, and breakdowns of expenses including airfare, mileage, lodging, etc.
  • Departments must identify and report vacant appropriated full-time equivalent positions that were vacant for more than one year by September 1 each year.
  • Departments must report any travel expenses funded by entities other than the state.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-03 Received from the House passed; filed for first reading
2025-04-03 Introduced, read first time; referred to: State Affairs
2025-04-02 Rules Suspended: Ayes 65 Nays 0 Abs/Excd 5, read in full as required –PASSED - 65-0-5AYES– Achilles, Alfieri, Andrus, Barbieri, Beiswenger, Berch, Boyle, Bruce, Burgoyne, Cannon, Cayler, Cheatum, Church, Cornilles, Crane(12), Crane(13), Dygert, Egbert, Ehardt, Ehlers, Erickson, Fuhriman, Furniss, Galaviz, Gannon, Garner, Handy, Harris, Hawkins, Healey, Hill(Brown), Holtzclaw, Hostetler, Leavitt, Manwaring, Marmon, Mathias, McCann, Mendive, Mickelsen, Miller, Mitchell, Monks, Nelsen, Palmer, Petzke, Pickett, Pohanka, Price, Rasor, Raybould, Raymond, Redman, Sauter, Scott(Dotson), Shepherd, Shirts, Skaug, Tanner(13), Tanner(14), Thompson, Weber, Wheeler, Wisniewski, Mr. SpeakerNAYS– NoneAbsent– Clow, Green, Horman, Rubel, Vander Woude(Harris)Floor Sponsor - MonksTitle apvd - to Senate
2025-04-02 Read second time; Filed for Third Reading
2025-04-01 Introduced, read first time, referred to JRA for Printing
2025-04-01 Reported Printed; Filed for Second Reading

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates new reporting requirements and structural mechanisms (annual department reports) specifically designed to identify inefficiencies and waste in state government staffing and travel expenditures, with the explicit goal of improving government efficiency and saving taxpayer dollars.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating detailed annual reports on unfilled positions and travel expenses, the bill provides data for decision-makers to reduce unnecessary costs, streamline operations, and potentially eliminate redundant or wasteful positions and expenditures. This could lead to more efficient allocation of resources and budgetary savings.

Evidence:

  • 'The goal is to identify and eliminate wasteful spending in government to save taxpayer dollars and increase public trust in government operations.'
  • 'requiring state departments to report on vacant full-time equivalent positions that have been unfilled for over a year and to provide detailed information about these vacancies.'
  • 'mandates state departments to report on travel expenses incurred by state employees... to identify potential waste.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its intent to promote efficiency and reduce waste; however, the ultimate actions taken based on these reports (such as actual position eliminations or travel reductions) are at the discretion of policymakers, so the direct effect depends on follow-through.

Illinois

Index of Bills

House - 1266 - AUDITOR GENERAL-DOGE ACT

Legislation ID: 182918

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill creates the Department of Government Efficiency within the Office of the Auditor General. It aims to improve the efficiency of state government operations by advising policymakers on regulatory rescissions, administrative reductions, and cost savings. The department will be overseen by a Board of Directors, which includes the Auditor General and other appointed members, and will issue reports to the Governor and General Assembly regarding its findings and recommendations.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-14 Added Co-SponsorRep. Chris Miller
2025-03-11 Added Co-SponsorRep. Charles Meier
2025-03-05 Added Co-SponsorRep. Bradley Fritts
2025-02-20 Added Co-SponsorRep. Patrick Windhorst
2025-02-18 Added Co-SponsorRep. Brad Halbrook
2025-02-18 Added Co-SponsorRep. Paul Jacobs
2025-02-11 Added Chief Co-SponsorRep. Tony M. McCombie
2025-02-11 Added Chief Co-SponsorRep. Norine K. Hammond

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a new department with the explicit mission to improve government efficiency, reduce administrative costs, and streamline operations. It also creates structural mechanisms (a board, reporting requirements, advisory roles) aimed at identifying and implementing efficiency measures.

Mechanism of Influence: The Department of Government Efficiency will advise policymakers, recommend regulatory and administrative changes, and issue regular reports to the Governor and General Assembly. It is empowered to consult on audits and request information from agencies, giving it practical tools to drive efficiency improvements.

Evidence:

  • creates the Department of Government Efficiency within the Office of the Auditor General
  • aims to improve the efficiency of state government operations by advising policymakers on regulatory rescissions, administrative reductions, and cost savings
  • issue reports to the Governor and General Assembly regarding its findings and recommendations
  • The department will be overseen by a Board of Directors
  • amends the Illinois State Auditing Act to allow the Auditor General to consult with the newly established Department regarding audits and investigations
  • grants the Department the power to request information from state agencies and advises the Auditor General on audits and investigations

Ambiguity Notes: None

House - 1937 - APA-SURVEY

Legislation ID: 183589

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends the Illinois State Auditing Act and the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act to require the Auditor General to conduct a comprehensive survey of the Illinois Administrative Code. The survey will identify the number of mandates and restrictions affecting the private sector and local governments. Following the survey, state agencies will be required to report on their findings and take action to reduce the total number of mandates to a specified limit. The bill also allows the use of artificial intelligence to assist in these tasks.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must reduce mandates to either 250,000 or 80% of the total identified in the Auditor Generals report, whichever is lesser.
  • AI tools may be utilized in both the survey and reporting processes to enhance efficiency.
  • Artificial intelligence may be used for preparing the reports.
  • Artificial intelligence may be used in the survey process.
  • Auditor General must conduct a survey within 2 years of the Acts effective date.
  • Each agency must submit a report within 9 months after the Auditor Generals report.
  • It must report quarterly on the implementation of the reduction requirements.
  • Reports must include a numerical acknowledgment of the number of mandates and restrictions maintained by the agency.
  • The Auditor General may contract with a private entity for assistance.
  • The Joint Committee must calculate each agencys share of mandates and restrictions within 3 months of follow-up reports.
  • This must be completed within 2 years of the follow-up reports.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-04 Referred toRules Committee
2025-02-04 First Reading
2025-01-29 Filed with the Clerk byRep. Jed Davis

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes new procedural mechanisms—a comprehensive survey, follow-up reporting, and mandated rule reduction—designed to streamline government operations, reduce regulatory burdens, and improve efficiency. It empowers the Auditor General and the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules to oversee and enforce these changes.

Mechanism of Influence: It creates a process for identifying and quantifying regulatory mandates, requires agencies to acknowledge and act on these findings, and sets enforceable targets for reducing regulatory burdens. The use of artificial intelligence is authorized to improve the efficiency of these processes.

Evidence:

  • 'The survey will identify the number of mandates and restrictions affecting the private sector and local governments.'
  • 'State agencies are required to adopt, amend, or repeal rules to reduce mandates and restrictions to a specified limit.'
  • 'Artificial intelligence may be used for preparing the reports.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit about its goals and mechanisms. The requirement to reduce mandates and the oversight structure are clearly tied to government efficiency. The exact definition of 'mandates and restrictions' may be subject to interpretation, but the overall intent is clear.

Senate - 2619 - DEPT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY

Legislation ID: 181700

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

The Department of Government Efficiency Act establishes a new department tasked with overseeing and improving the efficiency of State government operations. The Act mandates annual audits of State agencies, the establishment of performance indicators, and the consolidation of overlapping programs. It also emphasizes the need for technological advancements to improve transparency and streamline operations. The Act seeks to eliminate programs that prioritize ideology over taxpayer benefits and aims to restore public trust in government by focusing on accountability and efficiency.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Conduct mandatory annual audits in all State agencies.
  • Department must be operational within 3 months of the Acts effective date.
  • Establish clear Key Performance Indicators for every State agency.
  • Quarterly reports summarizing achievements and challenges must be submitted to the General Assembly.
  • Submit initial efficiency plans within 12 months of establishment.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-26 Referred toAssignments
2025-02-26 Filed with Secretary bySen. Andrew S. Chesney
2025-02-26 First Reading

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's explicit purpose is to improve government efficiency by establishing a permanent department tasked with oversight, audits, and recommending structural changes.

Mechanism of Influence: The new department will have the authority to conduct audits, set performance standards, consolidate services, and implement technology, all of which are direct mechanisms to increase efficiency and reduce waste.

Evidence:

  • 'establishes the Department of Government Efficiency to oversee State agencies operations and recommend improvements.'
  • 'conduct mandatory annual audits in all State agencies.'
  • 'establish clear Key Performance Indicators for every State agency.'
  • 'consolidating overlapping programs.'
  • 'implementing technology solutions.'

Ambiguity Notes: The mission includes language about 'combating ideological indoctrination,' which could be interpreted broadly, but the core operational provisions (audits, consolidation, KPIs) are clearly focused on efficiency.

Indiana

Index of Bills

Senate - 417 - Inspector general government efficiency report.

Legislation ID: 103010

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill No. 417 mandates the inspector general to prepare an annual list of all executive boards, committees, and commissions starting in 2026, and to conduct efficiency reviews of at least 25% of these entities from 2027 onward. The results of these reviews will be reported to the legislative council, promoting transparency and efficiency in state government operations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Annual report must be in electronic format.
  • Mandates annual efficiency reviews of at least 25% of active commissions starting in 2027.
  • Recommendations for improving resource allocation and performance must be included.
  • Report should include results of efficiency reviews and recommendations for resource allocation.
  • Requires the inspector general to compile a list of all executive commissions by July 1, 2026.
  • Reviews must assess whether commissions create measurable benefits and fulfill their statutory functions.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-13 First reading: referred to Committee on Judiciary
2025-01-13 Authored by Senator Carrasco

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a structural mechanism (inspector general-led efficiency reviews) with the explicit purpose of improving government efficiency and effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating regular efficiency reviews and public reporting, the bill aims to identify inefficiencies, eliminate unnecessary commissions, and recommend resource reallocation for better government performance.

Evidence:

  • conduct efficiency reviews of at least 25% of these entities from 2027 onward
  • reporting to the legislative council, promoting transparency and efficiency in state government operations
  • Recommendations for improving resource allocation and performance must be included

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 5 - State fiscal and contracting matters.

Legislation ID: 102618

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill No. 5 addresses various state fiscal and contracting matters, allowing state agencies to utilize artificial intelligence for budget projections. It mandates agencies to report to the budget committee before submitting federal fund requests that require state matching funds. The bill also requires quarterly reports on active contracts, reauthorization of long-vacant positions, and transparency in state contracts. Additionally, it prohibits nonpublic contracts and ensures all contract opportunities are publicly posted.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies cannot accept federal funds requiring a state match without budget committee review.
  • Agencies cannot accept federal funds requiring state matches or additional employees without prior budget committee review.
  • Agencies cannot accept federal funds that require a state match, additional employees, or new mandates without budget committee review.
  • Agencies cannot accept federal funds that require a state match or additional employees without budget committee review.
  • Agencies cannot accept federal funds that require state matching or additional permanent employees without budget committee review.
  • Agencies cannot accept federal funds without budget committee review if a state match is needed.
  • Agencies must post contract opportunities as requests for proposals or quotations prior to awarding.
  • Agencies must report active contracts quarterly.
  • Agencies must report amendments that increase contract amounts by at least $500,000 or extend contract terms by at least six months.
  • Agencies must report on active contracts quarterly.
  • Agencies must report on active contracts quarterly, starting January 1, 2026.
  • Agencies must report on contract amendments that exceed $500,000 or extend terms.
  • Agencies must submit allotment requests 25 days before the allotment period.
  • Agencies must submit allotment requests 25 days prior to the allotment period.
  • Agencies must submit contract reports quarterly after January 1, 2026.
  • Agencies must submit reports detailing federal fund requests quarterly.
  • All contract opportunities must be posted 30 days prior to award.
  • All contract opportunities must be publicly posted before awarding.
  • Annual audits must be conducted by an independent auditor.
  • Audits must cover all financial transactions of the public entity.
  • Budget director must approve allotment requests.
  • Budget director must provide quarterly reports on position reviews.
  • Contracts must be downloadable in an accessible spreadsheet format.
  • Contracts must be electronically downloadable.
  • Contracts must be electronically downloadable and accessible.
  • Contracts must be electronically downloadable and searchable in spreadsheet format.
  • Contracts must be posted on the Indiana transparency website within 30 days of execution.
  • Contracts must be posted on the transparency website within 30 days of execution.
  • Contracts must be posted within 30 days of execution.
  • Contracts must be provided to the department for inclusion on the transparency website within 30 days of execution.
  • Contracts must be reported to the budget committee within 30 days of execution.
  • Contracts must be submitted electronically within 30 days of execution.
  • Contracts must be submitted to the department for posting on the Indiana transparency website.
  • Contracts over $500,000 must include specific language and be reported quarterly to the budget committee.
  • Financial officers are required to conduct regular audits of public funds.
  • Financial officers must prepare annual financial reports.
  • Information must be available in an accessible spreadsheet format.
  • Monthly financial reports must be posted on the offices website.
  • Monthly financial reports must be publicly posted.
  • Monthly financial reports on Medicaid must be posted publicly.
  • Monthly reports on Medicaid program service utilization must be reviewed.
  • Monthly reports on Medicaid service utilization must be reviewed and posted publicly.
  • Monthly reports on Medicaid utilization must be reviewed for trends.
  • Permanent full-time positions vacant for 90 days must be reviewed and either reauthorized or eliminated.
  • Permanent full-time positions vacant for 90 days must be reviewed before being filled.
  • Positions must be classified according to their duties and responsibilities.
  • Positions vacant for 90 days must be reviewed by the budget director.
  • Quarterly reports on active contracts must be submitted to the budget committee.
  • Quarterly reports on reviewed positions must be submitted to the governor.
  • Quarterly reports on reviewed positions must be submitted to the governors office.
  • Quarterly reports to the budget committee on Medicaid program finances are required.
  • Quarterly reports to the governor on positions reauthorized or eliminated.
  • Reports must detail contracts active at specified dates throughout the year.
  • Reports must include details of active contracts.
  • Reports must include specific details about each contract.
  • Reports must include specific details about the contracts.
  • Requests must be reviewed and approved by the budget agency.
  • Requests requiring state matches must be reviewed by the budget committee before acceptance.
  • Requires budget committee review for federal fund requests necessitating state fund transfers.
  • Requires quarterly reporting of federal fund requests to the budget committee.
  • Requires review and reauthorization or elimination of long-vacant positions.
  • Requires review of vacant positions by the budget director.
  • State agencies cannot accept federal funds requiring a state match without budget committee review.
  • State agencies may use AI software for budget-related tasks.
  • State agencies may utilize AI for budget-related tasks.
  • State agencies must report federal fund requests quarterly.
  • State agencies must report federal funds requests by January 1, April 1, July 1, and October 1 each year.
  • State agencies must report new federal fund requests quarterly.
  • State agencies must report new federal funds requests quarterly.
  • State agencies must report on new federal fund requests quarterly.
  • State agencies must report requests for new federal funds quarterly.
  • State agencies must report to the budget committee on new federal funds requests quarterly.
  • State agencies must submit requests for allotment 25 days prior to the allotment period.
  • State agencies must submit requests for allotments 25 days prior to the allotment period.
  • State agencies must use AI software for specific financial documentation.
  • State agencies must utilize AI for preparing budget-related documents.
  • State agencies must utilize AI software for budget-related tasks.
  • The budget director must approve expenditure requests.
  • The director must prepare a classification plan for state civil service positions.
  • Vacant positions must be reviewed and either reauthorized or eliminated after 90 days.
  • Vacant positions must be reviewed and reauthorized prior to being filled after 90 days.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-06 Signed by the Governor
2025-04-29 Signed by the President of the Senate
2025-04-24 Signed by the Speaker
2025-04-24 Signed by the President Pro Tempore
2025-04-23 Conference Committee Report 1: adopted by the Senate; Roll Call 488: yeas 48, nays 0
2025-04-23 Rules Suspended. Conference Committee Report 1: adopted by the House; Roll Call 524: yeas 90, nays 1
2025-04-22 CCR # 1 filed in the Senate
2025-04-22 CCR # 1 filed in the House

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes and strengthens procedural mechanisms (reporting, oversight, transparency) designed to improve government efficiency, reduce costs, and promote accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: It requires agencies to use technology (AI) for budget projections, mandates regular reporting and review of contracts and positions, and sets up processes for oversight of federal fund requests and Medicaid program finances, all aimed at streamlining operations and eliminating waste.

Evidence:

  • allowing state agencies to utilize artificial intelligence for budget projections
  • mandates agencies to report to the budget committee before submitting federal fund requests
  • requires quarterly reports on active contracts
  • review and reauthorization or elimination of long-vacant positions
  • prohibits nonpublic contracts and ensures all contract opportunities are publicly posted

Ambiguity Notes: None

Iowa

Index of Bills

House - 325 - concerning combined services of governmental units.

Legislation ID: 105020

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Study Bill 325 allows two or more governmental units within Iowa to enter into joint agreements to combine their services related to tax levying, collection, and property assessment. This initiative is intended to promote cost savings and operational efficiency among political subdivisions such as counties, cities, school districts, and townships.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Requires two or more governmental units to agree on combining services under a joint agreement.
  • Services combined must relate to levying taxes, collecting taxes, and assessing property values.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-09 Subcommittee recommends passage.
2025-04-08 Subcommittee Meeting: 04/09/2025 12:45PM House Lounge.
2025-04-01 Subcommittee: Wills, J., Nordman and Wichtendahl.H.J. 877.
2025-04-01 Introduced, referred to Ways and Means.H.J. 04/01.
2025-04-01 Introduced, referred to Ways and Means.H.J. 876.
2025-04-01 Subcommittee: Wills, J., Nordman and Wichtendahl.H.J. 04/01.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to promote cost savings and operational efficiency by allowing governmental units to combine services related to tax functions.

Mechanism of Influence: By permitting joint agreements, the bill facilitates the consolidation of administrative services, which can reduce duplication, streamline processes, and lower costs.

Evidence:

  • This initiative is intended to promote cost savings and operational efficiency among political subdivisions
  • Allows governmental units to enter into agreements to combine their services related to tax assessment, levy, and collection.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not specify exact metrics or mechanisms for measuring efficiency gains, but the purpose is clearly stated as improving operational efficiency.

House - 719 - requiring the department of revenue to issue a request for proposals to study local taxing authority processes and procedures.

Legislation ID: 67996

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House File 719 requires the Iowa Department of Revenue to issue a request for proposals to hire a private entity for a study on local taxing authorities. This study is intended to identify the most efficient and cost-effective methods for these authorities to levy and collect taxes, as well as assess property values. The bill outlines the timeline for issuing the proposals, executing a contract, and submitting a report to the General Assembly.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Political subdivisions must comply with any state mandates included in the bill, even if funding is not specified.
  • Requires a contract to be executed with the selected contractor by October 1, 2026.
  • Requires a report detailing the studys findings to be submitted to the General Assembly by June 30, 2027.
  • Requires the Department of Revenue to issue the request for proposals by July 1, 2026.
  • Requires the state to pay 90% of the studys total cost, with local authorities covering the remaining 10%.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-03 Introduced, referred to State Government.H.J. 485.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: This bill directly requires a study aimed at improving the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of government tax collection and assessment processes at the local level.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating a study focused on identifying efficient methods for tax administration, the bill creates a procedural mechanism (a contracted study and subsequent report) specifically intended to make government operations more efficient and less costly.

Evidence:

  • 'study on local taxing authorities. This study is intended to identify the most efficient and cost-effective methods for these authorities to levy and collect taxes, as well as assess property values.'
  • 'Requires a report detailing the study's findings to be submitted to the General Assembly.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its purpose: the study must focus on efficiency and cost-effectiveness. There is little ambiguity regarding its intent to promote government efficiency.

House - 720 - concerning combined services of governmental units.

Legislation ID: 67990

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House File 720 enables two or more governmental units in Iowa, such as counties, cities, school districts, or townships, to combine their services and authority related to tax levying, collection, and property assessment. This collaboration is facilitated through a joint agreement under Code chapter 28E, aimed at promoting cost savings and operational efficiency.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Requires governmental units to enter into a joint agreement to combine services.
  • Services can include levying taxes, collecting taxes, and assessing property values.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-03 Introduced, referred to State Government.H.J. 485.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly enables structural mechanisms (joint agreements) for governmental units to collaborate on tax-related functions, explicitly aiming to promote cost savings and operational efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By allowing and requiring joint agreements, the bill empowers governmental units to consolidate services, reduce duplication, and streamline processes, which directly targets government efficiency and cost reduction.

Evidence:

  • This collaboration is facilitated through a joint agreement under Code chapter 28E, aimed at promoting cost savings and operational efficiency.
  • Allows multiple governmental units to enter into agreements to combine their tax-related services and authorities.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's language centers on tax-related services, but the intent to promote efficiency and cost savings is clear and explicit. The scope is limited to tax functions, not government operations as a whole.

Senate - 1126 - relating to statutory corrections which may adjust language to reflect current practices, insert earlier omissions, delete redundancies and inaccuracies, resolve inconsistencies and conflicts, remove ambiguities, and provide for Code editor directives.

Legislation ID: 68361

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House File 381 introduces amendments to various sections of the Iowa Code to correct language, resolve inconsistencies, and ensure that definitions and references are accurate and up-to-date. The bill aims to streamline the legal framework and eliminate redundancies, thereby enhancing the overall clarity and functionality of the Code.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must classify records and data for safeguarding and accessibility.
  • Agencies must classify records for safeguarding.
  • Agencies must classify records to safeguard and make information available as needed.
  • Agencies must classify records to safeguard information.
  • Agencies must maintain data for performance metrics.
  • Agencies must provide data to the department upon request.
  • Agencies must provide records to the department upon request.
  • Agreements must be approved by the attorney general.
  • Candidates must file financial statements prior to elections.
  • Claims must be presented before the state appeal board.
  • Claims must be presented to the state appeal board.
  • Data must be updated on a regular schedule.
  • Data must be updated regularly.
  • Each agency must collect and maintain performance metrics.
  • Each agency must identify, collect, and maintain performance data.
  • Each agency must identify, collect, and maintain performance metrics.
  • Gifts must be reported within 20 days.
  • Gifts over $50 must be reported within 20 days.
  • Gifts over $50 must be reported within twenty days.
  • Gifts valued over $50 must be reported within 20 days.
  • Standards must be accessible online at no cost.
  • Standards must be readily accessible online.
  • Standards must be readily accessible online at no cost.
  • The fund must consist of appropriated moneys and other available funds.
  • The fund must include appropriated and accepted moneys.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-19 Subcommittee recommends passage.
2025-02-19 Committee report approving bill, renumbered asSF 396.
2025-02-17 Subcommittee Meeting: 02/19/2025 9:30AM Room 217 Conference Room.
2025-02-13 Subcommittee: Lofgren, Blake, and Green.
2025-02-13 Introduced, referred to Judiciary.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill includes provisions that require agencies to maintain and update performance data and classify records, which are procedural mechanisms intended to improve monitoring and management of government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating agencies to regularly update performance data and classify records for safeguarding and accessibility, the bill establishes clearer operational standards. This could improve the efficiency, transparency, and accountability of government agencies.

Evidence:

  • Requires each agency to maintain data critical for monitoring performance as per Section 8E.208.
  • Data must be updated on a regular schedule.
  • Each agency must identify, collect, and maintain performance metrics.
  • Agencies must classify records to safeguard information.
  • Agencies must provide records to the department upon request.

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill clarifies processes and definitions, it does not explicitly establish new bodies or task forces dedicated solely to government efficiency. However, the requirement for agencies to maintain and update performance metrics is a direct procedural mechanism aimed at improving government effectiveness.

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill overall focuses on clarifying and streamlining Iowa Code, which can be seen as an effort to reduce redundancy and improve governmental processes.

Mechanism of Influence: By correcting inconsistencies and updating definitions, the legislation may reduce confusion and bureaucratic friction, indirectly contributing to more efficient government operations.

Evidence:

  • The bill aims to streamline the legal framework and eliminate redundancies, thereby enhancing the overall clarity and functionality of the Code.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not establish new entities or require studies/audits specifically for efficiency purposes, but the intent to streamline the legal framework is consistent with efficiency goals.

Senate - 396 - relating to statutory corrections which may adjust language to reflect current practices, insert earlier omissions, delete redundancies and inaccuracies, resolve inconsistencies and conflicts, remove ambiguities, and provide for Code editor directives.

Legislation ID: 68385

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Study Bill 115 seeks to amend various sections of the Iowa Code to ensure clarity and accuracy in statutory language. The bill addresses specific sections by correcting terms, updating definitions, and refining the language used in the Code to align with contemporary practices and eliminate confusion. It includes provisions for the responsibilities of agencies regarding data management, the classification of records, and the reporting of gifts, among other adjustments.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must classify records and data for safeguarding and accessibility.
  • Agencies must classify records and provide data to the department upon request.
  • Agencies must identify, collect, and maintain performance metrics.
  • Agencies must provide data to the department as requested.
  • Agreements must be approved by the attorney general.
  • Annual report of gifts over $1,000 must be submitted.
  • Benefits for voluntary departures without good cause are not charged to the employer.
  • Candidates must file financial statements with appropriate authorities.
  • Candidates must file financial statements with designated authorities.
  • Claims must be presented before the state appeal board.
  • Claims must be presented to the state appeal board.
  • Class B and E licensees must follow specific sale limits.
  • Departments must report gifts over fifty dollars within twenty days.
  • Each agency must collect and maintain performance data.
  • Each agency must identify, collect, and maintain data for performance metrics.
  • Fund consists of appropriated and other available moneys.
  • Fund consists of appropriated moneys and other available funds.
  • Gifts over $50 must be reported within 20 days.
  • Licensing boards must ensure standards are accessible online.
  • Requires agencies to identify, collect, and maintain performance metrics.
  • Sales must not exceed five cases in a 24-hour period.
  • Standards must be readily accessible online without cost.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-08 HF 381substituted.S.J. 726.
2025-04-08 Withdrawn.S.J. 727.
2025-04-03 Placed on calendar under unfinished business.S.J. 689.
2025-03-12 Attached toHF 381.S.J. 495.
2025-02-20 Committee report, approving bill.S.J. 332.
2025-02-20 Introduced, placed on calendar.S.J. 322.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: Section 8E.208 requires agencies to maintain data critical for monitoring and assessing their performance, which is a procedural mechanism aimed at improving government effectiveness and accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating agencies to identify, collect, and maintain performance metrics, this provision could enhance the ability of oversight bodies to evaluate government programs and identify inefficiencies.

Evidence:

  • Mandates each agency to maintain data critical for monitoring and assessing their performance.
  • Requires agencies to identify, collect, and maintain performance metrics.

Ambiguity Notes: While the section mandates performance data collection, it does not explicitly state the purpose is to improve efficiency or reduce costs, but the intent to monitor and assess performance is closely aligned.

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: Section 8E.209 clarifies agency responsibilities in classifying and safeguarding records and providing data to the department as requested, which supports transparency and potentially streamlines information sharing.

Mechanism of Influence: Improved data classification and accessibility could reduce administrative burdens and improve inter-agency coordination, indirectly promoting efficiency.

Evidence:

  • Agencies must classify records and data for safeguarding and accessibility.
  • Agencies must provide data to the department as requested.

Ambiguity Notes: The section is focused on record-keeping and data provision, without an explicit efficiency mandate, but it supports efficiency through better data management.

Kansas

Index of Bills

house - 2088 - Enacting the fast-track permits act to require local governments to meet specified deadlines for issuing building permits and other required approvals for real estate development.

Legislation ID: 52318

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill No. 2088 establishes the fast-track permits act, which requires local governments to meet specific deadlines for issuing building permits and other approvals for real estate development. It mandates that the Secretary of Health and Environment must issue decisions on stormwater discharge applications within 45 days. The bill aims to expedite the permitting process to foster economic development.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Allows building permits for lots divided into two tracts without replatting.
  • Amends K.S.A. 12-752 and 12-759 to incorporate new timelines and procedures for application approvals.
  • Appeals can be made by any aggrieved person or officer of the city or county.
  • Appeals must be filed within a reasonable time as per board rules.
  • Applications are deemed approved if no decision is made within the 60-day period.
  • Applications not acted upon within 60 days are deemed approved.
  • Board must consist of 3 to 7 members, with at least one member residing outside city limits if applicable.
  • Decisions must be made on complete applications for stormwater discharge within 45 days.
  • Decisions on stormwater runoff discharge applications must be made within 45 days.
  • Defines applicant as a person submitting an application to local government.
  • Defines application as a request for building permits or approvals related to real estate development.
  • Defines the fast-track permits act and its purpose.
  • Dissatisfied parties may appeal to the district court within 30 days of the boards final decision.
  • Establishes definitions for key terms such as applicant and application.
  • Exceptions can only be granted if specifically authorized by zoning regulations.
  • Failure to respond within the specified timelines results in automatic approval.
  • Governing bodies must accept or refuse land dedication within 30 days.
  • Governing bodies must create a board of zoning appeals.
  • If an application is incomplete, local governments must notify the applicant within 15 days.
  • If an application is incomplete, the local government must notify the applicant within 15 days.
  • If no notice is given within 60 days, the application is deemed approved.
  • Industrial lots may also be divided without replatting.
  • Local governments must approve or deny applications within 60 days of receipt of a complete application.
  • Local governments must approve or deny applications within 60 days of receiving a complete application.
  • Local governments must approve or deny building permit applications within 60 days of receiving a complete application.
  • Local governments must notify applicants of incomplete applications within 15 days.
  • Local governments must provide written notice of approval or denial within 60 days of a complete application.
  • May allow building permits for lots divided into three or more tracts without replatting under established conditions.
  • Members serve without compensation and must be appointed for staggered terms initially set for one, two, and three years.
  • Must include all supporting documentation as required by law.
  • No additional fees for resubmitted applications after a denial.
  • Notice of appeals must be published in official newspapers at least 20 days prior to hearings.
  • Planning commissions must determine if a plat conforms to regulations within 60 days.
  • Planning commissions must determine plat conformance within 60 days.
  • Planning commissions must determine plat conformity within 60 days.
  • Specifies what constitutes a complete application.
  • The board must consist of 3 to 7 members, with at least one from outside the city limits if applicable.
  • The Secretary must respond to applications for stormwater runoff discharge within 45 days.
  • Variances can be granted if they meet specified conditions related to public interest and hardship.
  • Written notice must be provided to applicants regarding the status of their applications.
  • Written notice of application completeness or incompleteness must be provided within 15 days of receipt.
  • Written notice of incomplete applications must be provided within 15 days.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-10 House
2025-03-26 House
2025-03-24 Senate
2025-03-21 House
2025-03-20 House
2025-03-19 Senate
2025-03-14 Senate
2025-03-05 Senate

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates structural and procedural requirements that directly target government efficiency in permit processing, aiming to reduce bureaucratic delays and streamline approval processes.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating specific deadlines, requiring prompt notification of incomplete applications, and instituting automatic approval for inaction, the bill compels local governments to adopt more efficient, responsive administrative practices. This reduces administrative burdens and accelerates decision-making.

Evidence:

  • 'requires local governments to meet specific deadlines for issuing building permits and other approvals'
  • 'Failure to respond within the specified timelines results in automatic approval.'
  • 'The bill aims to expedite the permitting process to foster economic development.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's efficiency focus is explicit in its purpose (expediting permitting), and its mechanisms are clearly procedural. However, it is primarily limited to the permitting process for development, not government operations broadly.

house - 2217 - Expanding the scope of the inspector general to audit and investigate all state cash, food or health assistance programs and granting the inspector general the power to subpoena, administer oaths and execute search warrants thereto.

Legislation ID: 52415

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill No. 2217 amends existing law to empower the office of the inspector general within the attorney generals office to conduct investigations, audits, and performance reviews of state assistance programs. It aims to improve program integrity, deter fraud, and ensure compliance with legal standards. The bill outlines the definitions, duties, and powers of the inspector general, ensuring independence from political influence and establishing protocols for investigations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Access to all pertinent information from state agencies, vendors, and contractors.
  • Access to pertinent information from state agencies and contractors is mandated.
  • Adhere to confidentiality laws regarding information handling.
  • All investigation records must be kept confidential.
  • Allows issuance of subpoenas for investigations.
  • Allows the inspector general to set audit scope and timing.
  • Annual reports must include aggregate billing information and audit results.
  • Annual reports on fraud investigations and audits must be submitted to various state agencies and officials.
  • Audit contractors and service providers.
  • Audits must adhere to generally accepted governmental auditing standards.
  • Audits must comply with generally accepted governmental auditing standards.
  • Audits must comply with governmental auditing standards.
  • Can administer oaths and take sworn statements.
  • Can issue subpoenas and compel testimony and document production.
  • Can issue subpoenas for testimony and documents related to investigations.
  • Conduct independent evaluations of programs.
  • Conduct independent evaluations of the programs.
  • Confidentiality of individual medical records must be maintained.
  • Confidentiality of informants must be maintained.
  • Confidentiality of information must be maintained by the inspector general.
  • Confidentiality of records from investigations must be maintained.
  • Contractors convicted of fraud are barred from state Medicaid contracts unless exceptions apply.
  • Contractors convicted of significant fraud are ineligible for future contracts unless exceptions apply.
  • Contractors with fraud convictions cannot receive Medicaid contracts unless specific conditions are met.
  • Defines key terms for clarity in the context of the bill.
  • Empowers the inspector general to administer oaths.
  • Grants original jurisdiction to investigate public assistance-related crimes.
  • Identity of reporters must remain confidential.
  • Immediate notification of possible licensure violations is required.
  • Imposes confidentiality obligations on the inspector general and their employees.
  • Information can be shared with law enforcement under certain conditions.
  • Information may only be shared with authorized entities like the attorney general or law enforcement.
  • Inspector general and employees must maintain confidentiality as mandated by law.
  • Inspector general can issue subpoenas and compel testimony.
  • Inspector general can make recommendations without prior approval.
  • Inspector general can recommend changes without needing approval from other officials.
  • Inspector general has original jurisdiction over public assistance-related crimes.
  • Inspector general has the power to investigate crimes related to public assistance.
  • Inspector general must adhere to confidentiality laws.
  • Inspector general must notify the attorney general of possible criminal acts.
  • Inspector General must possess relevant knowledge and skills in auditing and investigations.
  • Inspector general must report vendor violations to licensing agencies.
  • Inspector General to be appointed by the Attorney General with Senate consent.
  • Investigate fraud and abuse related to the programs.
  • Investigate fraud, waste, and abuse related to assistance programs.
  • Investigations must preserve evidence for legal proceedings.
  • Investigations must preserve evidence for potential criminal prosecutions.
  • Investigations must preserve evidence for potential prosecutions.
  • Limitations on access to individual medical records of non-clients.
  • Maintain confidentiality as imposed by law.
  • Mandates annual reporting of fraud investigations to various state agencies.
  • Mandates confidentiality of inspector general records and information.
  • Mandates preservation of evidence for criminal prosecutions.
  • No healthcare provider shall be compelled to provide individual medical records of non-clients.
  • No health care provider shall be compelled to provide individual medical records of patients not enrolled in state Medicaid or related programs.
  • No retaliation against whistleblowers allowed.
  • Notify agencies of reasonable suspicion of violations.
  • Notify the attorney general of potential criminal acts.
  • Prohibits contractors convicted of fraud from receiving state contracts unless specific criteria are met.
  • Prohibits retaliation against individuals reporting misconduct.
  • Protects identities of whistleblowers unless consent is provided for disclosure.
  • Records from investigations must remain confidential.
  • Report all convictions and suspensions to licensing agencies.
  • Report findings of significant fraud or abuse to the Attorney General.
  • Report findings to the Attorney General when necessary.
  • Reports must summarize investigations and comply with confidentiality laws.
  • Reports of fraud must be kept confidential unless certain conditions are met for disclosure.
  • Reports of fraud must not disclose identities without consent.
  • Requires compliance with governmental auditing standards.
  • Requires reporting of sanctions against healthcare providers and contractors.
  • Requires state and local agencies to assist the inspector general with requested information.
  • Requires the inspector general to notify the attorney general of suspected criminal acts.
  • State and local agencies must assist the inspector general as required.
  • Summaries of investigations must comply with confidentiality laws.
  • The inspector general and employees must adhere to laws regarding confidentiality.
  • The inspector general can access all pertinent information from state agencies and contractors.
  • The inspector general can issue subpoenas for testimony and documents related to investigations.
  • The inspector general must be appointed by the attorney general with senate confirmation.
  • The Inspector General must be appointed by the Attorney General with Senate confirmation.
  • The inspector general must have access to state agency information and contractor files related to program compliance.
  • The inspector general must have relevant experience in audits or investigations.
  • The Inspector General must have relevant qualifications and experience in audits or investigations.
  • The inspector general must investigate fraud, waste, and abuse within the programs.
  • The inspector general must possess knowledge and experience in audits or investigations.
  • The inspector general shall conduct ongoing evaluations of the programs.
  • The inspector general shall report findings of fraud or abuse to the attorney general.
  • The inspector general shall report findings of significant fraud to the attorney general.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-10 House
2025-03-25 House
2025-03-20 Senate
2025-03-18 Senate
2025-03-17 House
2025-03-13 Senate
2025-03-12 House
2025-03-12 Senate

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes a permanent office (Inspector General) with the explicit mission of conducting audits, investigations, and performance reviews to improve the integrity and efficiency of state assistance programs.

Mechanism of Influence: By centralizing oversight, granting broad investigative and audit powers, and requiring reporting of findings, the bill creates a structural mechanism to identify fraud, waste, and inefficiency, thereby directly promoting government efficiency and cost savings.

Evidence:

  • 'conduct investigations, audits, and performance reviews of state assistance programs'
  • 'aims to improve program integrity, deter fraud, and ensure compliance with legal standards'
  • 'duties of the inspector general, including conducting audits, investigations, and performance reviews'
  • 'mandates annual reporting of fraud investigations to various state agencies'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill emphasizes fraud deterrence and compliance, the Inspector General’s duties include performance reviews, which typically encompass efficiency and effectiveness evaluations. However, the primary stated goal is integrity and fraud prevention, not general government efficiency.

house - 2237 - Authorizing hiring, recruitment and retention bonuses in state agencies employee award and recognition program, increasing the limitation on such award or bonus to $10,000, eliminating the secretary of administrations authority to adopt rules and regulations and requiring such secretary to submit an annual report to certain legislative committees concerning such awards and bonuses.

Legislation ID: 52432

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill No. 2237 amends existing laws concerning state agency employee awards by increasing the cap on awards to $10,000, allowing for hiring, recruitment, and retention bonuses, and requiring annual reporting to legislative committees. It also eliminates the secretary of administration’s authority to adopt regulations while mandating oversight and consistency in award programs across state agencies. The bill establishes a suggestion program for employees to propose cost-saving measures, with incentives for adopted suggestions.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Awards can include hiring, recruitment, and retention bonuses.
  • Awards for accepted suggestions are based on a percentage of the cost savings.
  • Awards for suggestions are 10% of the cost savings, up to $5,000.
  • Awards must be funded from appropriated moneys of the state agency.
  • Awards must be funded from appropriated moneys or other funding sources.
  • Defines award and state agency.
  • Elected or appointed individuals cannot receive monetary awards.
  • Employees can submit suggestions for cost reductions.
  • Establishes an employee award and recognition program for state employees.
  • Limits total gross value of awards to $10,000 per employee per fiscal year.
  • Monetary awards over $3,500 require governors approval.
  • Requires governors approval for awards exceeding $3,500.
  • Revokes regulations of the employee award board.
  • State agencies must report awards to the Secretary of Administration annually.
  • State agencies must report monetary awards annually.
  • State agencies must report the number and total amount of monetary awards annually.
  • The Secretary must compile and report this information to legislative committees.
  • The secretary of administration must compile and report all information to legislative committees.
  • Total gross value of awards to an employee shall not exceed $10,000.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-21 Senate
2025-03-20 Senate
2025-03-19 House
2025-03-13 House
2025-02-27 House
2025-02-04 House

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes a program to incentivize state employees to propose cost-saving measures and process improvements, with the goal of increasing government efficiency and reducing costs.

Mechanism of Influence: By offering financial incentives for employee suggestions that result in cost savings, and requiring annual reporting, the bill creates structural mechanisms to identify and implement efficiency improvements in government operations.

Evidence:

  • 'Establishes a program for employees to submit cost-saving suggestions, with awards for successful implementations.'
  • 'Awards for suggestions are 10% of the cost savings, up to $5,000.'
  • 'Mandates annual reporting of awards and suggestions to the secretary of administration and legislative committees.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's intent and mechanisms are clearly tied to promoting efficiency and cost savings; there is little ambiguity as to its relevance.

house - 2291 - Creating the regulatory relief division within the office of the attorney general and establishing the general regulatory sandbox program to waive or suspend rules and regulations for program participants.

Legislation ID: 52476

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill No. 2291 establishes a regulatory relief division within the Kansas attorney generals office, tasked with administering a general regulatory sandbox program. This program aims to support innovation by allowing businesses to temporarily waive or suspend certain regulatory requirements, facilitating the testing of new products or services. The bill outlines the structure of the division, the roles of advisory committees, and the process for businesses to apply for participation in the sandbox program, including reporting requirements and consultation with relevant agencies.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Administer the general regulatory sandbox program.
  • Advisory committee must meet at least quarterly to review applications.
  • A fee of up to $250 may be charged for each application.
  • Agencies may request a five-day extension for report submission.
  • Agencies must describe reasons for recommending denial of an application.
  • Agencies must provide a written report on applications within 30 days.
  • Agencies must submit a written report on each application within 30 days.
  • Agencies should suggest less restrictive means if applicable.
  • Allows for a fee of up to $250 for each application submitted.
  • Allows for a one-time extension of 5 business days for report submission.
  • Allows for immediate removal of participants engaging in prohibited practices or violations.
  • Allows the regulatory relief office to remove participants engaging in unlawful practices.
  • Any motion for a closed meeting must include a description of the subjects, justification, and the time for resuming the open meeting.
  • Applicants must provide a detailed application including business information and the innovative offering description.
  • Applicants must submit a detailed application confirming their jurisdiction and location.
  • Application information is confidential and not subject to open records laws.
  • Applications must be submitted in a prescribed format.
  • Applications must confirm jurisdiction and provide relevant business details.
  • Applications must include detailed information about the innovative offering and potential risks.
  • Applications must include specific information about the innovative offering.
  • Businesses must apply to participate in the sandbox program.
  • Committee uses agency criteria for their recommendations.
  • Competitor participation is a factor in favor of applicant approval.
  • Compile public suggestions quarterly and report to relevant committees.
  • Considers previous participation of competitors in the sandbox as a favorable factor for applicants.
  • Consists of 11 members representing various interests.
  • Consultation with agencies and advisory committee is mandatory before approval.
  • Consumers must acknowledge receipt of disclosures before transactions.
  • Consumers must be residents of Kansas.
  • Defines Agency, records, and written report.
  • Director must provide reasons for application denial.
  • Disclosures must be clear and conspicuous.
  • Disclosures must be clear and conspicuous, with consumer acknowledgment required.
  • Ensure privacy of individuals making suggestions.
  • Establishes the regulatory relief division with a director appointed by the attorney general.
  • Exit report must include incidents of harm, legal actions, and complaints.
  • Extensions of up to 12 months can be requested before the end of the initial period.
  • If no notification is received, the demonstration period ends at the conclusion of the 12-month or 24-month testing period.
  • Information submitted is confidential and not subject to open records laws.
  • It must consult with other agencies regarding the sandbox program.
  • Mandates creation of a website for public suggestions.
  • Mandates detailed incident reporting within seven business days.
  • Mandates inclusion of reasons for denial if the application is rejected.
  • Members are appointed for renewable terms, and a chairperson is selected annually.
  • Members serve renewable terms and include legislative appointments.
  • Members will serve for renewable terms, and the committee will meet to provide recommendations.
  • No binding action can be taken during closed meetings.
  • Notification of discontinuation or extension request is required 30 days prior to the periods end.
  • Notify the regulatory relief office and relevant agencies of any incidents causing consumer harm within three business days.
  • Participants have 12-24 months to demonstrate their offerings.
  • Participants must inform consumers of risks, lack of immunity from liability, and the temporary nature of the offering.
  • Participants must notify the regulatory relief office if they cease providing an offering.
  • Participants must notify the regulatory relief office if they wish to extend the demonstration period 30 days before it ends.
  • Participants must notify the regulatory relief office of any incidents causing consumer harm within three business days.
  • Participants must notify the regulatory relief office of their intent to leave the program or seek an extension before the demonstration period ends.
  • Participants must retain records related to their offerings.
  • Prohibits binding actions during closed sessions.
  • Provide detailed reports of such incidents within seven business days.
  • Quarterly reporting on consumer complaints is required.
  • Reports must assess potential consumer harm and provide recommendations.
  • Reports must include recommendations for statutory or regulatory reforms.
  • Requires a detailed application form to be submitted by applicants, including information on the innovative offering and any relevant criminal history.
  • Requires a formal motion to recess for closed meetings, including a statement of subjects to be discussed and justifications for closing the meeting.
  • Requires agencies to provide a written report within 30 days of receiving an application.
  • Requires agencies to provide written reports to the regulatory relief office within 30 days of receiving exit or quarterly reports.
  • Requires agencies to submit a written report within 30 days of receiving a complete application.
  • Requires applicants to provide detailed information about their innovative offerings and the regulations they seek to waive.
  • Requires a written agreement detailing waived regulations for approved applicants.
  • Requires committee members to be appointed for renewable terms.
  • Requires consultation with agencies regarding past regulatory actions against the applicant.
  • Requires consultation with applicable state agencies during the application process.
  • Requires detailed motions for recessing to closed meetings, including subjects and justifications.
  • Requires quarterly compilation and reporting of suggestions to relevant legislative committees.
  • Requires sandbox participants to report incidents of consumer harm within specified timeframes.
  • Requires submission of an exit report within 30 days of leaving the sandbox.
  • Requires the advisory committee to meet quarterly to review applications.
  • Requires the Attorney General to appoint a director for the regulatory relief division.
  • Requires the committee to consist of members representing various business interests and state agencies.
  • Requires the creation of a website for public suggestions on regulatory modifications.
  • Requires the division to act as a liaison between businesses and regulatory agencies.
  • Requires the regulatory relief division to submit annual reports detailing the outcomes of the sandbox program and recommendations for regulatory changes.
  • Review state laws that inhibit business success and recommend changes.
  • Submit an exit report within 30 days of leaving the sandbox.
  • The advisory committee will consist of 11 members, including business representatives and legislative members.
  • The application process should be completed within specified timeframes.
  • The committee must consist of 11 members from various business and regulatory backgrounds.
  • The committee must use the same criteria as applicable agencies in their recommendations.
  • The director of the division must be appointed by the attorney general.
  • The division is responsible for administering the sandbox program and liaising with businesses and agencies.
  • The division must be headed by a director appointed by the attorney general.
  • The division must create a framework for assessing risks to consumers.
  • The division must create a risk analysis framework and propose reciprocity agreements with other states.
  • The division must have a principal office and appoint necessary staff.
  • The division must review laws that inhibit business success and recommend changes.
  • The division must submit an annual report to legislative committees detailing program outcomes.
  • The program does not allow waivers for certain licensing requirements.
  • The program does not allow waivers for specific regulated areas like liquor control.
  • The regulatory relief office can remove a participant at any time for violations or harmful practices.
  • The report must include incidents of consumer harm and any legal actions taken against the participant.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-10 House
2025-03-25 House
2025-03-19 Senate
2025-03-14 Senate
2025-03-10 Senate
2025-03-03 House
2025-02-28 Senate
2025-02-27 Senate

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly creates a new division (regulatory relief division) and an advisory committee within a state agency with the stated mission of streamlining regulations and facilitating innovation, which aligns with the goal of improving government efficiency and responsiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing a division and advisory committee to review, waive, and recommend changes to regulations, and by mandating inter-agency coordination and reporting, the bill sets up structural and procedural mechanisms to reduce regulatory burdens and modernize government functions.

Evidence:

  • 'establishes a regulatory relief division within the Kansas attorney generals office'
  • 'administering a general regulatory sandbox program'
  • 'review state laws that inhibit business success and recommend changes'
  • 'outlines the responsibilities of the regulatory relief division, including administering the sandbox program and acting as a liaison between businesses and state agencies.'

Ambiguity Notes: The focus is on regulatory relief and innovation, but the bill directly empowers government entities to identify and act upon opportunities to make government more efficient in its regulatory functions.

senate - 99 - Requiring the head of each state agency to certify the number of full-time positions paid from the state general fund that have been vacant for more than 180 calendar days and lapsing state general fund appropriations for such positions for fiscal year 2026.

Legislation ID: 52244

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill No. 99 mandates that the heads of state agencies certify the number of full-time positions funded by the state general fund that have been vacant for over 180 days. These positions will be abolished effective July 1, 2025, and the corresponding salary appropriations will be lapsed from the state budget for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026. This measure is intended to enhance government efficiency and fiscal responsibility.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Defines state agency for the purposes of the act.
  • Directs the director of the budget to certify lapsed amounts.
  • Positions vacant for over 180 days will be abolished.
  • Requires heads of state agencies to certify vacant positions.
  • Requires lapsed appropriations for abolished positions.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-18 Senate

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to enhance government efficiency and fiscal responsibility by eliminating persistently vacant positions and removing their funding from the state budget.

Mechanism of Influence: It establishes a procedural mechanism requiring agency heads to review and certify long-term vacancies, leading to the automatic abolition of such positions and the lapsing of their appropriations. This directly targets government efficiency by reducing unnecessary spending and streamlining agency staffing.

Evidence:

  • 'This measure is intended to enhance government efficiency and fiscal responsibility.'
  • 'Heads of state agencies must certify vacant positions that have been unfilled for over 180 days by June 30, 2025, leading to their abolition on July 1, 2025.'
  • 'On July 1, 2025, the appropriations for salaries and wages of the abolished positions will be lapsed from the state general fund accounts for the fiscal year 2026.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent and mechanism; the only potential ambiguity could lie in how 'vacant' is defined or whether agencies could manipulate position status to avoid abolition.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

Kentucky

Index of Bills

House - 422 - AN ACT relating to administrative regulations.

Legislation ID: 165620

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill revises KRS 13A to update definitions, processes, and requirements for administrative regulations in Kentucky. It addresses the roles of administrative bodies, the nature of emergency regulations, and the responsibilities of the Legislative Research Commission in handling and maintaining these regulations. The amendments are intended to enhance transparency, efficiency, and compliance with federal mandates.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Must certify copies of filed regulations upon request.
  • Must correct non-substantive errors in regulations.
  • Must demonstrate an imminent threat to public health or safety.
  • Must expire within 270 days unless replaced by an ordinary regulation.
  • Must maintain a file of administrative regulations for public inspection.
  • Must maintain public inspection files with suitable indexes.
  • Must provide documentary evidence justifying the emergency.
  • Must receive and file administrative regulations and documents.
  • Shall expire after 270 days unless replaced by an ordinary regulation.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-25 signed by Governor (Acts Ch. 88)
2025-03-14 received in House enrolled, signed by Speaker of the House enrolled, signed by President of the Senate delivered to Governor
2025-03-13 reported favorably, to Rules posted for passage in the Regular Orders of the Day for Thursday, March 13, 2025 3rd reading, passed 38-0
2025-03-12 taken from Licensing & Occupations (S) 2nd reading returned to Licensing & Occupations (S)
2025-03-07 to Licensing & Occupations (S) taken from Licensing & Occupations (S) 1st reading returned to Licensing & Occupations (S)
2025-03-06 received in Senate to Committee on Committees (S)
2025-03-05 3rd reading, passed 98-0 with Floor Amendment (1)
2025-03-04 floor amendment (1) filed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's amendments are explicitly intended to enhance the efficiency of government operations in the realm of administrative regulations. It updates processes and responsibilities to streamline how regulations are handled, filed, and corrected.

Mechanism of Influence: By defining roles, improving document handling, and expediting correction of non-substantive errors, the bill aims to reduce bureaucratic delays and make regulatory processes more efficient. The requirements for emergency regulations also introduce procedural safeguards that can streamline urgent regulatory action while maintaining oversight.

Evidence:

  • The amendments are intended to enhance transparency, efficiency, and compliance with federal mandates.
  • Must correct non-substantive errors in regulations.
  • Must maintain public inspection files with suitable indexes.

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill states its intent to enhance efficiency, the actual mechanisms are procedural updates rather than the creation of new oversight bodies or mandated studies. The efficiency gains are implied by more precise definitions and clarified responsibilities rather than by structural reforms or new evaluations.

House - 498 - AN ACT relating to use of artificial intelligence by courts.

Legislation ID: 165689

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 498 proposes that the Kentucky Supreme Court conduct a pilot project to test the implementation of artificial intelligence for transcription services during court proceedings. This initiative is intended to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of AI in enhancing judicial processes. The project would be voluntary, requiring participation from judges in selected districts or circuits, and would not proceed without sufficient funding from the General Assembly.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Annual reports must be submitted to the Legislative Research Commission.
  • Annual reports with statistics and findings must be submitted by September 1 each year.
  • Participation from judges in selected districts or circuits is required.
  • Periodic progress reports may be made as deemed necessary by the Chief Justice.
  • The pilot project must be initiated by the Kentucky Supreme Court.
  • The project cannot proceed if the applicable judge objects.
  • The project must be conducted in a minimum of three diverse judicial districts.
  • The project must be funded through available resources if not appropriated by the General Assembly.
  • The project must be monitored to assess adverse effects, benefits to litigants and the public, cost savings, and efficiency improvements.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-21 to Judiciary (H)
2025-02-13 introduced in House to Committee on Committees (H)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to test whether AI can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of court transcription, a core government function. The pilot is structured as a study to evaluate a new technology for potential cost savings and process improvements.

Mechanism of Influence: By piloting AI transcription, the bill could identify ways to streamline judicial operations, reduce reliance on manual transcription, and potentially lower costs and administrative burdens. If successful, it could lead to broader adoption of technology to modernize government functions.

Evidence:

  • 'pilot project to test the implementation of artificial intelligence for transcription services during court proceedings'
  • 'intended to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of AI in enhancing judicial processes'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent to assess efficiency and effectiveness, though it does not guarantee implementation beyond the pilot stage. The scope is limited to transcription services, but the findings could have broader implications for court operations.

Senate - 20 - AN ACT relating to administrative regulations and declaring an emergency.

Legislation ID: 166117

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends various sections of KRS Chapter 13A, which governs administrative regulations in Kentucky. It clarifies definitions, processes for filing and reviewing regulations, and the roles of various administrative bodies and committees. The amendments are intended to improve the efficiency and transparency of administrative regulation processes and ensure compliance with both state and federal mandates.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Conduct continuous studies on administrative regulations.
  • Defines various terms relevant to administrative regulations including what constitutes an administrative body and regulation.
  • Ensure electronic versions are submitted and are the controlling version if discrepancies exist.
  • File original and copies of administrative regulations with specific formatting rules.
  • Maintain files for public inspection and prepare the Kentucky Administrative Regulations Service.
  • Prescribe statements of general applicability and procedures for hearings.
  • Receive and file administrative regulations and documents.
  • Review effective regulations and make recommendations for changes or new statutes.
  • Set fees as authorized by law.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-26 2nd reading, to Rules
2025-02-25 reported favorably, 1st reading, to Calendar
2025-02-19 to Licensing & Occupations (S)
2025-02-14 introduced in Senate to Committee on Committees (S)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to improve the efficiency and transparency of the administrative regulation process by clarifying procedures, enhancing oversight, and specifying the roles of entities tasked with regulatory review and maintenance.

Mechanism of Influence: It empowers the Administrative Regulation Review Subcommittee to conduct continuous studies and make recommendations for changes, and it clarifies the responsibilities of the Administrative Regulations Compiler, which should lead to more streamlined and effective management of regulations.

Evidence:

  • The amendments are intended to improve the efficiency and transparency of administrative regulation processes.
  • Conduct continuous studies on administrative regulations.
  • Review effective regulations and make recommendations for changes or new statutes.

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill's language focuses on process improvements, the intent to promote efficiency and transparency is clear. The continuous studies and recommendations for legislative changes are direct mechanisms for improving government operations.

Senate - 240 - A RESOLUTION supporting the establishment of the Kentucky Discipline of Government Efficiency Task Force.

Legislation ID: 166593

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

The resolution supports the creation of the Kentucky Discipline of Government Efficiency Task Force, which will evaluate Executive Branch expenditures and recommend strategies to improve government efficiency and save costs. It emphasizes the importance of collaboration between citizens and government to achieve these goals.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Compile a report with findings, strategies, and recommendations.
  • Copy of the resolution to be transmitted to Senator Lindsey Tichenor.
  • Report to be submitted to the General Assembly.
  • Report to detail strategies for generating savings and increasing government efficiency.
  • Submit the report to the General Assembly.
  • Task Force must examine Executive Branch expenditures.
  • Task Force must inform the biennial budget preparation process.
  • Task Force to examine government operations for efficiency improvements.
  • Task Force to inform the biennial budget preparation process.
  • Transmittal of the resolution to Senator Lindsey Tichenor.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-28 adopted
2025-03-27 to Senate Floor
2025-03-14 introduced in Senate to Committee on Committees (S)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The resolution directly establishes a task force whose explicit mission is to evaluate government expenditures and recommend ways to improve efficiency and reduce costs.

Mechanism of Influence: By creating a dedicated task force with a mandate to study expenditures and propose efficiency strategies, the resolution establishes a structural mechanism to identify and implement government improvements.

Evidence:

  • The Senate supports the establishment of the Kentucky Discipline of Government Efficiency (KY DOGE) Task Force to study Executive Branch expenditures and improve government efficiency.
  • Task Force must inform the biennial budget preparation process.
  • Compile a report with findings, strategies, and recommendations.
  • Submit the report to the General Assembly.

Ambiguity Notes: The language clearly states the purpose is to improve efficiency and generate savings, with a formal reporting requirement. There is no ambiguity about the intent.

Senate - 251 - AN ACT relating to reorganization.

Legislation ID: 166339

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends KRS 12.028 to allow the Governor and other state officials to propose changes to the organizational structure of state government. It outlines the process for submitting reorganization plans to the General Assembly, which must include detailed explanations, financial implications, and expected improvements in service delivery. Additionally, it establishes monitoring mechanisms for the implementation of these plans and specifies how funds should be handled post-reorganization.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Excess funds from reorganization must lapse to the general fund surplus account.
  • Must estimate financial impacts and specify how many employees will be affected.
  • Must provide a detailed explanation of each proposed change.
  • Plan must include an explanation of changes, estimated financial impacts, expected improvements in efficiency, and effects on budget and personnel.
  • Requires maintenance of transferred funds in designated accounts.
  • Requires monitoring of the reorganization plans implementation.
  • Requires reporting findings to the General Assembly.
  • Requires submission of a reorganization plan to the Legislative Research Commission.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-20 to State & Local Government (S)
2025-02-18 introduced in Senate to Committee on Committees (S)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly targets government efficiency by requiring that any proposed reorganization of state government be justified with anticipated improvements in service delivery and efficiency. It also establishes mechanisms for oversight and reporting on the effectiveness of these changes.

Mechanism of Influence: It empowers the executive branch to propose structural changes, mandates detailed justifications including efficiency gains, and requires ongoing legislative oversight and reporting on outcomes, all of which are explicit mechanisms to improve government efficiency and effectiveness.

Evidence:

  • 'The reorganization plan must detail the proposed changes, including their necessity, financial implications, anticipated improvements in service delivery, and the impact on affected organizational units.'
  • 'Plan must include an explanation of changes, estimated financial impacts, expected improvements in efficiency, and effects on budget and personnel.'
  • 'This provision allows the Legislative Research Commission or the Legislative Oversight and Investigations Committee to monitor the implementation of the reorganization plan and report on its effectiveness.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in requiring that reorganization plans address expected improvements in efficiency and service delivery, leaving little ambiguity about its intent to promote government efficiency.

Senate - 257 - AN ACT relating to the Office of the Auditor of Public Accounts.

Legislation ID: 166345

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill creates the Office of Government Efficiency tasked with conducting performance audits, recommending improvements, and monitoring the implementation of efficiency measures in state agencies. It outlines the structure of the Office of the State Auditor, detailing its various divisions and offices, and sets forth provisions for staffing and funding.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Act takes effect on July 1, 2026.
  • Allow the Auditor and agents to access all relevant information from state agencies.
  • Auditor may appoint additional staff as needed.
  • Auditors failing to perform duties may be fined.
  • Audit state agencies and private entities receiving state funds annually.
  • Conduct performance audits and fiscal reviews of state agencies to identify inefficiencies and cost-saving opportunities.
  • Conduct performance audits and operational reviews of state agencies.
  • Creates the Commonwealth Office of the Ombudsman with designated offices.
  • Develop and recommend best practices for streamlining government operations.
  • Develop best practices for streamlining operations.
  • Enable the Auditor to petition courts for compliance enforcement.
  • Establishes the Office of Planning and Management with specific divisions.
  • Establish the Commonwealth Office of the Ombudsman with various divisions for citizen services and program performance.
  • Examine the performance and management of state institutions and agencies.
  • Include an Office of Planning and Management with divisions for IT, financial management, and human resources.
  • Includes the Office of the Deputy Auditor and its subdivisions.
  • Individuals obstructing audits face fines.
  • Maintain an Office of the Deputy Auditor with specific offices for local and state government audits, special investigations, and quality assurance.
  • Monitor implementation of recommendations and report findings.
  • Monitor the implementation of efficiency-related recommendations and report findings to the Governor and Legislative Research Commission.
  • Office funded through General Assembly appropriations and grants.
  • Officers obstructing audits face fines and removal from office.
  • Provide protections for employees participating in audits.
  • Report unauthorized handling of state funds immediately to relevant authorities.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-06 received in House to Committee on Committees (H)
2025-03-05 3rd reading, passed 32-6 with Committee Substitute (1) and Floor Amendment (1)
2025-03-04 reported favorably, to Rules with Committee Substitute (1) posted for passage in the Regular Orders of the Day for Wednesday, March 05, 2025 floor amendment (1) filed to Committee Substitute
2025-02-28 taken from State & Local Government (S) 2nd reading returned to State & Local Government (S)
2025-02-27 taken from State & Local Government (S) 1st reading returned to State & Local Government (S)
2025-02-21 to State & Local Government (S)
2025-02-18 introduced in Senate to Committee on Committees (S)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly creates a new office dedicated to evaluating and improving government efficiency through audits, recommendations, and monitoring.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing a permanent entity tasked with identifying inefficiencies, recommending best practices, and ensuring follow-through, the bill directly targets structural and procedural reforms to make government more efficient and less costly.

Evidence:

  • Establishes the Office of Government Efficiency to evaluate and recommend improvements for state government efficiency.
  • Conduct performance audits and operational reviews of state agencies.
  • Monitor implementation of recommendations and report findings.

Ambiguity Notes: The language is clear in its intent to promote efficiency; the scope of 'efficiency measures' could be broad, but the mechanisms (audits, best practices, monitoring) are well-defined.

Louisiana

Index of Bills

House - 50 - LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR:  Authorizes and directs the legislative auditor to study the efficiency, financial accountability, and effectiveness of the state Supreme Court, courts of appeals, and district courts

Legislation ID: 186889

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This concurrent resolution directs the legislative auditor to obtain a report from the National Center for State Courts regarding a work point study of the judiciary and to examine the judiciarys plan for implementing any recommendations from the report. The auditor is required to report findings to the legislature by April 1, 2026.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Changes the reporting date from February 6, 2026, to April 1, 2026.
  • Requires examination of the judiciarys plan to implement recommendations from the report.
  • Requires the legislative auditor to obtain a copy of the final report from the National Center for State Courts.
  • Requires the legislative auditor to submit findings by April 1, 2026.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-04 Read by title and returned to the Calendar, subject to call.
2025-06-03 Received in the Senate. Read first time by title and placed on the Calendar for a second reading.
2025-06-03 Read by title, roll called on final consideration, yeas 80, nays 2. The resolution was adopted and ordered to the Senate.
2025-06-02 Read by title, amended, ordered engrossed, passed to 3rd reading.
2025-06-02 Scheduled for floor debate on 06/03/2025.
2025-05-29 Reported with amendments (13-0).
2025-05-19 Read by title, under the rules, referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
2025-05-15 Read by title. Lies over under the rules.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The resolution explicitly authorizes a study focused on the efficiency, financial accountability, and effectiveness of the judiciary, which fits the criteria of evaluating government performance and efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating an external study and requiring the legislative auditor to examine both the findings and the implementation plan, the resolution sets up a mechanism for identifying inefficiencies and recommending improvements in judicial operations. The required report to the legislature could prompt legislative or administrative action to streamline or modernize court functions.

Evidence:

  • 'authorizes the legislative auditor to study the efficiency, financial accountability, and effectiveness of the state Supreme Court, courts of appeal, and district courts.'
  • 'Requires examination of the judiciarys plan to implement recommendations from the report.'

Ambiguity Notes: The resolution is clear in its focus on efficiency and effectiveness, but does not itself implement changes; rather, it sets up an evaluative and reporting process. The actual impact will depend on subsequent actions taken in response to the findings.

Senate - 33 - TAX/TAXATION:  Authorizes an income tax credit for eligible state employees that identify cost savings in state agencies. (gov sig)

Legislation ID: 103883

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill No. 33 establishes the Government Accountability and Innovation for Net Savings (GAINS) tax credit program, providing a tax credit against individual income tax for eligible state employees who identify and implement savings proposals within state agencies. The program aims to reward employees for suggestions that lead to monetary savings, operational efficiencies, and improved public service delivery. The total credits available per fiscal year are capped at $10 million, with specific criteria for credit certification and a structured process for application and recovery of credits.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must implement approved proposals to qualify for the credit.
  • Agency heads must submit recommendations and address any concerns related to the proposals.
  • Agency heads must submit recommendations for certification.
  • Agency heads must submit recommendations for credit certification.
  • Authorizes the Department of Revenue to promulgate rules for the program.
  • Authorizes the Dept. of Revenue to promulgate rules for program implementation.
  • Claims must be made on individual income tax returns.
  • Credit equals 30% of approved state savings.
  • Credits can be claimed for up to ten years if they exceed tax liability.
  • Credits can be claimed only if they do not exceed the amount of taxes due.
  • Credits can be recaptured if awarded based on fraud or misrepresentation.
  • Credits may be recaptured if violations are found.
  • Credits may be recovered by the Department of Revenue if disallowed.
  • Credits must be claimed on individual income tax returns.
  • Credits must be recaptured if found to be in violation of the provisions.
  • Credits must be recaptured if found to be obtained through fraud or misrepresentation.
  • Employees must claim the credit on their individual income tax return.
  • Establishes a cutoff date for certification of GAINS tax credits.
  • Interest may be assessed on recovered credits.
  • No credits shall be certified on or after July 1, 2029.
  • No credits will be certified after July 1, 2029.
  • Proposals must be submitted to the agency head for initial review.
  • Proposals must be verified and approved by the commissioner of administration for the credit to be granted.
  • Proposals must demonstrate a discernable reduction in expenditures.
  • Proposals must demonstrate a reduction in expenditures.
  • Proposals must show a discernible reduction in expenditures.
  • Proposals must yield monetary savings and improve operational effectiveness.
  • Proposals must yield monetary savings, streamline operations, and reduce waste while maintaining performance levels.
  • Recommendations must include evidence and performance information.
  • Recovery actions must be initiated within three years.
  • Recovery actions must be initiated within three years of the credit being taken.
  • Requires implementation of the GAINS tax credit program within 180 days.
  • Requires the GAINS tax credit program to be implemented within 180 days of the effective date.
  • Rules for implementation must be promulgated by December 31, 2025.
  • Rules must be established by December 31, 2025.
  • Rules must be established to guide the implementation of the GAINS tax credit program.
  • State employees must submit savings proposals to their agency heads.
  • State savings proposals must be submitted to the agency head.
  • Taxpayers income tax will be adjusted to recapture credits if violations are found.
  • The agency head must determine if the proposal results in a discernible reduction in expenditures.
  • The agency head must determine if the proposal will yield discernible state savings.
  • The agency head must evaluate the proposals potential for cost savings and submit a recommendation to the commissioner.
  • The credit equals 30% of the certified state savings.
  • The credit is 30% of the approved state savings and is claimed over three tax years.
  • The credit is designed to reward verified improvements in various operational areas.
  • The credit is earned only after the state savings proposal is approved and implemented.
  • The credit is equal to 30% of the annual state savings certified by the commissioner.
  • The credit is equal to 30% of the certified state savings.
  • The credit must be claimed on individual income tax returns.
  • The Department of Revenue may also promulgate necessary rules.
  • The proposal must be approved for implementation by the commissioner.
  • The savings proposal must be approved for implementation by the commissioner.
  • The state savings proposal must be approved for implementation by the commissioner.
  • The tax credit is earned when the savings are certified by the commissioner.
  • The total amount of tax credits certified cannot exceed ten million dollars per fiscal year.
  • Total credits certified cannot exceed $10 million per fiscal year.
  • Unused credits can be carried forward for up to ten years.
  • Unused credits may be carried forward for a maximum of ten years.
  • Unused credits may be carried forward for up to ten years.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-12 Read by title and returned to the Calendar, subject to call.
2025-05-08 Rules suspended. Recalled from Committee.
2025-05-08 Read by title and passed to third reading and final passage.
2025-04-29 Read by title. Ordered engrossed and recommitted to the Committee on Finance.
2025-04-28 Reported favorably.
2025-04-14 Introduced in the Senate; read by title. Rules suspended. Read second time and referred to the Committee on Revenue and Fiscal Affairs.
2025-03-31 Prefiled and under the rules provisionally referred to the Committee on Revenue and Fiscal Affairs.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's stated purpose is to encourage state employees to submit proposals for cost savings and operational efficiencies within their agencies, directly aiming to enhance fiscal responsibility and transparency in state operations.

Mechanism of Influence: It establishes a structured process and incentive (tax credit) for employees to identify and implement efficiency improvements, with oversight, verification, and a formal review process to ensure only effective proposals are rewarded.

Evidence:

  • The GAINS tax credit is designed to encourage state employees to submit proposals for cost savings and operational efficiencies within their agencies, aiming to enhance fiscal responsibility and transparency in state operations.
  • Proposals must be verified and approved by the commissioner of administration for the credit to be granted.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: It establishes a new program and authorizes the Department of Revenue and the commissioner to promulgate rules and administer the process, which are structural mechanisms to improve government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By creating a formal process for reviewing, certifying, and rewarding efficiency proposals, the bill institutionalizes ongoing efforts to improve government effectiveness.

Evidence:

  • The Department of Revenue is authorized to create rules necessary for the implementation of the GAINS tax credit program.
  • The commissioner is tasked with promulgating necessary rules for the implementation of the GAINS tax credit program.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 3

Why Relevant: The bill specifies a cap on credits and a termination date, ensuring the program is both fiscally responsible and time-limited, with rules for recapture in cases of misuse.

Mechanism of Influence: These provisions ensure the program is accountable and can be evaluated for effectiveness, with corrective mechanisms if credits are improperly granted.

Evidence:

  • The total credits available per fiscal year are capped at $10 million, with specific criteria for credit certification and a structured process for application and recovery of credits.
  • The program will terminate on July 1, 2029.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 35 - LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR:  Directs the legislative auditor to conduct a performance audit of the Department of State regarding policies, procedures, and practices related to the integrity of elections.

Legislation ID: 187566

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This concurrent resolution requests the legislative auditor to conduct a performance audit of the Department of States election integrity policies and practices, including a comparison with other states methods. It emphasizes the need for post-election audits to assure citizens of the election processs accuracy and security. The audit is to be conducted every four years, starting after the 2028 presidential election.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Conduct a performance audit every four years, beginning after the 2028 presidential election.
  • Include a comparison of Louisianas election policies with those of other states.
  • Utilize cryptography to safeguard sensitive data elements as outlined in R.S. 18:154(C)(1).

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-10 Sent to the Secretary of State by the Secretary of the Senate.
2025-06-09 Signed by the Speaker of the House.
2025-06-09 Enrolled. Signed by the President of the Senate.
2025-06-08 Read by title, rules suspended, concurred in by vote of 88 yeay, 6 nays.
2025-06-08 Received from the House without amendments.
2025-06-04 Scheduled for floor debate on 06/10/2025.
2025-06-04 Read by title, passed to 3rd reading.
2025-06-03 Reported favorably (9-0).

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The resolution explicitly requires recurring performance audits to evaluate a government department's operations, with the stated goal of ensuring accuracy and security in election administration. Performance audits are a structural mechanism to improve government effectiveness and accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating regular, comprehensive audits and cross-state comparisons, the resolution seeks to identify inefficiencies, best practices, and potential improvements in the election process. This could lead to recommendations for streamlining procedures or adopting more effective policies.

Evidence:

  • requests the legislative auditor to conduct a performance audit
  • including a comparison with other states methods
  • emphasizes the need for post-election audits to assure citizens of the election processs accuracy and security

Ambiguity Notes: The resolution focuses specifically on election integrity, which is a narrower aspect of government efficiency. While it does not mention cost savings or reducing bureaucracy, performance audits are generally intended to improve effectiveness and can uncover inefficiencies.

Senate - 54 - LOCAL AGENCIES:  Provides for a limited fiscal administrator for political subdivisions. (8/1/25)

Legislation ID: 112656

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill No. 54 amends and reenacts various statutes related to fiscal administration in Louisiana. It introduces provisions for the appointment of limited jurisdiction fiscal administrators, outlines their duties, and establishes criteria for determining financial stability. The bill also sets forth penalties for violations by officials and creates a revolving loan fund to assist political subdivisions in financial distress.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Administrator has the authority to direct fiscal operations and amend budgets as necessary.
  • Administrator must have access to all records and can direct fiscal operations.
  • Administrator must have access to all records and documents of the political subdivision.
  • A hearing must be held within 10 to 20 days after filing.
  • A hearing must be held within a specified timeframe to determine the necessity of appointing a fiscal administrator.
  • A limited jurisdiction fiscal administrator can be appointed when there is a consensus among key state officials.
  • Allows for termination of the fiscal administrators appointment upon resolution of the emergency or by request of the administrator or the political subdivision.
  • Allows for termination upon the motion of the attorney general or the political subdivision if the court finds the emergency resolved.
  • Allows the attorney general to seek court intervention if the governing authority fails to adopt necessary amendments.
  • A political subdivision is not financially stable if it cannot meet its obligations without significant operational disruptions or asset disposals.
  • Appointment is required if the political subdivision is unable to receive necessary funds due to noncompliance.
  • A single violation of specified conditions can classify a subdivision as financially unstable.
  • Attorney General must file a motion for appointment in district court.
  • Attorney general must file a rule if the governing authority fails to adopt the amendments.
  • A unanimous decision by key state officials is required to determine the need for a fiscal administrator.
  • Authorized to direct all fiscal operations and take necessary actions during emergencies.
  • Certain financial conditions must not exist for a subdivision to be considered financially stable.
  • Conditions for appointment include insufficient revenue, failure to make debt payments, or material fraud.
  • Conditions for financial instability include insufficient revenue, failure to make debt payments, and other financial mismanagement indicators.
  • Conditions include insufficient revenue, failure to make debt payments, or material fraud in financial records.
  • Conditions such as insufficient revenue, failure to make debt payments, or reliance on nonrecurring revenue disqualify them from being financially stable.
  • Conditions such as insufficient revenue or failure to make debt payments indicate instability.
  • Costs or attorney fees related to misconduct charges are not reimbursed unless the official is acquitted or the suit is dismissed.
  • Costs related to legal actions are not reimbursed unless acquitted or dismissed.
  • Costs related to legal actions cannot be reimbursed unless the officer is acquitted or the suit is dismissed.
  • Court hearing must occur within 10 to 20 days of filing the motion.
  • Court must find by a preponderance of evidence that the political subdivision cannot address the emergency.
  • Court must find that the emergency has been resolved.
  • Defines financial stability and lists conditions that indicate a lack of financial stability.
  • Defines the scope of the limited jurisdiction fiscal administrators oversight.
  • Denial of access to records or offices for the fiscal administrator is prohibited.
  • Denying access to records or obstructing the fiscal administrator is prohibited.
  • Establishes specific conditions that indicate a lack of financial stability, such as insufficient revenue or failure to make debt service payments.
  • Failure to adopt may lead to court intervention.
  • Failure to comply may result in legal action by the attorney general.
  • Failure to comply with requests from fiscal administrators is considered a violation.
  • Failure to do so results in automatic classification as financially at risk.
  • Failure to make debt service payments or timely audits.
  • Failure to provide an audit for two consecutive fiscal years results in automatic removal from financial stability category.
  • Fiscal administrator can amend budgets, approve contracts, and reorganize departments.
  • Fiscal administrator must have sufficient qualifications as recommended by the legislative auditor and attorney general.
  • Funds can be used for costs associated with fiscal administration and must be appropriated accordingly.
  • Funds can be used for financial assistance to political subdivisions and public water systems.
  • Funds can be used only for costs associated with fiscal administration or receivership.
  • Funds must be used solely for assisting political subdivisions under fiscal administration.
  • Funds must be used to cover costs associated with fiscal administration.
  • Governing authority must adopt amendments within seven days of receiving the report.
  • Governing authority must adopt budget amendments within seven days of receiving the fiscal administrators report.
  • Governing authority must adopt budget amendments within seven days of receiving the initial report from the fiscal administrator.
  • Governing authority must adopt proposed budget amendments within seven days of receipt.
  • Grants authority to amend budgets and contracts, supervise personnel, and reorganize departments as necessary to address emergencies.
  • Grants authority to amend budgets, approve contracts, and manage personnel.
  • Hearing must be held within 10 to 20 days of the motion being filed.
  • Hearing on the appointment must occur within 10 to 20 days after the motion is filed.
  • If the budget is not adopted, the attorney general may file a rule to compel adoption.
  • If the governing authority fails to adopt the budget, the attorney general may seek court intervention.
  • Includes a proposed two-year plan to resolve ongoing emergency matters.
  • Insufficient revenue to cover operating expenditures for twelve months.
  • Joint motion and consent judgment required for appointment.
  • Legal costs related to misconduct charges are not reimbursed unless the officer is acquitted or the case is dismissed.
  • Limited jurisdiction fiscal administrators must be appointed by the court based on a unanimous decision by the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer.
  • Mandates a court hearing for the appointment if there is no joint motion and consent judgment.
  • Mandates an estimate of financial aid or new revenue needed if current funds are insufficient.
  • Mandates a public meeting to assess the need for an administrator.
  • Mandates cooperation in transmitting reports and information to fiscal administrators.
  • Mandates court involvement for the appointment process.
  • Mandates filing a rule to show cause in district court for the appointment.
  • Mandates ongoing monitoring of revenues and expenditures under the adopted budget.
  • Mandates the governing authority to adopt amendments within seven days of receiving the administrators report.
  • Mandates timely audits and balanced budgets for political subdivisions.
  • Mandates timely transmission of reports and statements to the fiscal administrator.
  • Mandates written notice if information cannot be provided on time.
  • Material fraud or misrepresentation in financial records.
  • Monies in the fund can only be used for providing financial assistance to political subdivisions under fiscal administration.
  • Monies in the fund can only be used for providing financial assistance to political subdivisions with appointed fiscal administrators.
  • Monies in the fund can only be used for providing financial assistance to subdivisions under fiscal administration.
  • Must file quarterly reports and investigate fiscal conditions.
  • Must have access to all relevant records of the political subdivision.
  • Must perform an investigation and file a report with the court and other authorities.
  • Must provide access to all records and information necessary for fiscal oversight.
  • No reimbursement for legal costs unless the official is acquitted or the case is dismissed.
  • No reimbursement for legal costs unless the official is acquitted or the suit is dismissed.
  • Obstructing a fiscal administrators duties is a violation.
  • Obstructing the fiscal administrators work is a violation.
  • Obstruction of the fiscal administrators examination is prohibited.
  • Officers and officials must furnish all required documents to the fiscal administrator.
  • Officers cannot obstruct the fiscal administrators examination.
  • Officers must provide necessary documents and access to the fiscal administrator without obstruction.
  • Officers must provide requested documents and access to records to the fiscal administrator.
  • Officers or employees must not refuse access to records or documents requested by fiscal administrators.
  • Officials must not obstruct the fiscal administrators duties.
  • Officials must provide access to records and documents as required.
  • Officials must provide access to records and documents requested by fiscal administrators.
  • Officials must provide access to records and documents requested by the fiscal administrator.
  • Officials must provide necessary documentation to fiscal administrators.
  • Officials must provide requested documents to the fiscal administrator.
  • Parties must file a joint motion and consent judgment for the appointment.
  • Penalties apply for failing to comply with requests from the fiscal administrator.
  • Political subdivisions can borrow from the fund with approval from the appointed fiscal administrator.
  • Political subdivisions in fiscal distress can borrow from the fund with court approval.
  • Political subdivisions may borrow from the fund with approval from the appointed fiscal administrator.
  • Political subdivisions must avoid specified conditions that indicate financial instability.
  • Political subdivisions must maintain financial obligations without substantial asset liquidation, layoffs, or service interruptions.
  • Political subdivisions must maintain financial stability as defined by the bills criteria.
  • Political subdivisions must meet financial obligations in a timely manner.
  • Political subdivisions must meet financial obligations timely without significant asset disposals or service interruptions.
  • Political subdivisions must meet specific financial criteria to be considered stable.
  • Political subdivisions must meet specific financial stability criteria, including timely payment of obligations and maintaining adequate revenue.
  • Political subdivisions must meet their financial obligations timely without asset disposals, layoffs, or service interruptions.
  • Political subdivisions must provide audits as required by law for two consecutive fiscal years to maintain financial stability.
  • Political subdivisions must provide audits to the legislative auditor within two consecutive fiscal years.
  • Political subdivisions must provide audits within two consecutive fiscal years to avoid being classified as financially unstable.
  • Removal can only be requested by the fiscal administrator or as specified in law (R.S. 39:1354.1).
  • Removal is also allowed for fraud, negligence, or misconduct.
  • Report must be updated quarterly.
  • Report must include amendments to budgets and estimates of financial aid needed.
  • Reports must be adopted, approved, and subject to court review.
  • Reports must include financial needs and a two-year plan to address emergencies.
  • Required to file quarterly reports with various authorities.
  • Requires a determination of need by the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer.
  • Requires adoption of the comprehensive budget or amendments in an open meeting within seven days of receiving the report.
  • Requires appointment of a fiscal administrator when a political subdivision cannot receive funds due to noncompliance with audit law.
  • Requires a public meeting and unanimous agreement from key state officials to appoint a limited jurisdiction fiscal administrator.
  • Requires a unanimous decision by the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer to appoint a fiscal administrator.
  • Requires a unanimous decision by the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer to appoint a limited jurisdiction fiscal administrator.
  • Requires a unanimous decision from the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer for appointment.
  • Requires a unanimous decision from the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer to appoint a fiscal administrator.
  • Requires a unanimous decision from the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer to file for a fiscal administrator appointment.
  • Requires court intervention if the governing authority fails to adopt the proposed budget amendments.
  • Requires officials to provide access to records and documents requested by the fiscal administrator.
  • Requires officials to provide necessary documents and access to fiscal administrators.
  • Requires officials to respond within three business days to information requests.
  • Requires submission of amendments to the comprehensive budget or a proposed budget if none exists.
  • Requires submission of a written report detailing findings and proposed budgets to address emergencies within specified timelines.
  • Requires supplemental reports until the emergency is resolved.
  • Requires the administrator to report findings to the court and relevant authorities.
  • Requires the attorney general to file a rule for appointment if financial instability is determined by the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer.
  • Requires the attorney general to file a rule for the appointment of a fiscal administrator if financial instability is determined by a unanimous decision of specified state officials.
  • Requires the fiscal administrator to monitor the budget and provide necessary reports.
  • Requires timely audits to maintain financial stability status.
  • Requires unanimous decision by the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer to appoint a fiscal administrator.
  • Requires unanimous decision from the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer for appointment.
  • Requires unanimous decision from the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer to appoint a fiscal administrator.
  • Specifies grounds for the appointment, such as noncompliance with audit laws.
  • States that legal costs are not reimbursed unless the official is acquitted or the suit is dismissed.
  • States that termination can occur upon the administrators motion or if the emergency is resolved.
  • Termination can occur upon motion by the fiscal administrator, attorney general, or the political subdivision.
  • Termination is contingent upon a court finding that the emergency has been resolved.
  • The administrator can be removed upon motion by the attorney general or if the court finds the emergency resolved.
  • The administrators oversight is limited to specific departments or functions necessary for addressing emergencies.
  • The appointment can be terminated if the emergency is resolved or by motion from the attorney general or political subdivision.
  • The appointment may terminate upon the administrators motion or if the court finds that the emergency has been resolved.
  • The appointment must address emergencies affecting fiscal stability.
  • The attorney general must file a motion in court to appoint a fiscal administrator based on findings of financial instability.
  • The attorney general must file a rule for appointment if a financial emergency is determined.
  • The attorney general must file a rule if a political subdivision fails to maintain financial stability as determined by a public meeting of the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer.
  • The attorney general must file a rule in district court for appointment.
  • The attorney general must file a rule to appoint a fiscal administrator if specified financial conditions are met.
  • The attorney general must file a rule to appoint a limited jurisdiction fiscal administrator if required.
  • The attorney general must file a rule to show cause in district court for the appointment.
  • The fund may be used only for financial assistance related to the costs of independent fiscal administration.
  • The fund will be used to provide financial assistance to subdivisions with appointed fiscal administrators.
  • The legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer must determine the need for a limited jurisdiction fiscal administrator.
  • The legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer must unanimously agree on the necessity for such an appointment.
  • The limited jurisdiction fiscal administrator must have access to all relevant records of the political subdivision.
  • The limited jurisdiction fiscal administrator will oversee specific functions of a subdivision.
  • The political subdivision may consent to the appointment or the court may appoint one if necessary.
  • They are authorized to amend budgets and take necessary actions to address emergencies.
  • Unanimous decision by legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer required to appoint a limited jurisdiction fiscal administrator.
  • Unanimous decision by the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer is required for appointment.
  • Unanimous decision by the legislative auditor, attorney general, and state treasurer is required to initiate the appointment process.
  • Unanimous decision required for appointment; must address specific emergencies.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-08 Signed by the Governor. Becomes Act No. 96.
2025-06-08 Effective date 8/1/2025.
2025-06-04 Sent to the Governor by the Secretary of the Senate.
2025-06-03 Signed by the Speaker of the House.
2025-06-03 Enrolled. Signed by the President of the Senate.
2025-06-02 Read third time by title, roll called on final passage, yeas 95, nays 0. Finally passed, ordered to the Senate.
2025-06-02 Received from the House without amendments.
2025-05-28 Scheduled for floor debate on 05/29/2025.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates and empowers new administrative entities (fiscal administrators) whose explicit mission is to restore and maintain financial stability in government subdivisions, which is directly tied to improving government efficiency and effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating audits, balanced budgets, and granting administrators authority over budgets, contracts, and personnel, the bill establishes structural mechanisms to enforce fiscal discipline and streamline operations in distressed political subdivisions.

Evidence:

  • 'Appointment of a fiscal administrator...for a political subdivision that is not financially stable.'
  • 'Mandates timely audits and balanced budgets.'
  • 'Fiscal administrator...authority to manage budgets, contracts, personnel, and operations.'
  • 'Establishes a revolving loan fund to provide financial assistance to political subdivisions under fiscal administration.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit about its efficiency goals, as the administrators are tasked with resolving fiscal emergencies and restoring stability; the language is not ambiguous in this regard.

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill mandates audits, reporting, and corrective budget amendments, all aimed at uncovering and correcting inefficiencies or mismanagement, which aligns with the goal of evaluating and improving government performance.

Mechanism of Influence: The fiscal administrator's oversight, required access to records, and power to propose and enforce budget amendments are direct procedural mechanisms to identify and remedy inefficiencies.

Evidence:

  • 'Mandates timely audits and balanced budgets for political subdivisions.'
  • 'Requires court intervention if the governing authority fails to adopt the proposed budget amendments.'

Ambiguity Notes: The focus is specifically on fiscal emergencies, but the corrective actions and oversight mechanisms are clearly designed to improve efficiency and effectiveness.

Senate - 59 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE:  Provides for fiscal and economic impact statements under the Administrative Procedure Act. (8/1/25)

Legislation ID: 112661

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

SB 59 seeks to amend existing laws related to the Administrative Procedure Act by requiring a statement from the legislative fiscal office regarding the fiscal impact of proposed rules. It establishes that any proposed rule resulting in significant state expenditures or economic impacts must be approved by relevant legislative committees or the governor before taking effect. The bill also clarifies that fiscal impacts accounted for in prior legislation shall not be counted again for proposed rules.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Allows actions to take effect without committee approval if a committee fails to conduct a hearing within 30 days and the governor approves the action in writing.
  • Allows actions to take effect without committee approval if no hearing is held within 30 days and the governor approves the action in writing.
  • Allows for rules to take effect without committee approval if the committee fails to meet within 30 days and the governor approves the rule.
  • Allows proposed actions to take effect without committee approval if no hearing is conducted within 30 days and the governor deems the action acceptable.
  • Allows rules to take effect without committee approval if a committee fails to meet within 30 days and the governor approves the rule in writing.
  • Allows rules to take effect without committee approval if specific conditions are met.
  • Allows rules to take effect without committee approval if the committee fails to meet within 30 days and the governor approves the rule.
  • Emergency rules with significant fiscal impacts must be reviewed and approved by legislative committees.
  • Excludes fiscal impacts accounted for in the fiscal note of related legislation from being considered as fiscal impacts of the proposed rule.
  • Excludes fiscal impacts already accounted for in related legislation from being considered again.
  • Excludes fiscal impacts already considered in legislation from being counted again for proposed rules.
  • If a committee does not meet within 30 days, the governor can approve the rule in writing.
  • If an emergency rule results in significant expenditures, the governor must provide a written report explaining the need for an earlier effective date.
  • If a subcommittee fails to meet within thirty days, the governors written approval allows the rule to take effect.
  • If the rule entails costs of $200,000 or more annually or $600,000 over three years, it must be approved by legislative oversight committees.
  • If the rule is necessary to implement legislation, the fiscal impact noted in the associated fiscal note is not considered.
  • Mandates review by subject matter committees for emergency rules with significant fiscal impacts.
  • Proposed rules resulting in expenditures of state funds or costs to regulated entities estimated at $200,000 per year or more must be approved by oversight committees.
  • Proposed rules resulting in expenditures of state funds or economic impacts of $200,000 per year or $600,000 over three years must be approved by legislative oversight committees.
  • Proposed rules resulting in expenditures of state funds or economic impacts over $200,000 per year or $600,000 over three years require committee approval.
  • Proposed rules with an economic impact of $200,000 per year or $600,000 over three years require committee approval.
  • Proposed rules with an impact of $200,000 per year or $600,000 over three years require committee approval.
  • Proposed rules with significant economic impacts must be approved by legislative oversight subcommittees.
  • Proposed rules with significant fiscal impacts must be approved by legislative committees before taking effect.
  • Proposed rules with significant fiscal impacts require legislative approval.
  • Requires a fiscal impact statement for emergency rules from the legislative fiscal office.
  • Requires a fiscal impact statement for proposed rules.
  • Requires a fiscal impact statement from the legislative fiscal office for proposed actions.
  • Requires a fiscal impact statement from the legislative fiscal office for proposed rules.
  • Requires a notice of emergency rule adoption to include a fiscal impact statement from the legislative fiscal office.
  • Requires approval from appropriate house and senate subject matter committees for rules with significant fiscal impact.
  • Requires approval from house and senate subject matter committees for emergency rules with fiscal impacts of $200,000 or more per year or $1 million over five years.
  • Requires approval from legislative oversight committees for actions with an economic impact of $200,000 per year or $600,000 over three years.
  • Requires approval from legislative oversight subcommittees for actions with fiscal impacts over $200,000 per year or $600,000 over three years.
  • Requires approval from legislative oversight subcommittees for rules with economic impacts of $200,000 per year or $600,000 over three years.
  • Requires approval from relevant house and senate committees for rules with economic impacts of $200,000 per year or $1 million over five years.
  • Requires approval from subject matter committees for rules with significant fiscal impacts.
  • Requires a statement from the legislative fiscal office on the fiscal impact of proposed actions.
  • Requires a statement from the legislative fiscal office on whether the proposed action will have a fiscal impact.
  • Requires a statement from the legislative fiscal office regarding the fiscal impact of proposed rules.
  • Requires a statement of fiscal impact from the legislative fiscal office for proposed rules.
  • Requires a statement on fiscal impact from the legislative fiscal office for proposed rules.
  • Requires legislative oversight committees to approve proposed actions with significant fiscal impacts before they take effect.
  • Requires the legislative fiscal office to assess and report the fiscal impact of proposed rules.
  • Requires the legislative fiscal office to provide a fiscal impact statement for proposed actions.
  • Requires written approval from the governor for final rule promulgation.
  • Rules can take effect without committee approval if the committee does not meet within 30 days and the governor approves the rule.
  • Rules may take effect without committee approval if a committee fails to meet within 30 days and the governor approves the rule.
  • Specifies that fiscal impacts already included in fiscal notes for legislation will not be counted again.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-08 Sent to the Governor by the Secretary of the Senate on 6/5/2025.
2025-06-08 Signed by the Speaker of the House.
2025-06-04 Enrolled. Signed by the President of the Senate.
2025-06-03 Amendments proposed by the House read and concurred in by a vote of 37 yeas and 0 nays.
2025-06-02 Read third time by title, amended, roll called on final passage, yeas 98, nays 0. Finally passed, ordered to the Senate.
2025-06-02 Received from the House with amendments.
2025-05-28 Scheduled for floor debate on 06/02/2025.
2025-05-28 Scheduled for floor debate on 05/29/2025.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes procedural safeguards (fiscal impact statements, oversight committee/governor approval) specifically aimed at ensuring that new administrative rules do not create unnecessary or duplicative financial burdens on the state. This directly relates to improving government efficiency by scrutinizing potential costs and impacts of regulatory actions.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring fiscal impact statements and higher-level approval for costly rules, the bill introduces a structural mechanism to control expenditures, prevent redundant spending, and improve oversight of regulatory actions—key elements of efficient government operations.

Evidence:

  • 'requires a statement from the legislative fiscal office regarding the fiscal impact of proposed rules.'
  • 'any proposed rule resulting in significant state expenditures or economic impacts must be approved by relevant legislative committees or the governor before taking effect.'
  • 'fiscal impacts accounted for in prior legislation shall not be counted again for proposed rules.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's language is clear in requiring fiscal impact review and oversight for significant rules; however, 'significant economic impact' is defined by a monetary threshold, which is concrete. The efficiency goal is implicit in the focus on fiscal scrutiny and oversight.

Maine

Index of Bills

Senate - 278 - Resolve, Directing the State Auditor to Audit All State Agencies

Legislation ID: 38951

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill seeks to establish a framework for auditing all state agencies in Maine. By mandating audits, the bill aims to improve oversight and ensure that state resources are being used efficiently and effectively. The amendment incorporates a fiscal note, indicating the financial implications of the proposed audits.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Requires the agencys jurisdiction, roles, and responsibilities to be outlined.
  • Requires the current and projected budget to be included in the report.
  • Requires the growth of the budget over the last 5, 10, 15, and 20 years to be reported.
  • Requires the percentage of the total most current state biennial budget represented by the agencys current budget to be included.
  • Requires the scope of current, completed, and incomplete projects over the last 5, 10, 15, and 20 years to be detailed.
  • Requires the State Auditor to list the number of current employees for each agency.
  • Requires the State Auditor to provide the number of newly hired employees over the last 5, 10, 15, and 20 years.
  • Requires the State Auditor to submit the report to the joint standing committee on appropriations and financial affairs.
  • Specifies the deadline for report submission as November 4, 2026.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-03 Accepted Report
2025-06-02 Accepted Report
2025-02-19 Referred to Committee
2025-02-19 Referred in Concurrence

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's primary purpose is to audit state agencies to improve oversight and ensure resources are used efficiently and effectively, which directly aligns with the goal of promoting government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating regular audits, the bill creates a structural mechanism to evaluate government performance, potentially uncover inefficiencies, and recommend improvements.

Evidence:

  • This bill seeks to establish a framework for auditing all state agencies in Maine.
  • By mandating audits, the bill aims to improve oversight and ensure that state resources are being used efficiently and effectively.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Massachusets

Index of Bills

Senate - 2124 - An Act relative to government efficiency

Legislation ID: 86659

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill proposes the establishment of a Behavioral Science Insights Policy Directive within the Massachusetts General Laws. It encourages administrative and independent agencies to identify and apply behavioral science insights to improve the outcomes of public programs. The directive emphasizes the importance of streamlining processes, improving information presentation, and reducing regulatory burdens to facilitate better access to public benefits and services.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must identify where behavioral science can improve public programs.
  • Combine behavioral insights with reviews of existing regulations.
  • Consider the structure of choices presented to individuals to promote welfare.
  • Develop strategies for applying these insights and evaluate their impact.
  • Engage researchers with expertise in behavioral science for policy guidance.
  • Enhance the presentation of information to improve comprehension.
  • Focus on rigorous, evidence-based evaluations, including randomized control trials.
  • Identify and reduce regulatory burdens consistent with Access to Justice Commission recommendations.
  • Identify and remove administrative hurdles for program access.
  • Review policies to encourage specific actions, such as saving or completing education.
  • Strengthen relationships with the research community for empirical findings.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-27 Referred to the committee onState Administration and Regulatory Oversight
2025-02-27 House concurred

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to improve government efficiency and effectiveness by streamlining processes, reducing regulatory burdens, and enhancing the delivery of public programs through behavioral science insights.

Mechanism of Influence: It sets up a policy directive that requires agencies to review and improve their operations, encourages collaboration with researchers, and mandates the evaluation of interventions aimed at reducing administrative hurdles and regulatory inefficiencies.

Evidence:

  • 'Agencies must identify where behavioral science can improve public programs.'
  • 'Agencies are required to streamline access to public programs and improve how information is presented to beneficiaries.'
  • 'Agencies are encouraged to integrate behavioral insights with regulatory reviews to reduce burdens.'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill uses language like 'encourages' rather than 'requires' in some sections, it does set clear expectations for agencies to pursue efficiency and effectiveness goals. The intent to promote government efficiency is explicit throughout.

Senate - 2137 - An Act to reduce the cost of government and create new jobs

Legislation ID: 86875

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Bill S.2137 seeks to repeal specific sections of chapter 7 of the General Laws, which may be contributing to unnecessary government expenditures. By eliminating these sections, the bill intends to streamline government operations and facilitate the creation of new job opportunities.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-07-12 Hearing scheduled for 07/22/2025 from 10:00 AM-01:00 PM in A-1
2025-02-27 Referred to the committee onState Administration and Regulatory Oversight
2025-02-27 House concurred

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly states its goal is to streamline government operations and reduce unnecessary expenditures, which aligns directly with efforts to improve government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By repealing specific statutory provisions, the bill aims to eliminate processes or requirements that may be causing inefficiency or excess cost within government operations.

Evidence:

  • may be contributing to unnecessary government expenditures
  • By eliminating these sections, the bill intends to streamline government operations

Ambiguity Notes: The summary does not detail what Sections 52 to 56 entail, so the exact nature of the inefficiencies or expenditures being addressed is unclear. However, the stated purpose is clear.

Senate - 2221 - An Act relative to zero-based budgeting and budget transparency

Legislation ID: 88765

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill proposes the development and adoption of a zero-based budget for each state agency and department on a quadrennial basis. The zero-based budget will start from a zero dollar amount and will be based on the cost-effective performance necessary to achieve the agencys goals and objectives. It requires public hearings and evaluations by the relevant legislative committees to ensure thorough scrutiny and transparency in the budgeting process.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Any appropriation must be accompanied by a description of tasks and goals.
  • Mandates legislative committees to evaluate the budget components based on public testimony.
  • Performance measures must be included to assess the achievement of the agencys objectives.
  • Requires a narrative detailing the agencys tasks, goals, and objectives.
  • Requires the Secretary of Administration and Finance to develop a zero-based budget for each agency.
  • Requires the Ways and Means Committees to hold public hearings and report on the zero-based budget.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-27 Referred to the committee onState Administration and Regulatory Oversight
2025-02-27 House concurred

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes a structural mechanism (zero-based budgeting) designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations by requiring agencies to justify all spending and link it to performance outcomes. It also mandates oversight and evaluation by legislative committees.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring agencies to start from zero in their budget justifications and tying appropriations to performance measures, the bill aims to eliminate waste, reduce unnecessary spending, and ensure that government funds are used efficiently. The involvement of legislative committees and public hearings enhances scrutiny and transparency.

Evidence:

  • 'zero-based budget will start from a zero dollar amount and will be based on the cost-effective performance necessary to achieve the agency's goals and objectives.'
  • 'Performance measures must be included to assess the achievement of the agency's objectives.'
  • 'Requires the Ways and Means Committees to hold public hearings and report on the zero-based budget.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's language is clear in its intent to promote efficiency through zero-based budgeting and performance evaluation. There is little ambiguity about its purpose or mechanism.

Senate - 2273 - An Act reducing administrative burden for government and industry

Legislation ID: 86760

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill proposes an amendment to Section 6B of chapter 159B of the General Laws of Massachusetts. The amendment involves the removal of the fifth paragraph from the existing legislation, which is intended to alleviate unnecessary administrative requirements that may hinder operations within government and industry.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-30 Hearing scheduled for 05/06/2025 from 11:00 AM-01:00 PM in A-2
2025-02-27 Referred to the committee onTelecommunications, Utilities and Energy
2025-02-27 House concurred

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill specifically aims to remove administrative requirements that are seen as unnecessary and burdensome, with the explicit goal of improving operational efficiency within government (and industry).

Mechanism of Influence: By deleting a paragraph that imposes administrative requirements, the bill would directly reduce bureaucratic procedures, potentially lowering administrative burdens and streamlining processes.

Evidence:

  • intended to alleviate unnecessary administrative requirements that may hinder operations within government and industry
  • removal of the fifth paragraph from the existing legislation

Ambiguity Notes: The exact content of the fifth paragraph is not provided, so the precise scope of the administrative burden being addressed is unclear. However, the abstract makes the intent clear.

Minnesota

Index of Bills

house - 2174 - State government unfilled positions appropriation reduction required, and law enforcement exception provided.

Legislation ID: 74832

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill mandates a reduction in appropriations for state agency operations based on unfilled positions that have not been filled within 180 days of being posted. It applies to positions posted in fiscal years 2023, 2024, and 2025, with specific exclusions for law enforcement and public safety positions. Additionally, it requires the commissioner of management and budget to report on the financial impact of these reductions to legislative finance committees.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Excludes law enforcement and public safety positions from this requirement
  • Reductions must be reflected in agency base budgets for fiscal years 2026 and 2027.
  • Requires a report to finance committees regarding agency spending reductions
  • Requires reductions in appropriations for unfilled positions after 180 days

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-12 Introduction and first reading, referred to State Government Finance and Policy

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to increase government efficiency and reduce costs by mandating budget reductions for prolonged vacancies and requiring reporting on these savings.

Mechanism of Influence: By tying appropriations to actual staffing levels and mandating reports on savings, the bill incentivizes agencies to either fill positions more quickly or reduce unnecessary positions, directly promoting efficient use of resources.

Evidence:

  • requires a reduction in general fund and nongeneral fund appropriations for state agencies based on salary and benefits savings from positions that have not been filled within 180 days
  • Requires a report to finance committees regarding agency spending reductions

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is specific in its method (budget reductions for unfilled positions) and in its reporting requirements. It does not create a new committee or task force, but it does establish a procedural mechanism (mandatory reporting and budget adjustment) to promote efficiency.

house - 2420 - Commission on Governmental Efficiency and Ethics established to investigate allegations of fraud in state programs and undisclosed legislative conflicts of interest, report required, and money appropriated.

Legislation ID: 91080

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill creates a new commission tasked with investigating fraud and conflicts of interest in Minnesotas state government. It outlines the commissions structure, membership, reporting requirements, and the procedures for conducting investigations and forensic audits. The bill also includes provisions for public reporting and rewards for whistleblowers, as well as amendments to existing statutes to ensure compliance and cooperation from state agencies and grantees.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Commission consists of six members: three appointed by the speaker of the house and three by the minority leader.
  • Commission must contract with a private entity to conduct audits.
  • Commission must maintain a website and hotline for anonymous reports.
  • Grant agreements must include an audit clause allowing for examination by the commission.
  • May award up to $5,000 for reports leading to convictions or expulsions.
  • Meetings must comply with open meeting laws, with exceptions for sensitive discussions.
  • Members must not be current or former elected officials.
  • Members serve a two-year term with no term limits.
  • Must report credible evidence of fraud to law enforcement.
  • Public officials must provide access to records and assist investigators.
  • Public reports required for conflicts of interest findings.
  • Reimbursement must be approved by the chair.
  • Specific amounts to be appropriated for fiscal years 2026 and 2027.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-17 Introduction and first reading, referred to State Government Finance and Policy

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates a permanent commission specifically named the 'Commission on Government Efficiency and Ethics,' with a direct mandate to investigate fraud and conflicts of interest, which are major sources of government inefficiency and waste. The commission's purpose and powers are explicitly tied to promoting government efficiency and ethical conduct.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing a specialized entity with investigative and audit powers, the bill provides a structural mechanism for identifying and addressing inefficiencies, waste, and unethical behavior in government operations. The commission's reporting and enforcement provisions are designed to enhance accountability and transparency, which are essential for improving efficiency.

Evidence:

  • 'Establishes the Commission on Government Efficiency and Ethics to investigate fraud and undisclosed conflicts of interest.'
  • 'Appropriates funds for the functioning of the Commission on Government Efficiency and Ethics.'
  • 'Allows commission members to order forensic audits of state agencies or grantees.'
  • 'Amends existing statutes regarding audit clauses in grant agreements to include provisions for the commissions oversight.'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill's primary focus is on fraud and conflicts of interest, the explicit naming and funding of the commission for 'efficiency' purposes, as well as its authority to conduct forensic audits and enforce compliance, make its intent and mechanism clear. The scope could be interpreted as primarily anti-fraud, but the inclusion of 'efficiency' in the commission's title and mandate covers the user's criteria.

house - 289 - SAVI program established for state agencies to encourage innovation and cost savings.

Legislation ID: 33239

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill creates the SAVI program, which encourages state agencies, including Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, to identify and implement cost-effective measures that result in savings. Agencies can retain a percentage of unspent funds for innovative projects, subject to oversight and approval processes. The bill also amends existing laws to accommodate this program and outlines a peer review process for funding decisions.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must have approval from the commissioner of management and budget to retain savings.
  • Agencies must manage and review projects funded from the SAVI-dedicated account.
  • Agencies must post project funding notices for 30 days before spending and obtain approval from the commissioner of management and budget.
  • All state agencies, including Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, may participate in the program.
  • Funds must be used only for projects that support the agencys mission.
  • The peer review panel must include department employees with cost-savings credentials and department managers in a balanced ratio.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-10 Introduction and first reading, referred to State Government Finance and Policy

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes a program (SAVI) whose mission is to improve government efficiency and reduce costs by encouraging agencies to find and implement savings.

Mechanism of Influence: It creates structural mechanisms (peer review panels, dedicated accounts, oversight by the commissioner) and procedural requirements (posting notices, approvals) to ensure savings are identified, retained, and reinvested in further efficiency projects.

Evidence:

  • 'This bill creates the SAVI program, which encourages state agencies ... to identify and implement cost-effective measures that result in savings.'
  • 'Agencies can retain a percentage of unspent funds for innovative projects, subject to oversight and approval processes.'
  • 'Peer review panel must include department employees with cost-savings credentials.'
  • 'This provision establishes the SAVI program aimed at encouraging state agencies to identify cost-effective measures and efficiencies that lead to savings for the state.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent and mechanisms, with little ambiguity regarding its focus on efficiency and cost-savings.

house - 2963 - Office of Inspector General established, powers and duties provided, enhanced grant oversight provided, retaliation prohibited, existing executive Offices of Inspector General transferred or repealed, detection and prevention of fraud provided, penalties provided, and money appropriated.

Legislation ID: 103587

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill outlines the creation and responsibilities of an Office of Inspector General within Minnesotas state government. It includes provisions for the appointment and duties of the inspector general, establishes mechanisms for reporting and investigating fraud and misuse of public funds, and enhances oversight of state grants. The bill also prohibits retaliation against whistleblowers and provides for penalties related to fraud.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Cannot hold another public office while in position.
  • Inspector general can subpoena witnesses and compel data production.
  • Inspector general must investigate and combat fraud and misuse of public funds.
  • Legislative auditor appointed for a six-year term.
  • Must coordinate with legislative auditor on credible reports of fraud.
  • Must establish policies for reporting suspected fraud.
  • Requires prompt identification and prosecution of fraud and misuse of public funds.
  • Requires timely notification to the legislative auditor when unlawful use of funds is suspected.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-01 Introduction and first reading, referred to Human Services Finance and Policy

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates a permanent government entity (Office of Inspector General) with the explicit mission of investigating fraud, misuse, and inefficiency in the use of public funds, which directly aligns with improving government effectiveness and efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing oversight, investigative, and reporting mechanisms, and mandating coordination with the legislative auditor, the bill seeks to identify waste, prevent fraud, and improve the use of state resources, all of which are structural mechanisms to promote government efficiency.

Evidence:

  • 'Establishes the Office of the Inspector General with specific powers and responsibilities.'
  • 'Inspector general must investigate and combat fraud and misuse of public funds.'
  • 'Mandates continuous legislative review of public fund spending to prevent fraud and misuse.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's focus is specifically on fraud and misuse of public funds, which is a clear and direct subset of government efficiency. There is little ambiguity about its intent to improve effectiveness and reduce waste.

house - 3 - Legislative auditor required to submit a report to the legislature related to an agencys implementation of legislative auditor recommendations, and money appropriated.

Legislation ID: 33521

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends existing Minnesota statutes to mandate that the legislative auditor submits an annual report detailing the implementation status of audit recommendations by state agencies. Additionally, it requires the commissioner to review audit reports and report on the status of recommendations, thereby ensuring that internal control issues are addressed effectively.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Commissioner must submit a report by September 1 each year.
  • Committee chair must allow the auditor to present findings in a public hearing before funding legislation is acted upon.
  • Legislative auditor must submit a report by February 1 each year.
  • Report must detail the implementation status of prior recommendations.
  • Report must itemize recommendations not implemented and the rationale for those decisions.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-06 Introduction and first reading, referred to State Government Finance and Policy

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates a recurring structural mechanism (annual reporting and required hearings) specifically aimed at improving government effectiveness and efficiency by ensuring audit recommendations are implemented.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating follow-up reporting and public hearings on audit recommendations, the bill increases oversight and pressure on agencies to address inefficiencies, correct internal control problems, and justify inaction, thus promoting more effective and efficient government operations.

Evidence:

  • 'requires the legislative auditor to submit an annual report on whether state entities have implemented audit recommendations from the past five years.'
  • 'Committee chair must allow the auditor to present findings in a public hearing before funding legislation is acted upon.'
  • 'Commissioner must submit a report by September 1 each year.'
  • 'Report must itemize recommendations not implemented and the rationale for those decisions.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit that its purpose is to improve the implementation of audit recommendations, which are typically aimed at correcting inefficiencies or control weaknesses. However, it does not specify the types of recommendations, so the scope could be broad.

senate - 1823 - Specific content requirement in a report from Minnesota Management and Budget on agency actions with respect to legislative auditor findings

Legislation ID: 30111

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends Minnesota Statutes to require the Minnesota Management and Budget commissioner to provide a detailed annual report on agency actions in response to recommendations made by the Legislative Auditor. The report must include descriptions of actions taken, assessments of completion, explanations for any incomplete actions, necessary work for completion, and timelines for addressing concerns raised by the auditor.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Mandates an annual report by January 15 to specific legislative committee chairs and minority members.
  • Requires the commissioner to review audit reports from the Legislative Auditor.
  • The report must detail actions taken in response to recommendations, completion assessments, reasons for any incomplete actions, necessary work to complete the actions, and timelines for completion.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-24 Introduction and first reading

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly mandates a structural mechanism (annual reporting) focused on evaluating and improving agency responses to audit recommendations, which is explicitly intended to promote government efficiency and effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring public, detailed reports on how agencies address audit findings, the bill increases accountability, encourages timely and thorough corrective actions, and supports ongoing improvements in government operations.

Evidence:

  • The report must include descriptions of actions taken, assessments of completion, explanations for any incomplete actions, necessary work for completion, and timelines for addressing concerns raised by the auditor.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill’s language is specific in tying the reporting requirement to the purpose of responding to efficiency-related recommendations from the Legislative Auditor.

senate - 2897 - Government Efficiency and Ethics Commission establishment to investigate allegations of fraud in state programs and undisclosed legislative conflicts of interest and appropriation

Legislation ID: 90511

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill establishes a Commission on Government Efficiency and Ethics within the state of Minnesota, tasked with investigating fraud in state programs and undisclosed conflicts of interest among legislators. The commission will be composed of six citizen members appointed by legislative leaders, will have the authority to conduct investigations and forensic audits, and will report findings to relevant authorities. It also includes provisions for public reporting and potential rewards for whistleblowers, as well as funding appropriations to support its operations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Audits must evaluate internal controls to identify fraud and inefficiencies.
  • Commission consists of six members appointed by legislative leaders.
  • Commission members must elect a chair and vice-chair.
  • Commission must maintain a website and hotline for anonymous reporting.
  • Executive director of the Legislative Coordinating Commission provides support.
  • Funds are allocated from the general fund for fiscal years 2026 and 2027.
  • Grant agreements must include clauses for audits by the commission.
  • May award up to $5,000 for reports leading to legal actions.
  • Meetings must comply with open meeting laws, with provisions for closed sessions.
  • Members must not be current or former elected officials.
  • Members serve a two-year term with no term limit.
  • Members serve without compensation but may be reimbursed for expenses.
  • Public officials must cooperate with investigators and provide necessary documentation.
  • Reports must be submitted to legislative committees regarding fraud or conflicts of interest.
  • Slate of appointees must be approved by both majority and minority leaders of the senate.
  • Three members appointed by the speaker of the house and three by the minority leader.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-24 Referred to State and Local Government
2025-03-24 Introduction and first reading

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly creates a commission whose explicit mission is to improve government efficiency by investigating fraud and identifying inefficiencies in state programs.

Mechanism of Influence: The commission is empowered to conduct forensic audits and investigations, require cooperation from public officials, and recommend corrective actions. Mandated reporting and audit clauses in grants further institutionalize efficiency and oversight.

Evidence:

  • 'Establishes the Commission on Government Efficiency and Ethics to investigate fraud and conflicts of interest.'
  • 'Forensic audits: Audits must evaluate internal controls to identify fraud and inefficiencies.'
  • 'Audit clause amendment: Grant agreements must include clauses for audits by the commission.'
  • 'Mandates reporting of findings from investigations and audits to relevant legislative committees.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent to promote efficiency and ethics; there is little ambiguity regarding its focus on improving government operations.

senate - 680 - Appropriations for positions that have been unfiled for at least 12 months reduction requirement provision

Legislation ID: 31348

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill mandates a reduction in appropriations for state agencies based on salary and benefits savings from positions that have not been filled for at least 12 months. It applies to positions posted in fiscal years 2025, 2026, and 2027, and requires reporting on the financial impact of these reductions. The bill exempts law enforcement positions from these provisions.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Excludes law enforcement positions from this requirement.
  • Requires reductions in agency budgets for positions unfilled for at least 12 months.
  • Requires the commissioner to report to specific legislative committees regarding spending reductions.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-27 Introduction and first reading

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly aims to improve government efficiency by eliminating unused salary expenditures and requiring reporting on the resulting savings.

Mechanism of Influence: By removing appropriations for persistently vacant positions, the bill incentivizes agencies to either fill necessary roles or streamline operations, reducing waste. The reporting requirement ensures oversight and transparency.

Evidence:

  • mandates a reduction in appropriations for state agencies based on salary and benefits savings from positions that have not been filled for at least 12 months
  • requires reporting on the financial impact of these reductions

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its intent to reduce costs by targeting unfilled positions, and the reporting mechanism is clearly outlined. The only ambiguity is how agencies might respond—by consolidating duties or possibly shifting workloads.

Mississippi

Index of Bills

House - 21 - Public purchasing laws; amend to revise the lowest and best bid decision procedure.

Legislation ID: 150667

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill No. 21 seeks to amend various sections of the Mississippi Code to redefine terms related to public purchasing, particularly focusing on the definition of lowest and best bids. The bill emphasizes the inclusion of life cycle costing, warranties, and other relevant considerations in the evaluation of bids. Additionally, it aims to bring forward several sections of the code for potential amendments, ensuring a comprehensive update to public procurement practices in the state.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Defines lowest and best as incorporating life cycle costs and total cost of ownership.
  • Purchases between $5,000 and $75,000 require at least two written bids.
  • Purchases over $75,000 require public advertisement and competitive bids.
  • Purchases under $5,000 can be made without competitive bids.
  • Specifies that ongoing maintenance and operation costs must be considered in bid evaluations.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-04 (H) Died In Committee
2025-01-10 (H) Referred To State Affairs

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations by modernizing procurement practices and requiring a more comprehensive evaluation of bids.

Mechanism of Influence: By redefining 'lowest and best' to include life cycle and operational costs, the bill encourages government entities to select bids that may provide greater long-term value and cost savings, rather than simply the lowest upfront price. This can reduce waste and improve resource allocation.

Evidence:

  • Defines lowest and best as incorporating life cycle costs and total cost of ownership.
  • Specifies that ongoing maintenance and operation costs must be considered in bid evaluations.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not create a new entity or require a study, audit, or report, but it does establish a procedural mechanism (life cycle analysis in bid evaluation) that is designed to make government purchasing more efficient.

House - 924 - Transparency in Government Act; create.

Legislation ID: 14883

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill No. 924, known as the Transparency in Government Act, seeks to establish a framework for reviewing newly adopted state agency administrative rules for compliance with legislative intent. It mandates the State Department of Education to collect data regarding technology in schools and improve planning for school nutrition and transportation services. The bill also proposes the formation of a State Board of Health Professions to oversee health care regulations and ensure efficient operations. Additionally, it includes provisions for Medicaid nonemergency transportation evaluations, penalties for noncompliance with committee subpoenas, and the establishment of a self-insurance task force.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Annual budget requests to be made by the State Department of Health for board operations.
  • Authorizer may receive gifts and donations.
  • Authorizer receives up to 3% of per-pupil allocations.
  • Board can remove a member for incapacity or excessive absences.
  • Board members to include representatives from various health professions.
  • Board must adhere to policies for acquiring office space.
  • Board must meet after September 1, 2013.
  • Chairman is responsible for calling subsequent meetings.
  • Committee can file complaints for noncompliance with subpoenas.
  • Committee can subpoena witnesses and documents.
  • Conduct biennial surveys on technology use and needs in school districts.
  • Creates a new section for civil enforcement of subpoenas.
  • Develop a template for technology plans.
  • Director can hire staff as needed, subject to funding.
  • Dissolves the Task Force upon submission of the report.
  • Establishes criminal penalties for failing to comply with subpoenas.
  • Establishes staggered terms for board members and allows a funding percentage from annual allocations.
  • Executive Director must meet qualifications based on best practices.
  • Imposes criminal penalties for failure to comply with subpoenas.
  • Initial appointments must be made before July 1, 2025.
  • Mandates annual budget requests and administrative support for the board.
  • Mandates a report on the cost benefits of self-insuring state properties.
  • Mandates a triennial performance evaluation of the Medicaid transportation program.
  • Mandates biennial surveys of district technology leaders and teaching staff regarding technology use.
  • Members serve three-year terms.
  • No member may serve more than two consecutive terms.
  • Noncompliance can result in contempt charges.
  • No removal from participation without notice and opportunity to be heard.
  • No simultaneous roles as employee or representative of a charter school authorized by the board.
  • Original appointing authority fills vacancies.
  • PEER Committee to select and review up to 30 newly adopted rules each year.
  • Provide resources and support for efficient planning of nutrition programs.
  • Recommendations to be submitted by November 1, 2025.
  • Reports must be submitted to the Legislature by December 15 each year.
  • Reports on reviewed rules must be submitted to the Legislature by December 15 each year.
  • Reports on these rules must be submitted to the Legislature by December 15 annually.
  • Requires a cost-benefit analysis before self-insurance funds are expended.
  • Requires annual reviews of accounting procedures to improve revenue and expense reporting.
  • Requires assistance for planning transportation services for school districts.
  • Requires PEER Committee to review up to 30 newly adopted rules annually.
  • Requires reporting of dependent support payments, fines, and restitution for each participant.
  • Requires reporting of financial information for participants in the work initiative program.
  • Requires that withholdings from participant wages are based on wages after mandatory deductions.
  • Requires the board to evaluate the need for regulation of healthcare professions.
  • Requires the department to provide support for efficient school nutrition planning.
  • Requires the PEER Committee to select and review 15 newly adopted rules annually, increasing to 30 in subsequent years.
  • Requires the PEER Committee to select and review up to 30 newly adopted rules annually.
  • Requires the State Department of Education to develop a technology plan template.
  • Requires the State Department of Education to establish standards for personnel investigations.
  • Set specific timelines for hearings following a request from the employee.
  • Student-athletes have a right to due process.
  • Superintendents must notify employees of charges and provide a hearing opportunity.
  • Task Force to report findings and recommendations by November 1, 2025.
  • Task Force to report findings to the Legislature by October 1, 2025.
  • Task force to report on cost benefits before any self-insurance funds are expended.
  • Witnesses are immune from prosecution for testimony, except for perjury.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-24 Vetoed
2025-04-08 (S) Enrolled Bill Signed
2025-04-08 (H) Enrolled Bill Signed
2025-04-02 (H) Motion to Reconsider Tabled
2025-04-01 (S) Conference Report Adopted
2025-04-01 (H) Conference Report Adopted
2025-04-01 (H) Motion to Reconsider Entered (Ford (54th), Porter)
2025-03-31 (S) Reconsidered

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes or restructures several entities (State Board of Health Professions, self-insurance task force, PEER Committee review authority) specifically to evaluate, coordinate, and improve government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: Creates new boards and task forces with explicit mandates to oversee, evaluate, and recommend improvements in regulatory, health, insurance, and administrative processes.

Evidence:

  • 'proposes the formation of a State Board of Health Professions to oversee health care regulations and ensure efficient operations.'
  • 'establishment of a self-insurance task force.'
  • 'The PEER Committee is authorized to review newly adopted state agency administrative rules and report on their compliance with legislative intent.'

Ambiguity Notes: The language is explicit in assigning efficiency, coordination, and evaluation roles to these entities, reducing ambiguity about their purpose.

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill mandates recurring studies, audits, and reports (e.g., triennial Medicaid transportation evaluation, annual review of school accounting procedures, technology surveys) aimed at identifying inefficiencies and improving government performance.

Mechanism of Influence: Requires agencies and committees to conduct audits, performance evaluations, and planning exercises, which are foundational steps in uncovering inefficiencies and implementing improvements.

Evidence:

  • 'Requires annual reviews of accounting procedures to improve revenue and expense reporting.'
  • 'Mandates a triennial performance evaluation of the Medicaid transportation program.'
  • 'Mandates biennial surveys of district technology leaders and teaching staff regarding technology use.'

Ambiguity Notes: The purpose of these evaluations and reports is clearly tied to improving efficiency, accountability, and responsiveness, as stated in the bill's descriptions.

Analysis 3

Why Relevant: Several provisions focus on streamlining processes and improving inter-agency coordination (e.g., State Board of Health Professions, planning for school nutrition and transportation services, establishing standards for investigations).

Mechanism of Influence: Assigns responsibility for coordination, standard-setting, and planning to specific agencies or newly created boards, which is a direct mechanism for improving process efficiency.

Evidence:

  • 'Establishes a new board to coordinate among health regulatory boards and evaluate healthcare professions.'
  • 'Mandates the State Department of Education to assist school districts in planning and improving school nutrition programs.'

Ambiguity Notes: Although some provisions (such as standards for investigations) could be interpreted as compliance-focused, the broader context and stated goals relate to efficiency and effective operations.

House - 958 - State agencies procurement; bring forward code sections related to.

Legislation ID: 14917

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill No. 958 proposes amendments to several sections of the Mississippi Code related to the Department of Information Technology Services. The amendments focus on eliminating outdated exemptions, revising definitions, and clarifying the powers and duties of the department and state agencies in relation to information technology. Key changes include the removal of certain procurement requirements, the deletion of the requirement for public procurement review board involvement, and the establishment of clearer guidelines for technology acquisitions by state agencies.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • 15% of these funds must be allocated to public schools in Sunflower County.
  • Acquisition must be approved by the State Bond Commission or the Legislature.
  • Agencies can continue to operate under their existing exemptions until new needs are identified.
  • Allows MDITS to make decisions regarding information technology acquisitions without external approval.
  • Allows rejection of bids and re-advertisement if all bids are rejected.
  • All profits from prison industries must be accounted for separately from state appropriations.
  • Clarifies conditions under which IT acquisitions remain exempt.
  • Clarifies terminology related to the Central Data Processing Authority and information technology procurement.
  • Council must set policies for sharing remote sensing data.
  • Council oversees procurement standards for GIS data.
  • Defines key terms related to information technology and its governance.
  • Deletes outdated exemptions for specific state departments.
  • Deletes specific procurement requirements for telecommunications.
  • Eliminates the public procurement review boards involvement in IT decisions.
  • Establishes the authoritys responsibility for efficient acquisition and utilization of information technology.
  • Funds derived from leasing penitentiary lands must be deposited into the Prison Agricultural Enterprises Fund.
  • Mandates adoption of rules for competitive procurement.
  • Mandates the establishment of policies for data procurement by state and local entities.
  • MDITS can make staffing decisions independently.
  • MDITS must adopt rules and regulations governing the acquisition process to ensure maximum competition.
  • MDITS must develop plans for the efficient acquisition of information technology.
  • MDITS must promote cohesive planning and cooperation among state agencies regarding information technology.
  • Must collect, process, store, and retrieve exempt information.
  • Must control access authorizations and security measures for automated systems.
  • Must handle information whose disclosure would significantly intrude into public body business.
  • Removes previous exemptions for certain departments regarding IT acquisitions.
  • Removes specific provisions regarding equipment support contracts.
  • Removes State Personnel Boards involvement in MDITS staffing.
  • Requires 15% of revenues from leasing penitentiary lands to be allocated to public schools in Sunflower County.
  • Requires advertisement in local newspapers for at least two weeks before the bidding date.
  • Requires advertisement of land for rent in specified publications for at least two weeks.
  • Requires a minimum notice period of seven days before filing a petition for a protective order.
  • Requires approval from the Public Procurement Review Board before entering contracts.
  • Requires demonstration of economic advantage to the Department of Human Services before entering contracts.
  • Requires legislative or State Bond Commission approval for property acquisition.
  • Requires notice for protective orders to be posted on the Mississippi procurement portal for at least seven days before filing.
  • Requires procurement contracts to disclose commodities, unit prices, overall price, and contract terms.
  • Requires state agencies to cooperate with MDITS for efficient IT services.
  • Requires submission of two or more sealed bids.
  • Requires the authority to develop and implement efficient IT acquisition plans.
  • Requires the integration of seven core data layers for the Digital Earth Model.
  • Requires two or more sealed bids for land leases.
  • Updates definitions related to information technology and state agencies.
  • Violators may be barred from procurement for up to five years.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-17 Approved by Governor
2025-04-07 (S) Enrolled Bill Signed
2025-04-07 (H) Enrolled Bill Signed
2025-04-02 (H) Motion to Reconsider Tabled
2025-04-01 (S) Conference Report Adopted
2025-04-01 (H) Conference Report Adopted
2025-04-01 (H) Motion to Reconsider Entered (Zuber, Johnson)
2025-03-31 (S) Conference Report Filed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill specifically aims to clarify and streamline the IT procurement and management process for state agencies, removing unnecessary procedural steps and external board involvement, which are classic examples of efforts to improve government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By eliminating redundant oversight and outdated exemptions, the bill reduces bureaucratic overhead, expedites decision-making, and enables more direct and efficient management of IT resources. The explicit mention of 'efficient acquisition and utilization of information technology' directly aligns with the goal of making government operations more effective and less costly.

Evidence:

  • Eliminates the public procurement review board's involvement in IT decisions.
  • Removes State Personnel Board's involvement in MDITS staffing.
  • Establishes the authority's responsibility for efficient acquisition and utilization of information technology.

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill does not create a new body or mandate a study, it restructures existing processes and clarifies responsibilities to promote efficiency. The focus is clearly on procedural and structural streamlining within a key government function (IT).

Senate - 2272 - Government Efficiency; create task force to provide recommendations on.

Legislation ID: 15890

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill No. 2272 establishes the Mississippi Health and Welfare Efficiency Task Force tasked with examining the efficiency of state agencies, streamlining government services, and eliminating duplicative requirements that hinder access to government services for residents. The task force will provide recommendations to the Legislature for improving state government efficiency and is composed of various state agency representatives, legislators, and the Governor.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must provide facilities and data as requested by the task force.
  • Eliminate duplicative requirements that hinder service delivery.
  • Evaluate efficiency of represented state agencies.
  • Final report due by October 1, 2025, requiring majority approval.
  • First meeting to be called by the State Health Officer, who will also chair the task force.
  • Includes heads of specific state agencies and appointed senators and representatives.
  • Includes the Executive Directors of key state departments and appointed senators and representatives.
  • Includes the Executive Directors of various state departments and appointees from the legislature.
  • Meetings can be held online if in-person meetings are not feasible.
  • Must report findings to the Legislature by October 1, 2025.
  • Review and suggest streamlining of current laws and regulations.
  • State agencies must provide necessary data and resources to the task force.
  • Task force members include agency heads and legislative representatives.
  • Task force must develop recommendations for the legislature to improve efficiency.
  • Task force must develop recommendations to streamline services and eliminate duplicative requirements.
  • Task force must elect a vice chairman and other officers.
  • Task force must evaluate the efficiency of represented state agencies.
  • Task force must meet within 45 days of the acts effective date.
  • Task force must report findings and recommendations by October 1, 2025.
  • Task force to develop recommendations for legislative changes to improve efficiency.
  • Task force to meet within 45 days of enactment.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-04 (H) Died In Committee
2025-02-10 (H) Referred To Accountability, Efficiency, Transparency
2025-02-07 (S) Transmitted To House
2025-02-06 (S) Passed
2025-01-29 (S) Title Suff Do Pass
2025-01-20 (S) Referred To Government Structure

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes a task force whose mission is to examine and improve the efficiency of state government operations, streamline services, and eliminate duplicative requirements.

Mechanism of Influence: By creating a formal body composed of key stakeholders, the bill empowers a group to systematically review existing processes, identify inefficiencies, and recommend legislative changes to enhance efficiency and reduce costs.

Evidence:

  • establishes the Mississippi Health and Welfare Efficiency Task Force tasked with examining the efficiency of state agencies, streamlining government services, and eliminating duplicative requirements
  • provide recommendations to the Legislature for improving state government efficiency

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 2275 - State Agency Reorganization Task Force; create.

Legislation ID: 15893

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill No. 2275 creates the State Agency Reorganization Task Force, which will conduct a comprehensive study of the executive branchs organization. The task force will include appointments from key state officials and will be required to adhere to open meeting laws. Its goal is to submit recommendations for reorganization by December 1, 2025, thereby enhancing governmental efficiency and reducing duplication of efforts within state agencies.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Act becomes effective upon passage and has a sunset clause.
  • Aims to eliminate duplication of efforts within state agencies.
  • Allows for the formation of advisory committees to support the task force.
  • Allows the task force to utilize advisory committees for expert assistance.
  • Conduct a comprehensive study and issue a report with recommendations.
  • Creates a State Task Force with specific membership criteria.
  • Final report and recommendations must be submitted by a specified date.
  • Mandates the task force to propose a structure for state agencies that enhances economic and organizational efficiency.
  • Members can be compensated for attendance and travel expenses.
  • Members can receive per diem for meetings and travel expenses.
  • Must address how agencies will maintain functions post-transfer.
  • No per diem payments after December 31, 2025.
  • Plan must include proposed organization structure, budget, and recommendations for legislative changes.
  • Recommendations must include transfer mechanisms for any proposed agency transfers.
  • Recommendations must specify transfer mechanisms for agencies.
  • Requires a systematic study of state agencies for improved efficiency.
  • Requires a systematic study of the executive branchs organization.
  • Requires the development of a plan by specified agencies to streamline administration services.
  • Task force activities must comply with open meeting laws and public records act.
  • Task force may employ research staff as deemed necessary.
  • Task force may hire research staff as necessary.
  • Task force must comply with open meeting laws and public records act.
  • Task Force must hold its first meeting by January 31, 2026, and submit a report by October 1, 2026.
  • Task force must submit a report and recommendations by December 1, 2025.
  • Task force to be composed of specified appointees from state leadership.
  • Task force to conduct a comprehensive study of state agency organization.
  • Task force to include ten appointees by the Governor and various legislative leaders.
  • The act is effective upon passage and will be repealed after December 31, 2025.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-04 (H) Died In Committee
2025-02-18 (H) Referred To State Affairs;Accountability, Efficiency, Transparency
2025-02-17 (S) Transmitted To House
2025-02-13 (S) Committee Substitute Adopted
2025-02-13 (S) Passed As Amended
2025-02-13 (S) Amended
2025-02-03 (S) Title Suff Do Pass Comm Sub
2025-01-20 (S) Referred To Government Structure

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly creates a task force whose mission is to study and recommend changes to state agency organization with the stated goals of promoting efficiency and eliminating duplication.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing a formal body to conduct a systematic review and requiring a final report with recommendations and proposed legislation, the bill directly creates a structural mechanism for government efficiency improvements.

Evidence:

  • conduct a comprehensive study of the executive branchs organization
  • enhancing governmental efficiency and reducing duplication of efforts within state agencies
  • create a structured approach to studying the organization of executive branch state agencies to promote efficiency and effective administration
  • submit a final report with recommendations and necessary legislation

Ambiguity Notes: The language is clear in its intent to promote efficiency and reduce duplication. The scope is broad but explicitly tied to the stated goals.

Senate - 2377 - Public Procurement Review Board; expand the contract and emergency contract reviewing authority of.

Legislation ID: 15995

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill No. 2377 proposes amendments to Section 27-104-7 of the Mississippi Code of 1972, which governs the Public Procurement Review Board. The bill seeks to expand the boards authority in reviewing contracts, particularly regarding purchasing regulations, contract approvals for state facilities, leasing agreements, and set-aside purchases from minority businesses. It also outlines the qualifications for board members and establishes procedures for adopting regulations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies can use preapproved lists for contracting without bidding.
  • Agencies must justify sole source claims and demonstrate efforts to seek competitive pricing.
  • Agencies must submit procurements to competitive processes unless exempted.
  • Agency heads may enter contracts without prior approval under specific circumstances.
  • Allows rejection of any procurement proposals.
  • Allows the Board to reject contracts that do not meet specified compliance and financial criteria.
  • Annual reporting on contracts must be submitted to the Legislature.
  • Annual report must collect information from state agencies on contract issuance.
  • A preapproved list of service providers can be created by the board.
  • At least 5% of anticipated annual expenditures must be set aside for minority businesses.
  • Bids from minority businesses must be considered first unless they exceed a certain threshold.
  • Board can issue reasons for contract rejections.
  • Certain contracts are exempt from Board approval, including those for specific state agencies.
  • Certain contracts are exempt from board oversight.
  • Contracts must be financially viable and compliant with laws.
  • Contracts must comply with IRS regulations regarding independent contractors.
  • Contracts must demonstrate clear deliverables and compliance with state laws.
  • Contracts must not present financial risks or conflicts of interest.
  • Contracts must still comply with procurement regulations.
  • Contracts over $75,000 require Board approval.
  • Develops mandatory standards for public bidding and contractor accountability.
  • Documentation must include market analysis and justification for the vendor and price.
  • Emergency contracts must be justified and reviewed retroactively.
  • Emergency contracts must document the nature of the emergency.
  • Emergency contracts must document the nature of the emergency and justification for expedited procurement.
  • Exemptions apply to specified entities regarding procurement regulations.
  • Individuals or companies receiving grants or contracts cannot be appointed to the board.
  • Individuals with financial interests in contracts subject to the boards approval cannot be appointed.
  • Justifications for pricing and vendor selection must be documented.
  • Leases must not exceed eighteen months in duration.
  • Leasing agreements require detailed information to be published on the Department of Finance and Administrations website.
  • Mandates an annual report to the legislature on contract issuance.
  • Mandates corrective actions for compliance with procurement rules.
  • Mandates the Department of Finance and Administration to conduct solicitations for specified departments above the threshold.
  • Members must have at least five years of management experience in relevant fields.
  • Members must not have conflicts of interest with state contracts.
  • Must demonstrate reasonable cost considerations.
  • No member can be an employee of the state while serving on the board.
  • Prohibits coercion by board members in procurement processes.
  • Requires approval for contracts involving expenditures exceeding $75,000.
  • Requires a written determination for sole source contracts.
  • Requires competitive procurement for contracts unless exempted.
  • Requires evidence of independent contractor status.
  • Requires justification for sole source contracts and public notification of proposed contracts.
  • Requires public posting for proposed sole source contracts for 14 days.
  • Requires submission of proposed changes to specific legislative committees at least 15 days before a vote.
  • Requires the Board to set aside funds for minority businesses and comply with bid requirements.
  • Requires the Public Procurement Review Board to document reasons for contract rejection.
  • Rules must provide for continuous internal audits of agency activities.
  • Set-aside purchases must comply with all bid requirements.
  • Standardized criteria for reviewing contracts must be established.
  • States that only compliant contracts for personnel services are authorized.
  • The Board consists of members appointed by the Governor and Lieutenant Governor, with specific qualifications regarding management experience.
  • The Board is required to adopt regulations to promote minority business procurement.
  • The board may reject any or all procurements.
  • The board must adopt regulations regarding the approval of contracts for state buildings and facilities.
  • The Board must approve all purchasing regulations and contracts exceeding $75,000.
  • They must undergo retroactive review within 30 days.
  • Written determination for sole source contracts must be included in procurement files.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-04 (H) DR - TSDPAA: SA To AC
2025-03-04 (H) Died In Committee
2025-02-17 (H) Referred To State Affairs;Accountability, Efficiency, Transparency
2025-02-14 (S) Transmitted To House
2025-02-13 (S) Passed
2025-02-13 (S) Committee Substitute Adopted
2025-01-30 (S) Title Suff Do Pass Comm Sub
2025-01-20 (S) Referred To Accountability, Efficiency, Transparency

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly empowers and restructures a state oversight entity (the Public Procurement Review Board) with the mission to improve the accountability, transparency, and efficiency of government procurement and contracting processes.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring annual reporting, mandating standards for procurement, authorizing internal audits, and establishing procedures for reviewing and justifying contracts (including sole source and emergency contracts), the bill creates structural and procedural mechanisms designed to promote government efficiency and reduce waste.

Evidence:

  • Mandates an annual report to the legislature on contract issuance.
  • The Board has the authority to reject contracts based on financial viability, compliance, conflicts of interest, and other specified criteria.
  • The Public Procurement Review Board must provide clear reasons for rejecting any contract, including violations of policy and suggested corrective actions.
  • The board is empowered to approve purchasing regulations, adopt regulations for construction contracts, and govern leasing agreements by state agencies.
  • Rules must provide for continuous internal audits of agency activities.
  • The Board must develop standards for public bidding and procurement processes, ensuring accountability and transparency.

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill does not use the phrase 'government efficiency' verbatim, the entire structure and intent of the provisions—oversight, reporting, process standardization, and audit requirements—are classic mechanisms for increasing efficiency and effectiveness in government operations.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

Missouri

Index of Bills

House - 1083 - 1447H.02I - Creates a new joint committee on government efficiency

Legislation ID: 106722

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill No. 1083 proposes the creation of a Joint Committee on Government Efficiency, composed of members from both the Senate and House of Representatives. This committee is tasked with reviewing state regulations, budgets, and social services to identify inefficiencies, recommend cost reductions, and ensure effective use of state resources. The committee will also be responsible for submitting reports on its findings and recommendations, with certain recommendations automatically taking effect unless disapproved by the General Assembly or the Governor.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Analyze agency budgets for potential cost reductions.
  • Conduct a review of the social services system and identify gaps.
  • Recommendations regarding job eliminations or real property dispositions shall automatically take effect unless disapproved.
  • Report findings on budgetary matters by December first each year.
  • Review existing state regulations and recommend changes.
  • Savings from recommendations must be deposited in the Government Efficiency Fund.
  • Submit a full report of activities to the General Assembly by September first of even-numbered years.
  • The committee is to be composed of a specified number of members from both the Senate and House of Representatives.
  • The committee must have a quorum for decision-making.
  • The fund is to be used solely for purposes specified in the bill.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-29 Read Second Time (H)
2025-01-28 Introduced and Read First Time (H)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: This bill directly establishes a legislative entity tasked with improving government efficiency through the identification of inefficiencies, cost-saving recommendations, and process improvements.

Mechanism of Influence: By creating a joint committee with the authority to review regulations, budgets, and social services, and to submit actionable recommendations (some of which take effect automatically), the bill sets up a structural mechanism to drive efficiency and cost savings in government operations.

Evidence:

  • proposes the creation of a Joint Committee on Government Efficiency
  • tasked with reviewing state regulations, budgets, and social services to identify inefficiencies, recommend cost reductions, and ensure effective use of state resources
  • recommendations automatically taking effect unless disapproved

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill requires regular reporting on findings and recommendations related to government efficiency, which aligns with mandates for studies or evaluations aimed at improving effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: Mandated reports and findings provide transparency and accountability, and inform legislative and executive decision-making regarding efficiency initiatives.

Evidence:

  • The committee must compile reports of its activities and findings, including recommendations for legislative action and budgetary adjustments.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 3

Why Relevant: The establishment of a Government Efficiency Fund to collect and utilize savings from efficiency recommendations is a structural mechanism to incentivize and track cost reductions.

Mechanism of Influence: This fund ensures that identified savings are captured and used specifically for efficiency purposes, reinforcing the bill's focus on government effectiveness.

Evidence:

  • establishes a Government Efficiency Fund to collect cost savings from the committees recommendations and outlines its use.

Ambiguity Notes: None

House - 869 - 2090H.01I - Requires an audit of all state departments every four years

Legislation ID: 106313

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends chapter 34 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri by adding a new section that mandates performance audits for economy and efficiency to be conducted at least once every four years on various state departments and offices. The bill outlines the process for selecting independent auditors, the requirement for entities to publish audit results, and the consequences for non-compliance with audit participation.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Entities must post audit results on their websites within thirty days of receiving them.
  • Entities must retain their own legal counsel for such suits.
  • Entities that do not participate in audits are subject to suit for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief.
  • Requires performance audits to be conducted at least every four years.
  • Results of audits must be submitted to the general assembly.
  • The office of administration must select an independent auditor.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-11 Public Hearing Completed (H)
2025-01-22 Referred: Government Efficiency(H)
2025-01-15 Read Second Time (H)
2025-01-14 Introduced and Read First Time (H)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a recurring mechanism (performance audits) designed to evaluate and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating independent performance audits focused on economy and efficiency, the bill creates a procedural tool to identify cost-saving opportunities, reduce waste, and ensure government entities operate effectively. The required public reporting and legislative submission of results further promote accountability and transparency.

Evidence:

  • mandates performance audits for economy and efficiency to be conducted at least once every four years on various state departments and offices
  • entities must post audit results on their websites within thirty days of receiving them
  • results of audits must be submitted to the general assembly

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 19 - Modifies Senate Rules 25 and 28 regarding standing committees of the Senate

Legislation ID: 214399

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This resolution proposes changes to Senate Rules 25 and 28, specifically altering the membership numbers of several standing committees, renaming some committees, and clarifying the duties of each committee. The amendments aim to improve the efficiency and functionality of the Senates operations by adjusting committee sizes and responsibilities to better reflect current legislative needs.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Committee on Administration to control financial obligations and business affairs of the Senate.
  • Committee on Agriculture to oversee matters related to agriculture and natural resources.
  • Committee on Appropriations to handle all matters related to state appropriations and public funds.
  • Committee on Commerce to focus on consumer protection and environmental issues.
  • Committee on Fiscal Oversight to review bills with significant financial implications.
  • Committee on Veterans and Military Affairs to oversee issues related to veterans.
  • Increases the Committee on Fiscal Oversight from 8 to 9 members.
  • Increases the Committee on Local Government, Elections, and Pensions from 7 to 8 members.
  • Reduces the Committee on Agriculture, Food Production and Outdoor Resources from 9 to 7 members.
  • Reduces the Committee on Appropriations from 14 to 13 members.
  • Reduces the Committee on Commerce, Consumer Protection, Energy and the Environment from 11 to 9 members.
  • Reduces the Committee on Education from 9 to 7 members.
  • Renames the Committee on Governmental Accountability to Committee on Government Efficiency.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-15 S adopted
2025-01-14 S offered

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The resolution explicitly aims to improve the efficiency and functionality of Senate operations by realigning committee structures and responsibilities. Renaming a committee to 'Government Efficiency' and clarifying duties directly aligns with efforts to promote government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By restructuring committees, adjusting their sizes, and clarifying their mandates, the resolution seeks to streamline legislative workflows, reduce overlap, and focus committee efforts. The renaming to 'Government Efficiency' signals a mission focused on efficiency improvements.

Evidence:

  • 'The amendments aim to improve the efficiency and functionality of the Senate's operations by adjusting committee sizes and responsibilities to better reflect current legislative needs.'
  • 'Renames the Committee on Governmental Accountability to Committee on Government Efficiency.'

Ambiguity Notes: While the resolution claims to improve efficiency, it does not establish new bodies or mandate specific studies, audits, or process changes. The main mechanism is organizational restructuring rather than the creation of new efficiency initiatives.

Senate - 757 - Repeals expired, terminated, sunset, and obsolete sections, and portions of sections, of law

Legislation ID: 214248

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill establishes a Palliative Care Consumer and Professional Information and Education Program within the Department of Health and Senior Services. It mandates the creation of a council to advise on palliative care initiatives, requiring regular meetings, annual reporting on care availability, and barriers to access. The bill also outlines the responsibilities of the council and the implementation of educational resources for healthcare providers and the public.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Annual report must include an assessment of palliative care access for early-stage patients.
  • Commission to include judicial and executive members, with specific roles defined.
  • Committee to include representatives from various departments and agencies.
  • Council members must include various professionals appointed by the governor with senate approval.
  • Council members serve a three-year term and meet biannually.
  • Credit amount cannot exceed the taxpayers state income tax liability.
  • Credits cannot be refundable but can be carried forward for four subsequent years.
  • Department to publish resources on palliative care on its website.
  • Eligible donations must be made to recognized innovation campuses.
  • Hospitals are encouraged to provide palliative care information on their websites.
  • Housing must be affordable for individuals earning 115% or less of the median income.
  • Must provide a statement of the eligible donation received, including donor information and donation amount.
  • Must submit a valid application to the department.
  • Payment equal to the credit value must be made by the innovation campus.
  • Recommendations must be reported to the governor and general assembly by July 1, 2016.
  • Report of findings and recommendations due by December 31, 2016.
  • Task force to include members from the legislature and relevant departments, appointed by the governor.
  • Task force to incorporate evidence-based practices and report recommendations to the general assembly by January 1, 2019.
  • Taxpayers must be subject to state income tax or other specified taxes in Missouri.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-02 SCS Voted Do Pass S Government Efficiency Committee (2955S.02C)
2025-03-31 Hearing Conducted S Government Efficiency Committee
2025-03-27 Second Read and Referred S Government Efficiency Committee
2025-02-25 S First Read

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes several structural entities (councils, committees, task forces, commissions) with mandates to study, report, and make recommendations on specific government services and programs. Some provisions require reports on program effectiveness, barriers, and sustainability, and include recommendations to the legislature and governor.

Mechanism of Influence: By creating advisory and oversight bodies, mandating reports, and requiring evaluations of program effectiveness, the bill introduces procedural mechanisms that can potentially improve government operations in the targeted areas (e.g., healthcare, corrections, child welfare). These mechanisms are designed to provide data, identify inefficiencies, and recommend improvements, which aligns with government efficiency goals.

Evidence:

  • 'Mandates the council to submit an annual report assessing palliative care availability and barriers in Missouri.'
  • 'Establishes a committee to assess the sustainability of the Money Follows the Person demonstration program.'
  • 'Creates a task force to study and recommend strategies for preventing infant abuse and neglect.'
  • 'Establishes a commission to oversee sentencing and corrections in Missouri.'

Ambiguity Notes: While many of the established bodies are focused on improving specific services (palliative care, trauma-informed care, etc.), only some explicitly mention evaluating government performance or recommending improvements. The overall purpose is more about service improvement than broad government efficiency, but the reporting and advisory components do touch on efficiency within their domains.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

Montana

Index of Bills

HOUSE - 692 - Generally revise the SMART Act

Legislation ID: 170771

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 692 amends Section 2-12-104 of the Montana Code Annotated (MCA) to mandate that each state department produces an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and subsequently every two years. The plans must include descriptions of departmental functions, program-level initiatives, and specific performance measures to track progress and outcomes, which must be accessible to the public on departmental websites.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Annual plans must be posted on departmental websites.
  • Annual plans must be published by September 1 each year, starting from 2023.
  • Annual plans must include a description of departmental functions and priorities.
  • Annual plans must include a description of departmental functions and priorities, program-level initiatives, and specific measurable performance measures.
  • Annual plans must include a description of the departments functions and priorities.
  • Annual plans must include descriptions of departmental functions and priorities, program-level initiatives, and measurable performance metrics.
  • Annual plans must include descriptions of departmental functions and priorities, program-level initiatives, and specific performance measures.
  • Annual plans must include descriptions of department functions and priorities, program initiatives, and measurable performance metrics.
  • Annual plans must include descriptions of department functions and priorities, program-level initiatives, and measurable performance outcomes.
  • Departments must produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and every two years thereafter.
  • Departments must produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and subsequently every two years.
  • Departments must produce annual plans by September 1, 2023, and subsequently every two years.
  • Departments must publish subsequent annual plans every two years.
  • Designed to provide meaningful information to policymakers and the public.
  • Each annual plan must include a description of departmental functions and priorities, program-level initiatives, and specific measurable performance measures.
  • Each department must post its annual plan on its website.
  • Each department must produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023.
  • Each department must produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and every two years thereafter.
  • Each department must produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and subsequently every two years.
  • Each department must produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and then every two years thereafter.
  • Each department must produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and thereafter every two years.
  • Each department must submit an annual plan by September 1, 2023.
  • Each program must have initiatives that state expected benefits and outcomes.
  • It must include program-level initiatives reflecting expected benefits and outcomes.
  • Mandates inclusion of program-level initiatives reflecting expected benefits and outcomes for the public.
  • Mandates inclusion of program-level initiatives that reflect expected benefits and outcomes for the public.
  • Mandates specific and measurable performance metrics for each initiative.
  • Mandates that performance measures be tracked ongoing, assess outcomes and outputs, be quantitative when possible, and provide meaningful information to policymakers and the public.
  • Mandates that the annual plan includes specific and measurable performance measures for each initiative.
  • Measures must assess preferred outcomes and outputs.
  • Measures must provide meaningful information to policymakers and the public.
  • Measures should assess preferred outcomes and outputs.
  • Measures should be quantitative when feasible.
  • Measures should be quantitative when possible.
  • Measures should provide meaningful information to policymakers and the public.
  • Measures should provide useful information to policymakers and the public.
  • Must assess preferred outcomes and outputs of the departments initiatives.
  • Must provide useful information to policymakers and the public.
  • Performance measures must assess preferred outcomes and outputs.
  • Performance measures must be included that are quantitative and meaningful for policymakers and the public.
  • Performance measures must be included, which should be specific, measurable, and trackable.
  • Performance measures must be specific, measurable, and trackable on an ongoing basis.
  • Performance measures must be specific, measurable, and trackable on an ongoing basis, providing meaningful information to policymakers and the public.
  • Performance measures must be tracked, assessed, and designed to provide useful information.
  • Performance measures must be tracked, assess outcomes, and provide meaningful information.
  • Performance measures must be tracked continuously.
  • Performance measures must be tracked continuously and be quantitative when possible.
  • Performance measures must be tracked continuously and provide meaningful information.
  • Performance measures must be tracked continuously and provide meaningful information to policymakers and the public.
  • Performance measures must be tracked continuously, assess preferred outcomes and outputs, and be quantitative when possible.
  • Performance measures must be tracked on an ongoing basis.
  • Performance measures must be tracked ongoing, assess outcomes and outputs, be quantitative when possible, and provide useful information to policymakers and the public.
  • Performance measures must provide meaningful information to the public.
  • Performance measures should be quantitative when possible.
  • Performance measures should be quantitative where possible.
  • Plans must detail program-level initiatives and measurable performance metrics.
  • Plans must detail program-level initiatives with expected benefits and outcomes.
  • Plans must detail specific initiatives for each program and their expected outcomes.
  • Plans must include a description of departmental functions and initiatives.
  • Plans must include a description of departmental functions and priorities.
  • Plans must include specific and measurable performance measures.
  • Plans must include specific and measurable performance measures for initiatives.
  • Plans must include specific, measurable performance measures for each initiative.
  • Plans must outline program-level initiatives with expected benefits and outcomes.
  • Quantitative measures are preferred when possible.
  • Requires departments to post their annual plans on their websites.
  • Requires departments to produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and every two years thereafter.
  • Requires departments to produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and subsequently every two years.
  • Requires each department to post their annual plan on their website.
  • Requires each department to produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and every two years thereafter.
  • Requires each department to produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and subsequently every two years.
  • Requires each department to produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and subsequently every two years thereafter.
  • Requires each department to produce an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and then every two years.
  • Requires each department to submit an annual plan by September 1, 2023, and every two years thereafter.
  • Requires inclusion of a description of department functions and priorities.
  • Requires inclusion of a description of department functions and priorities in the annual plan.
  • Requires measurable performance measures for each initiative.
  • Requires specific and measurable performance measures for each initiative.
  • Requires specific initiatives for each program that reflect expected benefits and outcomes.
  • Requires specific, measurable performance measures for initiatives that are tracked continuously.
  • Requires the annual plan to be posted on the departments website.
  • Requires the annual plan to be published on the departments website.
  • Requires the annual plan to include a description of departmental functions and priorities, program-level initiatives, and measurable performance outcomes.
  • Requires the inclusion of department functions, priorities, and initiatives in the annual plan.
  • Should be quantitative when possible.
  • Specific and measurable performance measures for each initiative must be included.
  • Specific and measurable performance measures must be included for each initiative.
  • Specific and measurable performance measures must be included in the plan.
  • Subsequent annual plans must be published every two years thereafter.
  • Subsequent plans must be published every two years.
  • The adopted annual plan must be posted on the departments website.
  • The annual plan must be accessible on the departments website.
  • The annual plan must be posted on the departments website.
  • The annual plan must describe the departments functions and priorities.
  • The annual plan must include a description of departmental functions and priorities.
  • The annual plan must include a description of departmental functions, priorities, and program-level initiatives with expected benefits and outcomes.
  • The annual plan must include a description of department functions, initiatives, and measurable performance metrics.
  • The annual plan must include a description of the departments functions and priorities.
  • The annual plan must include a description of the departments functions and priorities, initiatives for each program, and specific measurable performance measures.
  • The annual plan must include a description of the departments functions, priorities, and program-level initiatives.
  • The annual plan must include descriptions of department functions, priorities, and initiatives.
  • The plan must detail initiatives for each program and expected benefits and outcomes.
  • The plan must detail program-level initiatives and expected outcomes.
  • The plan must outline specific initiatives for each program, including expected benefits and outcomes.
  • The plan must specify measurable performance metrics for each initiative.
  • They must assess departments preferred outcomes and outputs.
  • They must assess preferred outcomes and outputs.
  • They must assess preferred outcomes and outputs of the department.
  • They must provide meaningful information to policymakers and the public.
  • They should be quantitative when possible.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-16 Chapter Number Assigned
2025-05-12 (H) Signed by Governor
2025-05-05 (H) Transmitted to Governor
2025-05-02 (S) Signed by President
2025-05-01 (H) Signed by Speaker
2025-04-28 (H) Returned from Enrolling
2025-04-24 (S) Scheduled for 3rd Reading
2025-04-24 (S) 3rd Reading Concurred

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes a structural mechanism (mandatory planning and reporting) designed to improve government efficiency and effectiveness by requiring departments to track and publicly report measurable outcomes and initiatives.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating regular planning, performance measurement, and public reporting, the bill seeks to increase transparency, facilitate accountability, and enable more informed oversight and decision-making, which are direct methods of promoting efficiency and responsiveness in government operations.

Evidence:

  • Plans must include specific and measurable performance measures.
  • Plans must outline program-level initiatives with expected benefits and outcomes.
  • Performance measures must be tracked on an ongoing basis.
  • The annual plan must be accessible on the department's website.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not explicitly state 'to promote efficiency,' but the requirement for performance measures, outcome tracking, and publication is a standard approach aimed at improving efficiency and effectiveness in government.

HOUSE - 834 - Create a government evidence and impact commission

Legislation ID: 170825

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

HB 834 establishes a commission tasked with developing a cohesive system for collecting and integrating data to inform policymakers about the effectiveness of state programs. It outlines the commissions membership, duties, and operational framework, including funding provisions and a timeline for meetings and activities.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • $75,000 appropriated for the commissions administration and costs.
  • $75,000 appropriated from the general fund for the commissions administration and costs.
  • $75,000 must be allocated for the commissions operational costs.
  • Act becomes effective immediately upon passage.
  • Act becomes effective upon passage and approval.
  • Act terminates on December 31, 2026.
  • Allocate $75,000 from the general fund for the commissions expenses.
  • Allocate funds for the commissions administration and operational costs for the specified biennium.
  • Allocates funds for the commissions administration and operational costs.
  • Analyze laws governing state operations for efficiency.
  • Analyze programs for potential efficiencies and improvements.
  • An appropriation of $75,000 from the general fund is allocated for the commissions administration and operational costs.
  • Appointed members are entitled to compensation and travel expenses.
  • Appointed members must be compensated for their service.
  • Appropriates $75,000 for the commissions operations for the biennium ending June 30, 2025.
  • Appropriates funding for the commissions operational costs.
  • Appropriates funds for the commissions administration and costs.
  • Appropriates funds specifically for the administration and costs of the commission.
  • Appropriation of $75,000 for the commissions costs.
  • Assess the structure of oversight for data access and prioritize impactful data for policymaking.
  • Commission consists of various appointed members including legislative leaders and agency directors.
  • Commission consists of voting members including legislative leaders and agency directors.
  • Commission must analyze data systems and provide recommendations for efficiency.
  • Commission must analyze laws for efficient government operation.
  • Commission must consist of designated legislative and executive members.
  • Commission must consist of specified voting and nonvoting members.
  • Commission must consist of specified voting and non-voting members including legislative leaders and agency directors.
  • Commission must consist of voting and nonvoting members from various legislative and executive branches.
  • Commission must create a system for evidence and impact analysis.
  • Commission must develop a system for evidence and impact analysis.
  • Commission must develop a system that identifies inefficient and redundant programs in state government.
  • Commission must meet quarterly starting June 1, 2025.
  • Commission must meet quarterly when the legislature is not in session.
  • Commission must prioritize impactful data for policy decisions.
  • Commission must receive and analyze specified reports.
  • Commission must review successful data implementations.
  • Commission to consist of specified voting and non-voting members, including legislative leaders and state agency directors.
  • Commission to consist of voting and nonvoting members from legislative and executive branches.
  • Commission to consist of voting and non-voting members, including legislative and executive officials.
  • Commission to include specific legislative and executive members, including designees.
  • Commission to include voting and nonvoting members from various legislative and executive roles.
  • Commission to meet quarterly starting June 1, 2025.
  • Commission to meet quarterly starting June 1, 2025, and encourage public participation.
  • Commission to meet quarterly starting June 1, 2025, when the legislature is not in session.
  • Commission to meet quarterly when the legislature is not in session.
  • Commission to receive reports on successful data systems and examples of programs for evidence analysis.
  • Commission to report on evidence and impact analyses conducted.
  • Commission will terminate on December 31, 2026.
  • Conduct impact analyses within specified timeframes.
  • Develop a data integration system for legislative and executive branches.
  • Develop a system for collecting and integrating targeted data.
  • Develop a system for evidence and impact analysis.
  • Develop a system for targeted data collection and integration.
  • Develop a system for targeted data collection and integration for legislative and executive use.
  • Develop a system to identify inefficient and redundant programs.
  • Establishes an immediate effective date.
  • Establishes an immediate effective date upon approval.
  • Evaluate laws for efficiency and transparency in government operations.
  • Funding allocated for the administration and costs of the commission.
  • Funding for the commissions administration and costs.
  • Funding is allocated for the biennium ending June 30, 2025.
  • Funding is provided for the biennium ending June 30, 2025, and into the following biennium.
  • Funds must be allocated for the commissions administration and operational costs.
  • Funds must be used for administration and costs of the commission.
  • Funds must be used for the administration and costs of the commission.
  • Funds to be used for the commissions administration and operational expenses.
  • Identify inefficient and redundant programs.
  • Identify inefficient and redundant programs in state government.
  • Identify inefficient and redundant programs within state government.
  • Immediate effect upon passage.
  • It must prioritize data that impacts policy decisions.
  • It must prioritize impactful data and evidence for policy decisions.
  • Mandates public comment at each meeting.
  • Mandates quarterly meetings starting June 1, 2025.
  • Mandates quarterly meetings starting June 1, 2025, when the legislature is not in session.
  • Members appointed to the commission must receive compensation and travel expenses.
  • Members must be compensated for attendance and travel expenses.
  • Members must be compensated for their attendance at meetings.
  • Members must be compensated for their service and travel expenses.
  • Must identify inefficient and redundant programs within state government.
  • Must identify inefficient or redundant programs.
  • Must identify inefficient or redundant programs in state government.
  • Must prioritize impactful data for policy decisions.
  • Must receive and analyze reports on data system implementations and potential efficiencies in state programs.
  • Must review laws governing state administration and make recommendations for efficiency.
  • Prioritize impactful data for decision-making.
  • Prioritize impactful data for policy decisions.
  • Produce reports with recommendations for program improvements.
  • Provide prioritization of impactful data for policy decisions.
  • Public comment must be reserved at each commission meeting.
  • Public comment must be reserved at each meeting.
  • Public comment periods must be included in each meeting.
  • Public comments must be encouraged at each commission meeting.
  • Public participation at commission meetings is encouraged.
  • Public participation is encouraged at commission meetings.
  • Public participation is encouraged at meetings.
  • Receive and analyze reports on data system implementations.
  • Receive and review reports on data implementations and program efficiencies.
  • Receive and review reports on data system implementations.
  • Receive and review reports on data system implementations and program analyses.
  • Receive reports on successful data implementations and examples of impactful data analysis.
  • Receive reports on successful data implementations and potential efficiencies.
  • Receive reports on successful data implementations and program analyses.
  • Receive reports on successful data systems and program efficiencies.
  • Recommendations for program improvements must be included in reports.
  • Requires a commission consisting of various appointed members from the legislature and state agencies.
  • Requires a diverse membership including legislative leaders, agency directors, and public representatives.
  • Requires public comment opportunities at each meeting.
  • Requires public comment time at each commission meeting.
  • Requires public participation at commission meetings.
  • Requires the commission to meet quarterly when the legislature is not in session.
  • Review existing data systems and their effectiveness.
  • Review existing laws to enhance government efficiency and transparency.
  • Review laws affecting government efficiency and transparency.
  • Review laws and oversight structures to enhance efficiency and transparency.
  • Review laws for efficient government operation.
  • Review laws for operational efficiency and transparency.
  • Review laws governing state government operations.
  • Review laws governing state operations for efficiency.
  • Sets a termination date for the act.
  • Sets a termination date for the commission.
  • Shall prioritize impactful data for policy decisions.
  • System must help identify inefficient programs.
  • System must identify inefficient and redundant programs.
  • System must identify inefficient and redundant state programs.
  • Termination of the act by December 31, 2026.
  • The act is effective upon passage and approval.
  • The act will terminate after the specified date.
  • The commission consists of various appointed voting and non-voting members including legislative leaders and agency directors.
  • The commission consists of voting and nonvoting members from various legislative and executive branches.
  • The commission is required to meet quarterly and allow for public comment at meetings.
  • The commission is required to meet quarterly and allow for public comment during meetings.
  • The commission is tasked with assessing the cost of providing efficient access to data.
  • The commission meets quarterly starting June 1, 2025, with public comment encouraged.
  • The commission must allow for public comment during its meetings.
  • The commission must analyze state laws to enhance government efficiency.
  • The commission must assess the cost of providing efficient access to data.
  • The commission must consist of both voting and non-voting members from various legislative and executive bodies.
  • The commission must consist of designated members from the legislature and state agencies.
  • The commission must consist of specified voting and non-voting members, including legislative leaders and state agency directors.
  • The commission must create a system that helps identify inefficient or redundant state programs.
  • The commission must create a system that identifies inefficient and redundant programs.
  • The commission must create a system to identify inefficient and redundant state programs.
  • The commission must evaluate successful data implementations and identify programs for potential efficiency gains.
  • The commission must have a specific membership structure including legislative leaders and agency directors.
  • The commission must have a specific number of voting and nonvoting members.
  • The commission must identify inefficient and redundant state programs.
  • The commission must include specific legislative and executive members as outlined.
  • The commission must include specific legislative and executive members as well as public representatives.
  • The commission must make recommendations based on its analyses.
  • The commission must meet quarterly starting June 1, 2025.
  • The commission must meet quarterly starting June 1, 2025, and allow public comments during meetings.
  • The commission must meet quarterly starting June 1, 2025, when the legislature is not in session.
  • The commission must prioritize data that impacts policy decisions.
  • The commission must produce reports with recommendations for program improvements.
  • The commission must provide a report with recommendations based on the evidence and impact analysis.
  • The commission must receive reports on data system implementations, potential efficiencies, and legislative oversight structures.
  • The commission must review laws governing state operations.
  • The commission must review successful data implementations and analyze programs for potential improvements.
  • The commission must review successful data implementations and analyze the efficiency of state programs.
  • The commission must review successful data system implementations and examples of impactful analyses.
  • The commission shall meet quarterly when the legislature is not in session.
  • The commissions reports should include recommendations for program improvements.
  • The commission will terminate on December 31, 2026.
  • The system must enable the identification of inefficient and redundant programs.
  • The system must help identify inefficient and redundant government programs.
  • The system must identify inefficient and redundant programs.
  • The system must identify inefficient and redundant state government programs.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-19 Chapter Number Assigned
2025-05-07 (H) Transmitted to Governor
2025-05-06 (S) Signed by President
2025-05-02 (H) Signed by Speaker
2025-04-29 (H) Returned from Enrolling
2025-04-28 (H) Sent to Enrolling
2025-04-25 (H) 3rd Reading Passed as Amended by Senate
2025-04-25 (H) Scheduled for 3rd Reading

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes a commission whose primary mission is to improve government efficiency by identifying inefficiencies and redundancies, enhancing oversight, and recommending improvements based on data analysis.

Mechanism of Influence: The commission is empowered to collect and analyze data on state programs, review legislative oversight structures, and report on opportunities for cost savings and improved efficiency. By identifying inefficiencies and redundancies, the commission can recommend structural or procedural changes to streamline government operations.

Evidence:

  • 'The commission must review and report on data systems, program efficiencies, and legislative oversight structures to enhance government operations.'
  • 'Must identify inefficient and redundant programs within state government.'
  • 'The commission is responsible for developing a system for targeted data collection to aid in analyzing state agency outcomes and resource utilization.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent to improve government efficiency, as it repeatedly references the identification of inefficiencies and redundant programs. The scope is tied to data-driven evaluation, which is a common mechanism for efficiency improvement.

Nebraska

Index of Bills

Senate - 152 - Interim study to examine the costs to persons and businesses in Nebraska associated with the adoption, amendment, or repeal of rules or regulations

Legislation ID: 159621

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This legislative resolution seeks to initiate an interim study by the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee to evaluate the costs associated with the adoption, amendment, or repeal of rules and regulations affecting persons and businesses in Nebraska. The study will utilize fiscal impact statements and other financial data to analyze the implications of selected regulatory changes made in the years 2023 and 2024.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Conduct an interim study on regulatory costs to businesses and individuals.
  • Prepare a report of findings and recommendations.
  • Review selected rules and regulations from 2023 and 2024.
  • Utilize fiscal impact statements and financial data for analysis.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-08-06 Notice of hearing for October 03, 2025
2025-05-19 Referred to Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee
2025-05-07 Referred to Executive Board
2025-05-07 Date of introduction

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The resolution explicitly establishes a formal study by a legislative committee to assess the financial impact of regulatory changes, with the intent to inform potential improvements in government efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring a systematic review and financial analysis of regulatory changes, the measure aims to uncover inefficiencies, unnecessary costs, or burdensome regulations. The resulting report and recommendations could lead to more efficient regulatory practices or reforms.

Evidence:

  • 'evaluate the costs associated with the adoption, amendment, or repeal of rules and regulations affecting persons and businesses in Nebraska'
  • 'analyze the implications of selected regulatory changes'
  • 'report its findings and recommendations to the Legislative Council or Legislature.'

Ambiguity Notes: While the resolution does not mandate specific efficiency reforms, the explicit purpose of the study is to evaluate regulatory costs, which is directly related to promoting government efficiency.

Senate - 190 - Provide duties for the Legislative Performance Audit Committee

Legislation ID: 121961

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This legislation updates the procedures and responsibilities of the Legislative Performance Audit Committee, ensuring that state agencies are audited on a regular five-year schedule and clarifying the steps for conducting performance audits, including notification processes and the development of audit plans.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Requires majority vote for any revisions to the scope statement or audit plan.
  • Requires majority vote from the committee to adopt, reject, or amend the scope statement.
  • Requires majority vote to adopt specific audit requests.
  • Requires the agency director to inform staff about the performance audit and ensure full cooperation.
  • Requires the audit plan to be approved by majority vote of the committee.
  • Requires the committee to audit each state agency or portion thereof on a rotating basis every five years.
  • Requires written notification to agency directors and the Governor before conducting an audit.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-03 Notice of hearing for March 04, 2025
2025-01-15 Referred to Executive Board
2025-01-13 Date of introduction

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill specifically establishes and clarifies procedural mechanisms for conducting regular performance audits of state agencies with the explicit purpose of evaluating and improving government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring all state agencies to be audited on a five-year schedule and setting out clear steps for audit planning and execution, the bill institutionalizes ongoing evaluation of government performance, which is directly aimed at identifying inefficiencies, redundancies, and areas for improvement.

Evidence:

  • 'ensuring that state agencies are audited on a regular five-year schedule'
  • 'clarifying the steps for conducting performance audits'
  • 'the committee is responsible for reviewing and approving a schedule to audit all state agencies every five years'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not explicitly state that the sole purpose of the audits is to promote efficiency; however, performance audits by definition are typically intended to improve efficiency and effectiveness. The committee's mission is presumed to include these goals, but the text provided does not quote explicit language to that effect.

Senate - 228 - Change provisions of the Legislative Performance Audit Act

Legislation ID: 122168

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Legislative Bill 228 seeks to amend various sections of the Legislative Performance Audit Act to redefine key terms, update obsolete provisions, and modify requirements for conducting performance audits on tax incentive programs. The bill also addresses the handling of documents that are exempt from public records requests, thereby enhancing the auditing process and accountability of government entities in Nebraska.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Audits must analyze program effectiveness and economic impact.
  • Committee must adopt or reject recommendations based on agency responses.
  • Committee must include adequate geographic representation.
  • Committee reconstituted at the beginning of each Legislature.
  • Conduct audits in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
  • Each tax incentive program must be reviewed at least once every five years.
  • Office must be granted access to agency records unless denied by law.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-06 Provisions/portions ofLB228amended intoLB298byAM1504
2025-06-02 Indefinitely postponed
2025-06-02 Motion to suspend rules to indefinitely postpone filed
2025-06-02 Motion to suspend rules to indefinitely postpone prevailed
2025-06-02 Motion to suspend rules to indefinitely postpone withdrawn
2025-05-30 Motion to suspend rules to indefinitely postpone filed
2025-03-20 Placed on General File
2025-02-03 Notice of hearing for March 04, 2025

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: This bill directly establishes and empowers the Legislative Performance Audit Committee, a body tasked with conducting performance audits of government agencies and tax incentive programs to promote efficiency and accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating regular performance audits, requiring access to agency records, and structuring the committee's review process, the bill creates procedural mechanisms to identify inefficiencies, evaluate program effectiveness, and recommend improvements or cost savings.

Evidence:

  • 'Ensures the office conducting audits has access to all necessary information and records from agencies...'
  • 'Describes the process by which the Legislative Performance Audit Committee reviews audit reports and recommendations...'
  • 'Establishes the Legislative Performance Audit Committee, detailing its composition, responsibilities...'
  • 'Mandates that performance audits are conducted according to government auditing standards...'
  • 'Audits must analyze program effectiveness and economic impact.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its intent to improve government accountability and efficiency through structured audits and oversight. There is little ambiguity as the language specifically references performance audits and the purpose of evaluating effectiveness and economic impact.

Senate - 346 - Change qualifications of the State Capitol Administrator, provide for termination of boards, commissions, committees, councils, funds, panels, task forces, the Conservation Corporation Act, and the Nebraska Potato Development Act, and change and eliminate funds and powers and duties of departments and agencies

Legislation ID: 121629

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

LB346 aims to streamline state governance by modifying the structure and responsibilities of numerous boards and commissions within Nebraska. It includes the termination of several advisory councils and boards, such as the Advisory Council for the Private Postsecondary Career School Act and the Nebraska Potato Development Committee, which will cease operations on July 1, 2026. The bill also proposes changes to the Board of Advanced Practice Registered Nurses, the Board of Alcohol and Drug Counseling, and various other entities, while repealing outdated statutes and establishing operative dates for these changes.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Board composition to include professional members and consumer representatives.
  • Board consists of appointed members and must elect a chairperson.
  • Board to consist of advanced practice registered nurses and other healthcare professionals.
  • Board to consist of advanced practice registered nurses, physicians, and public members.
  • Board to consist of a mix of appointed members from various sectors related to aquaculture.
  • Board to consist of appointed members from various sectors, including aquaculture.
  • Board to consist of professional and public members as specified.
  • Board to consist of state employees and appointed aquaculturists, with a chairperson elected from its members.
  • Board to consist of various licensed nursing professionals and physicians.
  • Board to include licensed counselors and public members.
  • Committee members must be appointed by the Governor with Legislative approval.
  • Committee members serve without pay but receive expenses for official business.
  • Committee members to be appointed by the Governor for two-year terms.
  • Committee must meet at least twice a year and more frequently during severe climate situations.
  • Committee to adopt rules for its conduct.
  • Committee to be composed of three shippers and four growers from the industry, chaired by the Director of Agriculture.
  • Committee to consist of three shippers, four growers, and one ex officio member from the University of Nebraska.
  • Committee to meet at least twice a year and more frequently during severe climate situations.
  • Committee to meet semiannually and advise on racial profiling prevention policies.
  • Department must determine the appropriate response to received reports.
  • Director of Agriculture serves as chairperson.
  • Meet at least twice a year.
  • Members serve without pay but can receive expenses.
  • Members to be reimbursed for expenses.
  • Terms for members are set at three years.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-02 Approved by Governor on May 30, 2025
2025-05-28 Cavanaugh, M.MO305withdrawn
2025-05-28 Presented to Governor on May 28, 2025
2025-05-28 Dispensing of reading at large approved
2025-05-28 President/Speaker signed
2025-05-28 Passed on Final Reading 49-0-0
2025-05-28 Cavanaugh, M.FA290withdrawn
2025-05-27 Cavanaugh, M.FA290filed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's main thrust is to streamline government by consolidating and eliminating various boards and commissions, which aligns directly with the goal of improving government efficiency and reducing unnecessary bureaucracy.

Mechanism of Influence: By terminating or merging multiple advisory councils and boards, the bill reduces administrative overhead, potential duplication, and operational costs, thereby promoting more efficient government operations.

Evidence:

  • 'LB346 aims to streamline state governance by modifying the structure and responsibilities of numerous boards and commissions within Nebraska.'
  • 'It includes the termination of several advisory councils and boards...'
  • 'repealing outdated statutes and establishing operative dates for these changes.'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill does not always explicitly state 'efficiency' as the goal in each section, the overall legislative intent and structural changes (such as terminating or consolidating entities) are classic mechanisms for improving efficiency and effectiveness in government.

Senate - 634 - Adopt the Legislative Sunset Review Act and eliminate the Legislatures Planning Committee

Legislation ID: 121616

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

LB634 introduces the Legislative Sunset Review Act, which aims to create a structured process for reviewing state boards, councils, committees, and other entities established by the Legislature. The bill outlines the formation of a Legislative Sunset Review Committee responsible for evaluating these entities every five years, assessing their performance, and making recommendations for their continuation or termination. Additionally, it repeals outdated statutes and sets an operative date for the act.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Committee includes chairpersons of the Executive Board and Appropriations Committee plus five additional members appointed for geographic representation.
  • Committee must assess public need for entities and their functions based on submitted information.
  • Committee to hold public hearings and present findings to the Speaker of the Legislature.
  • Entities must assist the committee in providing necessary information.
  • Entities must submit performance measures, compliance with laws, and recommendations for improvement before their scheduled review.
  • Initial reviews to begin in 2027, with a five-year review cycle for each entity.
  • Recommendations must be accompanied by proposed legislation in the next legislative session.
  • Reviews must include evaluations of costs, best practices, and potential alternatives for service delivery.
  • Unobligated funds lapse to the General Fund upon termination; properties and records must be transferred to the Department of Administrative Services.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-14 Executive Board priority bill
2025-02-03 Notice of hearing for March 06, 2025
2025-01-24 Referred to Executive Board
2025-01-22 Date of introduction

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's explicit purpose is to improve government efficiency by systematically reviewing the necessity, performance, and cost-effectiveness of state entities, with the goal of eliminating, consolidating, or restructuring those that are outdated, duplicative, or inefficient.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing a recurring, structured review process and empowering a legislative committee to recommend statutory changes, the bill creates a mechanism to reduce administrative burdens, uncover inefficiencies, and ensure government entities are only continued if they serve a demonstrated public need efficiently.

Evidence:

  • 'The bill outlines the formation of a Legislative Sunset Review Committee responsible for evaluating these entities every five years, assessing their performance, and making recommendations for their continuation or termination.'
  • 'Reviews must include evaluations of costs, best practices, and potential alternatives for service delivery.'
  • 'The Legislative Sunset Review Committee is tasked with making recommendations regarding the consolidation, transfer, or reorganization of programs within reviewable entities.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent and mechanisms, directly tying the reviews and recommendations to government efficiency and effectiveness. The exact criteria for 'public need' and 'effectiveness' may be subject to interpretation by the committee, but the overall purpose is unambiguous.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

Nevada

Index of Bills

Assembly - 33 - Creates the Nevada Office of the Inspector General. (BDR 18-435)

Legislation ID: 200805

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill proposes amendments to several sections of the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS), specifically focusing on the roles and responsibilities of state agencies in maintaining internal controls and reporting on financial accountability. It introduces the Inspector Generals role and outlines the reporting requirements for agencies regarding their internal accounting systems, as well as the annual accountability reports for school districts and other entities.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Heads of agencies must periodically review their internal accounting systems for compliance.
  • Reports must be available for legislative inspection.
  • Reports must be concise, understandable, and accessible to parents in appropriate languages.
  • Reports must be submitted to the Director by July 1 of each even-numbered year.
  • School districts must submit detailed reports on personnel and financials to the Superintendent of Public Instruction and the Inspector General by November 1 each year.
  • The financial report must be submitted to the State Treasurer and the Fiscal Analysis Division of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
  • The Lieutenant Governor, State Treasurer, and State Controller must appoint an Inspector General by December 1, 2025.
  • The State Board must prepare and disseminate an annual accountability report by January 15 each year.
  • The State Controller serves as the acting Inspector General until the initial appointment is made.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-12 (Pursuant to Joint Standing Rule No. 14.3.1, no further action allowed.)
2025-02-09 Notice of eligibility for exemption.
2025-02-04 Read first time. To committee.
2024-11-19 From printer.
2024-11-15 Prefiled. Referred to Committee on Government Affairs. To printer.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates a new Inspector General role specifically tasked with overseeing and investigating financial accountability within state agencies, which is a structural mechanism designed to improve government efficiency and effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: The Inspector General will have the authority to examine agency processes, uncover inefficiencies, and recommend improvements, directly targeting cost savings and improved performance.

Evidence:

  • Establishes the position of Inspector General to oversee and investigate financial accountability within state agencies

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill requires agencies to periodically review and report on their internal accounting and administrative controls to ensure compliance and efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: Mandated reviews and reports serve as procedural mechanisms to identify inefficiencies, duplications, or non-compliance, prompting corrective action.

Evidence:

  • Mandates each agency to review and report on their internal accounting and administrative controls to ensure compliance with established standards.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 3

Why Relevant: The annual accountability and financial reports for school districts and the State Permanent School Fund are intended to increase transparency and oversight, which are key components of government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: Requiring detailed, accessible, and periodic reports compels agencies and districts to monitor their operations and financials, potentially revealing areas for cost savings or process improvements.

Evidence:

  • Requires the State Board to prepare an annual report detailing accountability metrics for school districts
  • Requires the State Controller to prepare an annual financial report for the State Permanent School Fund

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 4

Why Relevant: The bill details reporting requirements for school districts regarding personnel, expenditures, and salaries, explicitly to ensure accountability in educational funding.

Mechanism of Influence: Detailed reporting can uncover inefficiencies, duplicative spending, or misallocation of resources, providing data for streamlining and improved responsiveness.

Evidence:

  • School districts must submit detailed reports on personnel and financials to the Superintendent of Public Instruction and the Inspector General

Ambiguity Notes: None

Assembly - 442 - Revises provisions relating to grants. (BDR 31-589)

Legislation ID: 201220

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 442 revises provisions related to grants by requiring state grant-making entities to process payments to private nonprofit corporations within 30 calendar days of receiving a proper invoice. The bill also imposes interest on late payments and allows for advances on grants to facilitate quicker execution of grant-funded activities. It defines key terms, outlines the responsibilities of state entities regarding invoice processing, and sets conditions for requesting advance payments.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Advances are limited to 25% of the annual grant amount if state-funded.
  • Advances are limited to 25% of the grant amount or the minimum needed for immediate cash requirements.
  • Allows advance payments to facilitate grant execution.
  • Annual compilation of payment delay notices must be submitted to the Office of Finance and the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
  • Annual reports on advances must be submitted to the Interim Finance Committee.
  • Authorizes coordination with state grant-making entities to identify best practices and compliance methods.
  • Defines a grant as a legal instrument of financial assistance not intended for direct state benefit.
  • Defines grant to include financial assistance for public purposes, excluding loans, subsidies, and direct cash assistance to individuals.
  • Director may adopt regulations to facilitate this coordination.
  • Empowers the Director to create regulations for the implementation of grant administration practices.
  • Entities must notify nonprofits of any defects in non-proper invoices within 14 days.
  • Entities must pay interest from their operating budget, not from grant funds.
  • Establishes the effective date for the bills provisions.
  • Excludes certain grants from the new requirements if executed before the effective date.
  • Interest accrues at an agreed-upon rate or the prime rate if no rate is specified.
  • Interest must be paid from the operating budget, not from grant funds.
  • Invoices must be marked with the date received.
  • Invoices must be marked with the date received and reviewed promptly.
  • Liability for interest accrues after 30 days if payment is not made.
  • Mandates annual reporting of such notices to the Office of Finance and the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
  • Notification of defects in invoices must occur within 14 days if they are not proper.
  • Office must identify existing policies and best practices for administering advanced payments.
  • Payments must be completed within 30 calendar days.
  • Policies must be published in the State Administrative Manual.
  • Private nonprofit corporations must submit an expenditure plan with advance requests.
  • Requests for advances must include an expenditure plan.
  • Requires payments to be made within 30 calendar days of receipt of a proper invoice.
  • Requires the State Plan to include administration methods for advanced payments of grants.
  • Requires written notice to be provided for payment delays beyond 30 days.
  • Requires written notice to be sent to the nonprofit corporation if payment is delayed beyond 30 days.
  • Specifies what constitutes a proper invoice for grant payments.
  • State entities must make advance payments to facilitate grant execution.
  • State Plan must outline methods for effective administration of grants and advanced payments.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-11 Chapter 474.
2025-06-10 Approved by the Governor.
2025-06-06 Enrolled and delivered to Governor.
2025-06-04 To Assembly. In Assembly. To enrollment.
2025-06-02 Read third time. Passed, as amended. Title approved, as amended. (Yeas: 20, Nays: None, Excused: 1.)
2025-06-01 Taken from General File. Placed on General File for next legislative day.
2025-05-31 Taken from General File. Placed on General File for next legislative day.
2025-05-30 From committee: Do pass. Placed on Second Reading File. Read second time.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly seeks to streamline and improve the efficiency of government operations related to grant administration, specifically by reducing payment processing times, imposing penalties for delays, and enabling advance payments to facilitate faster project execution.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring faster payment processing and penalizing delays, the bill incentivizes state agencies to improve their administrative procedures. The advance payment provisions and mandatory reporting introduce mechanisms for greater oversight, transparency, and responsiveness in grant management.

Evidence:

  • 'requiring state grant-making entities to process payments... within 30 calendar days of receiving a proper invoice.'
  • 'imposes interest on late payments'
  • 'allows for advances on grants to facilitate quicker execution of grant-funded activities'
  • 'requires the State Board of Examiners to establish policies for managing advances and reporting requirements.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is focused on the efficiency of grant payment processes rather than broader government operations. However, it explicitly states its intent to facilitate quicker execution of grant-funded activities by improving state administrative processes.

Assembly - 506 - Revises provisions relating to governmental administration. (BDR 18-934)

Legislation ID: 201335

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

The bill outlines the operational framework for state-sponsored programs aimed at employing offenders. It mandates that these programs must generate profits for the Department, specifies requirements for contracts with private employers, and establishes reporting obligations for the performance of these programs. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of vocational training and the conditions under which offenders may be employed or trained outside of correctional facilities.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must report findings on employee suggestions within 30 days.
  • Annual report on performance contracts due by February 1.
  • Approval needed from State Board of Examiners.
  • Biannual report on state purchasing contracts and veteran-owned business participation.
  • Board must evaluate and monitor adopted suggestions.
  • Bureau must submit reports on educational effectiveness and accountability.
  • Conduct studies as requested by the Legislature.
  • Detailed written analysis on the contracts impact on local industry.
  • Director must present a plan to generate profit in the subsequent year.
  • Director must report to the Joint Interim Standing Committee on the Judiciary after two consecutive years of loss.
  • Disclosure required for contracts with current/former employees.
  • Excludes specific fees and expenses from profit calculations.
  • Mandates that all workers receive prevailing wages based on their skill classification.
  • Must include status and savings information.
  • No right to employment or minimum wage for offenders.
  • Personal guarantee from private employers for contract amounts.
  • Programs must generate a profit each fiscal year.
  • Projects must be prioritized based on the time to commence, number of workers, energy consumption reduction effectiveness, estimated costs, and renewable energy capabilities.
  • Requires Board approval for leasing spaces and granting privileges to offenders.
  • Requires contractors to employ at least 50% of trained individuals on public works projects.
  • Requires contractors to provide health care benefits to employees and their dependents.
  • Requires periodic reporting to the Interim Finance Committee regarding project selection and completion dates.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-30 Approved by the Governor. Chapter 153.
2025-05-27 Enrolled and delivered to Governor.
2025-05-22 In Assembly. To enrollment.
2025-05-21 Read third time. Passed. Title approved. (Yeas: 17, Nays: 4.) To Assembly.
2025-05-19 From committee: Do pass. Placed on Second Reading File. Read second time.
2025-05-11 Notice of exemption.
2025-04-17 In Senate. Read first time. Referred to Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections. To committee.
2025-04-16 Read third time. Passed. Title approved. (Yeas: 42, Nays: None.) To Senate.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: This provision creates the Legislative Bureau of Educational Accountability to analyze and report on educational effectiveness and accountability, and to conduct studies as requested by the Legislature. Its explicit mission is to evaluate and improve government performance in education.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing a bureau dedicated to studying and reporting on educational accountability, the bill sets up a structural mechanism for ongoing evaluation and potential improvement of government operations in the education sector.

Evidence:

  • Creation of the Legislative Bureau of Educational Accountability
  • Bureau must submit reports on educational effectiveness and accountability.
  • Conduct studies as requested by the Legislature.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill outlines an employee suggestion process for state employees to submit ideas for improvements, requiring agencies to report on findings and the board to evaluate and monitor adopted suggestions. This is a formal mechanism to solicit and implement efficiency improvements.

Mechanism of Influence: This process institutionalizes a feedback loop for operational improvements, which can lead to cost savings and streamlined processes if suggestions are adopted.

Evidence:

  • Employee Suggestion Process
  • Agencies must report findings on employee suggestions within 30 days.
  • Board must evaluate and monitor adopted suggestions.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 3

Why Relevant: The bill requires local governments to report annually on the status and savings from performance contracts, which is a direct measure to evaluate government performance and cost savings.

Mechanism of Influence: Mandated annual reporting on performance contracts provides oversight and transparency, helping to ensure that such contracts achieve intended savings and efficiency gains.

Evidence:

  • Performance Contract Reporting
  • Annual report on performance contracts due by February 1.
  • Must include status and savings information.

Ambiguity Notes: None

New Jersey

Index of Bills

Assembly - 213 - Establishes New Jersey Delegation on Government Efficiency.

Legislation ID: 45420

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill creates a New Jersey Delegation on Government Efficiency (DOGE) under the Department of the Treasury to assess state government functions aimed at identifying cost-saving measures and improving operational efficiency. The DOGE will consist of a chairperson and up to 20 public members appointed by a selection committee, and it will report its findings and recommendations to the Governor and Legislature within 20 months of its first meeting.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Changes to compensation require approval from at least four members of the selection committee.
  • It must report findings and recommendations within 20 months of its first meeting.
  • Members must have relevant experience and disclose potential conflicts of interest.
  • Public members are appointed by a selection committee including state leaders.
  • Public members are appointed with approval from at least four selection committee members.
  • The DOGE consists of the State Auditor as chair and up to 20 public members.
  • The DOGE must meet publicly and is supported by the Department of the Treasury.
  • The selection committee may set an hourly or per diem rate for public members.
  • The selection committee must include the Governor, Senate President, Assembly Speaker, and both Minority Leaders.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-30 Introduced, Referred to Assembly State and Local Government Committee

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly creates a new entity (DOGE) with the specific mission to identify cost-saving measures and improve operational efficiency in state government.

Mechanism of Influence: DOGE is empowered to examine government functions, identify inefficiencies, and recommend improvements, directly targeting government efficiency and effectiveness.

Evidence:

  • assess state government functions aimed at identifying cost-saving measures and improving operational efficiency
  • DOGE is tasked with examining government functions to identify savings and efficiency improvements
  • report findings and recommendations within 20 months

Ambiguity Notes: None

Assembly - 5277 - Establishes public awareness campaign and call center for certain property tax relief programs; requires submission of annual report by Stay NJ Task Force.

Legislation ID: 44980

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill mandates the creation of a public awareness campaign and a call center to assist residents with property tax relief programs. It seeks to inform homeowners and tenants about various available programs, their eligibility, and the application process. Additionally, it requires the Stay NJ Task Force to provide annual reports on the administration of these programs, ensuring accountability and transparency in property tax relief efforts.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Continue to meet quarterly to assist in implementing property tax credit programs.
  • Establish a call center for assistance with property tax relief applications.
  • Establishes a public awareness campaign about property tax relief programs.
  • Informs residents about eligibility, application processes, and available resources for property tax relief programs.
  • Provide services in English and three other commonly spoken languages in the state.
  • Submit annual reports detailing applications processed, payments made, costs, and recommendations for improvements.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-10 Introduced, Referred to Assembly State and Local Government Committee

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes and empowers the Stay NJ Task Force to provide annual reports with recommendations for improvements, which is a procedural mechanism aimed at evaluating and potentially enhancing the administration of government programs.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring annual reporting and recommendations for improvement, the bill introduces a feedback loop that can identify inefficiencies, duplications, or administrative burdens in property tax relief programs, with the explicit goal of improving their administration.

Evidence:

  • Submit annual reports detailing applications processed, payments made, costs, and recommendations for improvements.
  • Annual Reporting by Stay NJ Task Force

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill requires the Task Force to recommend improvements, it does not explicitly state that government efficiency is the primary goal; the focus is on accountability and transparency in property tax relief. However, the reporting and recommendation requirement could lead to efficiency gains.

Assembly - 5308 - Requires Director of Division of Local Government Services in DCA to establish grant program to enhance local government efficiency; appropriates $1.5 million.

Legislation ID: 45011

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill requires the Director of the Division of Local Government Services to create a grant program for local government units to hire consultants for efficiency reviews. The program is designed to streamline operations and reduce costs, with a total appropriation of $1.5 million to support these efforts.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Consultants must hold relevant professional licenses.
  • Grants are capped at $150,000 for counties and $100,000 for municipalities.
  • Local governments must contribute 25% of the grant amount.
  • Local government units must submit an application detailing proposed plans for grant funding.
  • Reports must detail expenditures, services improved, and cost savings achieved.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-13 Introduced, Referred to Assembly State and Local Government Committee

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly targets government efficiency by funding external reviews specifically aimed at streamlining operations and reducing costs in local government units.

Mechanism of Influence: It empowers local governments to contract with professional consultants for efficiency reviews, with explicit requirements for reporting on cost savings and service improvements, thereby institutionalizing a process for identifying and implementing efficiency measures.

Evidence:

  • create a grant program for local government units to hire consultants for efficiency reviews
  • designed to streamline operations and reduce costs
  • Reports must detail expenditures, services improved, and cost savings achieved

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent and structure; the only ambiguity is in how 'efficiency reviews' are defined in practice, but the goal of improving efficiency is explicit.

Assembly - 5374 - Establishes "State Government Employee-Driven Efficiency Initiative."

Legislation ID: 45077

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This legislation creates an initiative managed by the Office of the State Comptroller that allows state employees to report perceived waste, fraud, or inefficiencies within state government operations. Upon validation of these reports, the Comptroller will work with relevant departments to devise corrective measures, with a financial incentive provided to employees who report valid claims based on the savings achieved.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Employees must report perceived waste, fraud, or inefficiency during their employment.
  • Incentive payment of 5% of savings, with a minimum of $500, for the first fiscal year or one-time savings.
  • The Comptroller must investigate these reports for validity.
  • The form must be accessible on department websites.
  • The form must include employee identification and a detailed explanation of the claim.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-27 Introduced, Referred to Assembly State and Local Government Committee

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to improve government efficiency by identifying and eliminating waste, fraud, and inefficiency through a structured reporting and corrective process.

Mechanism of Influence: It empowers the Office of the State Comptroller to investigate inefficiencies and mandates inter-departmental cooperation for corrective action. Financial incentives motivate employees to participate, directly tying the initiative to cost savings and efficiency.

Evidence:

  • allows state employees to report perceived waste, fraud, or inefficiencies within state government operations
  • the Comptroller will work with relevant departments to devise corrective measures
  • financial incentive provided to employees who report valid claims based on the savings achieved

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 147 - Establishes New Jersey Government Efficiency Commission.

Legislation ID: 49989

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This resolution establishes a New Jersey Government Efficiency Commission tasked with investigating and implementing strategies to streamline government functions, reduce unnecessary bureaucracy, and find opportunities for cost savings. The commission will consist of seven members, including the State Treasurer and various public appointees, and will report its findings and recommendations to the Governor and Legislature annually.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • It must report its findings to the Governor and Legislature.
  • Members are appointed for varying terms of one to three years, with initial appointments made within 30 days of the acts effective date.
  • The commission can call upon employees from various state and local agencies for assistance as needed.
  • The commission must consist of seven members, including the State Treasurer as chairperson and various public members appointed by state leaders.
  • The commission must investigate and compile strategies for streamlining operations and reducing costs.
  • The commission must issue an initial report within one year of its formation and annual reports thereafter.
  • Vacancies must be filled in the same manner as the original appointments.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-30 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate State Government, Wagering, Tourism & Historic Preservation Committee

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a commission with the explicit mission of improving government efficiency, streamlining operations, and reducing costs.

Mechanism of Influence: By creating a dedicated entity with investigative and reporting duties focused on government efficiency, the bill sets up a structural mechanism for ongoing evaluation and reform of government processes.

Evidence:

  • establishes a New Jersey Government Efficiency Commission tasked with investigating and implementing strategies to streamline government functions, reduce unnecessary bureaucracy, and find opportunities for cost savings
  • report its findings and recommendations to the Governor and Legislature annually
  • investigating government functions to identify redundancies and cost-saving opportunities
  • compile strategies for streamlining operations and reducing costs

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 4125 - Requires Division of Purchase and Property to issue annual report on State-owned underutilized real property with potential for other uses.

Legislation ID: 49606

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill mandates the Division of Purchase and Property in New Jersey to compile an inventory of underutilized real property owned by the state. It requires an analysis of the feasibility of developing these properties for various uses, including housing for low-income individuals and services for the homeless. The division will submit an annual report detailing its findings and recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature, ensuring transparency and ongoing evaluation of state property utilization.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Categorizes properties for potential uses including low-income housing and services for the homeless.
  • Requires evaluation of land use regulations for each property.
  • Requires the Division to consult with other state entities for feasibility analysis.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-03 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Community and Urban Affairs Committee

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes a mandated, recurring evaluation (inventory and analysis) of state-owned real property with the explicit aim of identifying underutilized assets and recommending more effective uses. This is a mechanism designed to improve the efficiency of government asset management.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring the Division to systematically identify and assess underused properties, the bill creates a process for uncovering inefficiencies and potentially reducing waste or administrative costs associated with idle assets. The consultation with other agencies and required reporting further supports oversight and transparent decision-making.

Evidence:

  • develop an inventory of all underutilized state-owned real property and analyze the feasibility for redevelopment or alternative uses
  • submit an annual report detailing its findings and recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill's primary focus is on property utilization for housing and social services, the requirement for inventory and feasibility analysis, and the mandate to report findings and recommendations, directly target government efficiency in asset management.

Senate - 4137 - Requires Director of Division of Local Government Services in DCA to establish grant program to enhance local government efficiency; appropriates $1.5 million.

Legislation ID: 49618

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill requires the Director of the Division of Local Government Services in the Department of Community Affairs to create a grant program that allows local government units to hire management enhancement review consultants. The goal is to conduct efficiency reviews that streamline operations and reduce costs. The program will allocate $1.5 million in grants, with specific maximum amounts for county and municipal units, and requires a 25% local match for grant recipients.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Applications must include the amount of funding sought, a description of the efficiency review plans, and sources of matching funds.
  • Consultants must hold relevant professional licenses.
  • Local government units must submit an application detailing their proposed plans for grant funding.
  • Maximum grant awards are $150,000 for counties and $100,000 for municipalities.
  • Reports must detail expenditures, shared services, operating efficiencies, and cost savings achieved.
  • The director will compile these reports for public dissemination.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-13 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Community and Urban Affairs Committee

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's explicit goal is to improve government efficiency and reduce costs by funding external reviews of local government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: It creates a structural mechanism (a grant program) that enables local governments to contract professionals for efficiency reviews, with mandated reporting on outcomes related to cost savings and operational improvements.

Evidence:

  • The goal is to conduct efficiency reviews that streamline operations and reduce costs.
  • Establish a grant program to provide funding for local government units to contract with management enhancement review consultants for efficiency reviews.
  • Reports must detail expenditures, shared services, operating efficiencies, and cost savings achieved.

Ambiguity Notes: None

New Mexico

Index of Bills

House - 276 - PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS FUND & PROGRAM

Legislation ID: 118288

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 276 introduces the Public-Private Partnership Fund and Program, which will facilitate collaboration between public entities and private partners to develop broadband and transportation infrastructure. The bill mandates the Local Government Division to provide grants for these projects and includes provisions for rulemaking, fund management, and exemptions from standard procurement codes to expedite project completion.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Exempts specific public-private partnership agreements from standard procurement processes.
  • Mandates a cost-benefit analysis for grant applications comparing public-private partnerships to traditional public projects.
  • Public partners must submit an application including a partnership agreement.
  • Requires the Local Government Division to administer the fund and provide grants for eligible projects.
  • Rules must ensure transparency and safeguard public funds.
  • The authority must assess financial risks before projects are recommended for funding.
  • The division must establish rules for grant applications and project evaluations.
  • The division must evaluate applications based on project viability and cost-effectiveness.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-12 HTPWC: Reported by committee with Do Pass recommendation
2025-02-05 Sent to HTPWC - Referrals: HTPWC/HAFC

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes new administrative mechanisms (fund, program, oversight processes) and requires cost-benefit analyses and financial risk evaluations, all explicitly aimed at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations in infrastructure project delivery.

Mechanism of Influence: By exempting projects from standard procurement codes, mandating cost-benefit analyses, and instituting financial oversight, the bill streamlines bureaucratic processes and aims to reduce project costs and delays. The creation of a dedicated fund and structured grant process further centralizes and modernizes project administration.

Evidence:

  • 'Exemptions from Procurement Code... facilitating quicker project implementation.'
  • 'The authority must assess financial risks before projects are recommended for funding.'
  • 'Mandates a cost-benefit analysis for grant applications comparing public-private partnerships to traditional public projects.'
  • 'The division must evaluate applications based on project viability and cost-effectiveness.'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill is focused on infrastructure, the provisions for cost-effectiveness evaluation, financial risk assessment, and streamlined processes are directly tied to government efficiency. The language is explicit about these goals.

House - 358 - INTERIM ADMIN. RULES OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

Legislation ID: 118368

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 358 establishes the Interim Administrative Rule Oversight Committee, which is tasked with reviewing proposed rules from executive agencies. The committee will assess the fiscal impacts of these rules and make recommendations accordingly. It also requires that any proposed rule with an estimated cost exceeding one million dollars includes a fiscal impact statement. The bill outlines the committees structure, duties, and the process for rule review, along with the appropriation of funds to support the committees operations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Chair position alternates between houses and political parties.
  • Committee consists of 12 members appointed by legislative leaders.
  • Committee staff to analyze proposed rules and fiscal impacts.
  • Direct committee staff.
  • Estimates of implementation costs to be included in notices.
  • Fiscal impact statement must assess impacts on various entities and compliance with legislative intent.
  • Legislative council service to hire up to four staff members.
  • Make recommendations to proposing agencies.
  • Members serve two-year terms.
  • Must indicate if the rule mandates funding for local governments.
  • Notice must include a fiscal impact statement for rules over one million dollars.
  • Review proposed rules and fiscal impacts two weeks prior to public hearings.
  • Two million dollars appropriated for committee operations.
  • Written analysis to be provided to committee members ten days before meetings.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-11 Sent to HGEIC - Referrals: HGEIC/HAFC

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly creates a committee whose explicit mission is to review administrative rules for fiscal impact and efficiency, aiming to improve government operations by identifying costly or inefficient rules.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring fiscal impact statements and empowering the committee to recommend changes or the repeal of rules, the bill creates a structural mechanism for ongoing oversight and potential streamlining of government regulation and administrative processes.

Evidence:

  • 'establishes the Interim Administrative Rule Oversight Committee, which is tasked with reviewing proposed rules from executive agencies'
  • 'The committee will assess the fiscal impacts of these rules and make recommendations accordingly.'
  • 'requires that any proposed rule with an estimated cost exceeding one million dollars includes a fiscal impact statement.'
  • 'committee is responsible for reviewing proposed rules, making recommendations, and directing staff work related to these rules. It can endorse legislation to amend or repeal authorizing statutes for rules.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its intent to review rules for fiscal impact and efficiency, leaving little ambiguity about its relevance to government efficiency. However, the degree to which the committee's recommendations will be implemented depends on legislative follow-up.

Senate - 484 - GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY TO TAXPAYER ACT

Legislation ID: 123321

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 484 enacts the Government Accountability to Taxpayer Act, creating an office dedicated to overseeing state agency performance, recommending improvements, and ensuring fiscal responsibility. The bill outlines the powers and responsibilities of the executive director of this office, including conducting audits and reporting on state fiscal health.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Conduct performance audits of state agencies.
  • Executive director responsible for managing office operations and enforcing applicable laws.
  • Executive director to be appointed by the governor with senate consent for a four-year term.
  • Governor must appoint an executive director-designate by October 1, 2025.
  • Provide an annual report on fiscal health and administrative efficiency.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-20 Sent to SRC - Referrals: SRC/SFC

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates a permanent office specifically charged with improving government efficiency and fiscal responsibility. It mandates performance audits and annual reports focused on administrative efficiency, directly aligning with the criteria for structural and procedural mechanisms to make government operations more effective and less costly.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing an office with the explicit mission to audit agencies, recommend improvements, and report on efficiency, the bill institutionalizes ongoing evaluation and reform of government operations. The executive director's authority ensures sustained focus on streamlining processes and reducing waste.

Evidence:

  • 'creating an office dedicated to overseeing state agency performance, recommending improvements, and ensuring fiscal responsibility'
  • 'conducting audits and reporting on state fiscal health'
  • 'responsibilities of the office, including conducting audits and reporting on government efficiency'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's description is clear in its intent and mechanisms, with little ambiguity regarding its focus on efficiency and oversight.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

New York

Index of Bills

Assembly - 243 - Provides for the detailing of the benefits and costs of proposed rules in the regulatory impact statements

Legislation ID: 54020

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends the State Administrative Procedure Act to require state agencies to provide comprehensive assessments of the costs and benefits of proposed rules in their regulatory impact statements. It mandates that agencies consider public comments, especially those that present differing estimates of costs or benefits, and include these in their assessments. The bill also stipulates that agencies provide detailed analyses of the anticipated impacts of rules, including economic, health, safety, and environmental effects.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Includes analysis of differing cost or benefit estimates from public comments.
  • Mandates a detailed analysis of cost impacts on regulated entities and governments.
  • Mandates a detailed assessment of anticipated benefits, including qualitative and quantitative analyses.
  • Mandates inclusion of differing cost or benefit estimates from public comments in the assessment.
  • Requires agencies to publish assessments of public comments for adopted rules.
  • Requires agencies to summarize public comments received on proposed rules.
  • Requires a statement describing the need for reporting requirements as a result of the rule.
  • Requires identification of classes of persons or entities benefiting from the rule.
  • Requires qualitative and quantitative assessments of costs where feasible.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-08 referred to governmental operations

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly aims to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations by mandating more rigorous, transparent regulatory impact assessments and the consideration of cost-saving alternatives in rulemaking.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring agencies to comprehensively analyze and publicly justify the costs, benefits, and alternatives of proposed regulations, the bill is designed to prevent unnecessary or overly burdensome rules, reduce administrative costs, and enhance the responsiveness and accountability of government rulemaking.

Evidence:

  • requires a detailed statement of the cost impacts of the rule on regulated entities and other affected parties
  • Mandates a detailed analysis of cost impacts on regulated entities and governments
  • Requires qualitative and quantitative assessments of costs where feasible
  • Requires agencies to publish assessments of public comments for adopted rules

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill does not create a new entity or mandate a study group, it does impose procedural mechanisms across all agencies to assess and justify rules for efficiency and effectiveness. Its explicit focus on cost-benefit analysis and consideration of alternatives ties it directly to government efficiency.

Assembly - 4464 - Establishes the legislative sunset advisory commission

Legislation ID: 60149

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends the legislative law to create the Legislative Sunset Advisory Commission, tasked with reviewing state agencies every ten years to determine their effectiveness, efficiency, and necessity. The commission will make recommendations on whether agencies should be continued, reformed, or abolished based on various criteria, including their operational effectiveness and public need.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Ad hoc members receive necessary expenses.
  • Annual report to governor and legislature by December 31.
  • Assess various criteria related to agency performance and public need.
  • Commission consists of specific legislative members and appointees from the lieutenant governor and legislative leaders.
  • Commission may appoint employees and set their compensation.
  • Conduct a ten-year review of state agencies.
  • Employees impacted by agency actions must be offered similar positions with the same salary and benefits.
  • Members appointed for varying terms, with specific rules for filling vacancies.
  • Notice to employee organizations about potential impacts.
  • Public hearings for recommendations.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-04 referred to governmental operations

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly creates a commission whose mission is to review government agencies for efficiency, effectiveness, and necessity, and to recommend structural changes including consolidation or elimination.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating periodic reviews and recommendations on agency performance, the commission is a direct structural mechanism for promoting government efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

Evidence:

  • tasked with reviewing state agencies every ten years to determine their effectiveness, efficiency, and necessity
  • make recommendations on whether agencies should be continued, reformed, or abolished based on various criteria, including their operational effectiveness and public need
  • Defines the commission's responsibilities to review state agencies and determine their necessity and effectiveness

Ambiguity Notes: The language is clear in stating the commission's purpose is to assess efficiency and necessity. The scope is broad but the intent is explicit.

Assembly - 5001 - Relates to the cost effectiveness of consultant contracts by state agencies

Legislation ID: 61377

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends the state finance law to mandate that state agencies perform cost comparison reviews for consultant services contracts anticipated to exceed one million dollars. The goal is to evaluate whether such services can be provided at a lower cost by state employees, unless specific exceptions apply. Additionally, the bill outlines requirements for developing business plans when cost savings are identified, and mandates transparency by making related documents public records.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies are required to train staff on the new cost comparison procedures.
  • Business plan must include a detailed description of the service, analysis of current performance, and potential outcomes.
  • Comptroller must provide a report detailing the review and recommendations within sixty days.
  • Defines consultant services and outlines what costs must be included in the comparison.
  • Documents must be disclosed under the public officers law.
  • Exemptions apply for incidental services, conflict of interest avoidance, urgent services, short-term services, or highly specialized services.
  • If no action is taken within ninety days, the business plan is deemed approved.
  • Mandates a business plan if cost savings of ten percent or more are identified.
  • Report must include an analysis of cost savings and the effectiveness of the program.
  • Requires notification to affected employees if layoffs are anticipated.
  • Requires state agencies to conduct a cost comparison review for consultant contracts exceeding one million dollars.
  • State agencies must maintain records of all cost comparison reviews conducted.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-10 referred to governmental operations

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes a procedural mechanism (cost comparison reviews, business plans, and reporting) explicitly aimed at identifying and implementing cost savings in government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: It creates a structured process for evaluating whether outsourcing or using state employees is more efficient, requires public transparency, and mandates a review of the program's effectiveness, all of which are designed to promote government efficiency and cost reduction.

Evidence:

  • The goal is to evaluate whether such services can be provided at a lower cost by state employees, unless specific exceptions apply.
  • If a cost savings of ten percent or more is identified, a business plan must be developed to evaluate the feasibility of the consultant contract.
  • The state comptroller must prepare a report analyzing the effectiveness of the cost comparison review program by the end of 2027.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its intent and mechanisms, with clear requirements for reviews, plans, and reports focused on efficiency.

Assembly - 5582 - Creates the division of regulatory review and economic growth

Legislation ID: 62499

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This legislation establishes the Division of Regulatory Review and Economic Growth, tasked with reviewing and recommending changes to state regulations and permit requirements to reduce burdens on businesses and promote economic growth. The division will conduct annual reviews and publish recommendations to streamline regulations, ensuring they are efficient and conducive to business development in New York.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must submit the complete text of the rule and any required impact statements to the commissioner.
  • The commissioner is appointed by the governor with senate consent and serves a five-year term.
  • The commissioner must approve the rule before it can be published.
  • The commissioner must have at least ten years of experience in a for-profit business.
  • The division must transmit its recommendations annually by January 1st.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-18 referred to governmental operations

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a permanent division tasked with reviewing, streamlining, and improving the efficiency of regulatory processes across state agencies, with the explicit goal of reducing administrative burdens and costs.

Mechanism of Influence: The division's annual reviews, recommendations, and required pre-publication review of proposed agency rules are structural mechanisms aimed at making government regulation more efficient and responsive. The division also coordinates with other agencies to implement changes and eliminate duplicative or overly burdensome regulations.

Evidence:

  • establishes the Division of Regulatory Review and Economic Growth, tasked with reviewing and recommending changes to state regulations and permit requirements to reduce burdens on businesses
  • The division will conduct annual reviews and publish recommendations to streamline regulations
  • This section outlines the functions, powers, and duties of the division, including oversight of state agency regulations, making recommendations to eliminate burdensome regulations, and facilitating regulatory review.
  • state agencies submit proposed rules to the commissioner for review before publication, ensuring they meet certain criteria.

Ambiguity Notes: The focus is specifically on regulations affecting businesses and economic growth, but the structural mechanisms (annual reviews, oversight, inter-agency coordination, mandated recommendations) are classic government efficiency tools.

Assembly - 6089 - Creates the New York state commission on government efficiency

Legislation ID: 63533

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill establishes the New York State Commission on Government Efficiency, tasked with reviewing state spending to uncover unnecessary expenses. The commission will consist of eight members appointed by legislative leaders, who will serve two-year terms without compensation. It is responsible for issuing an annual report with findings and recommendations for eliminating wasteful spending.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Annual report to be submitted to the governor and legislative leaders.
  • Annual report to include specific recommendations and proposed legislation.
  • Commission consists of eight members appointed by legislative leaders.
  • Commission must identify unnecessary and wasteful spending.
  • Commission to examine state spending and identify wasteful expenditures.
  • Commission to issue recommendations for spending elimination.
  • First report due one year after member appointments.
  • Members serve two-year terms without compensation.
  • Members to be appointed within 30 days of the acts effective date.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-20 held for consideration in governmental operations
2025-02-26 referred to governmental operations

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates a permanent commission specifically charged with identifying wasteful government spending and recommending actions to eliminate inefficiencies.

Mechanism of Influence: By conducting annual reviews of state spending and issuing recommendations—including proposed legislation—the commission is empowered to directly influence the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of government operations.

Evidence:

  • Establishes the New York State Commission on Government Efficiency to analyze state spending.
  • Commission to examine state spending and identify wasteful expenditures.
  • Commission must identify unnecessary and wasteful spending.
  • Annual report to include specific recommendations and proposed legislation.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 1207 - Relates to grants to local governments for the reduction of paperwork

Legislation ID: 66895

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill proposes the establishment of a grant program under the executive law, allowing the secretary of state to award competitive grants to local governments for the purpose of reducing paper use. The grants will have a maximum limit and require local matching funds. The bill outlines the criteria for eligibility, application, and evaluation of the grants, as well as the potential for these grants to contribute to government efficiency plans.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • A competitive application, evaluation, and award process must be established and made publicly available.
  • Grants shall not exceed ten thousand dollars per local government.
  • Local governments must provide matching funds equal to twenty-five percent of the total grant amount.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-08 REFERRED TO FINANCE

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's stated purpose is to improve government efficiency by reducing paper use and encouraging digital transformation in local government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By providing grants for digitization and paper reduction, the bill incentivizes local governments to modernize workflows, potentially leading to cost savings, streamlined processes, and reduced administrative burdens.

Evidence:

  • 'The grants will have a maximum limit and require local matching funds.'
  • 'The potential for these grants to contribute to government efficiency plans.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill directly references contributions to government efficiency plans, leaving little ambiguity about its intent. However, the actual impact on efficiency may depend on implementation and the specific projects funded.

Senate - 6724 - Establishes the New York state commission on regulatory efficiency

Legislation ID: 99863

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This legislation creates the New York State Commission on Regulatory Efficiency, tasked with examining existing state regulations, identifying those that are unnecessary or wasteful, and making recommendations for regulatory reform. The commission will consist of eight members appointed by various legislative leaders and will issue annual reports with findings and proposed changes.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Annual reports must continue thereafter.
  • Members are to be appointed within 30 days of the acts effective date and serve two-year terms.
  • Members must not be public sector employees.
  • Members will not receive compensation for their service.
  • The commission is required to issue an annual report of its findings.
  • The commission must examine state regulations.
  • The commission must submit its report to the governor and legislative leaders within one year of member appointments.
  • The commission shall consist of eight members appointed by legislative leaders.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-20 REFERRED TO FINANCE

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a commission whose explicit mission is to improve government efficiency by identifying and recommending the removal of unnecessary or wasteful regulations.

Mechanism of Influence: By examining regulations and issuing annual reports with recommendations, the commission is structured to systematically promote regulatory reform, reduce inefficiencies, and streamline government operations.

Evidence:

  • The commission is tasked with identifying unnecessary and wasteful state regulations.
  • The commission is required to issue an annual report of its findings.
  • Establishes the New York State Commission on Regulatory Efficiency to examine and report on state regulations.

Ambiguity Notes: The language is clear in its purpose; the commission's sole focus is on regulatory efficiency. There is little ambiguity about its intent to promote government efficiency.

North Carolina

Index of Bills

Senate - 376 - Increase Funding to State Auditor.

Legislation ID: 163939

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 376 proposes an increase in funding for the Office of the State Auditor to support personnel expansion, technology upgrades, and enhanced audit capabilities. The bill allocates both nonrecurring and recurring funds for the fiscal years 2025-2026 and 2025-2027, with specific amounts designated for hiring additional staff, improving compensation, and upgrading technology. The State Auditor is required to report on the utilization of these funds and their impact on audit efficiency by the end of 2025.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Allocates $3,000,000 for critical short-term audit infrastructure.
  • Allocates $3,000,000 for short-term audit infrastructure.
  • Allocates $500,000 for a 3% increase in staff compensation.
  • Appropriates $6,700,000 for hiring 70 additional full-time staff positions.
  • Appropriates $6,700,000 to hire 70 additional full-time staff.
  • Appropriates $95,000 for initial onboarding and recruitment costs.
  • Assesses the impact of technology investments on audit efficiency.
  • Designates $1,000,000 for additional office space.
  • Designates $5,000,000 for information technology modernization and security upgrades.
  • Designates $5,000,000 for technology modernization and security upgrades.
  • Include details on audits conducted, findings related to fraud or financial mismanagement, and technology impacts.
  • Includes findings related to fraud or financial mismanagement.
  • Provides $1,000,000 for additional office space.
  • Requires a report on the number of audits conducted.
  • Submit a report to the Joint Legislative Commission on Governmental Operations.
  • The act becomes effective on July 1, 2025.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-24 Passed 1st Reading
2025-03-24 Re-ref Com On Appropriations/Base Budget
2025-03-24 Ref To Com On Rules and Operations of the Senate
2025-03-24 Withdrawn From Com
2025-03-20 Filed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly aims to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations by expanding audit capacity and modernizing technology within the Office of the State Auditor.

Mechanism of Influence: By increasing resources for audits and requiring reporting on the efficiency and outcomes of these audits, the bill establishes procedural mechanisms to evaluate and enhance government performance, reduce waste, and promote accountability.

Evidence:

  • enhanced audit capabilities
  • technology upgrades
  • report on the utilization of these funds and their impact on audit efficiency
  • assesses the impact of technology investments on audit efficiency

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its intent to improve audit efficiency and government oversight, leaving little ambiguity regarding its relevance to government efficiency.

Senate - 402 - Limit Rules With Substantial Financial Costs.

Legislation ID: 162528

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 402 establishes a framework for the adoption of permanent rules by state agencies, particularly those that would result in substantial financial costs. It outlines the conditions under which rules must be ratified by the General Assembly based on their projected financial impact, as well as the voting requirements for agencies when adopting such rules. The bill aims to enhance accountability and transparency in the rule-making process, particularly for rules that could impose significant economic burdens on affected individuals and entities.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Administrative law judges must base decisions on the preponderance of evidence and exercise independent judgment.
  • Agencies must adhere to regulatory principles when preparing fiscal notes.
  • Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of State Budget and Management for the fiscal note.
  • Agencies must prepare a fiscal note for proposed rule changes with an economic impact of at least $1,000,000.
  • Agencies must prepare a fiscal note for rules with an economic impact of $1 million or more in a five-year period.
  • Agencies must prepare a fiscal note for rules with an impact of at least $1 million over five years.
  • Agencies must prepare and obtain approval for a fiscal note if a rule change has a substantial economic impact of at least $1,000,000.
  • Allows rules to be delayed if there are written objections from 10 or more persons.
  • Applies to all rules adopted under Article 2A of Chapter 150B.
  • Commission must notify the agency and Governor upon rule approval.
  • Commission must notify the agency and local governments upon approval of a rule.
  • Committee has the power to recommend statutory changes based on their reviews.
  • Committee must review rules with significant economic impact within 60 days of receipt from the Commission.
  • Committee must review rules with substantial economic impacts within 60 days of receipt.
  • Committee reviews state regulatory programs for efficiency and necessity.
  • Courts may review decisions for constitutional violations, excess of authority, unlawful procedures, errors of law, lack of evidence, or arbitrary actions.
  • Decisions must include findings of fact and conclusions of law unless a motion for judgment on the pleadings or summary judgment is granted.
  • Fiscal notes must be approved by the Office of State Budget and Management.
  • Judicial review standards vary based on the type of asserted error.
  • Mandates that objections to rules be formally submitted and addressed before rules can take effect.
  • Mandates written objections from affected persons for legislative review.
  • Must inform legislative committee if the rule has a significant economic impact.
  • Objections to rules must be submitted in writing and can delay the effective date of the rules.
  • Permanent rules become effective on the first day of the month following approval unless objections are received or substantial economic impacts are identified.
  • Requires a fiscal note for proposed rule changes with substantial economic impacts.
  • Requires a fiscal note for rules with an economic impact of at least $1 million within five years.
  • Requires approval from the Office of State Budget and Management for the fiscal note.
  • Requires a two-thirds vote for rules costing at least $1 million and a unanimous vote for those costing at least $10 million.
  • Requires permanent rules with significant economic impacts to be ratified by the General Assembly.
  • Requires permanent rules with significant economic impact to be ratified by the General Assembly.
  • Requires rules with an aggregate financial cost of $20 million or more over five years to be ratified by the General Assembly.
  • Requires rules with an aggregate financial cost of at least $20 million in a five-year period to be ratified by the General Assembly.
  • Rules can be objected to if written objections are received from ten or more persons.
  • Rules with an aggregate cost of $20 million or more over five years require General Assembly ratification.
  • Rules with costs of $10 million must be adopted by unanimous vote unless required by federal law.
  • Rules with costs of $10 million require a unanimous vote for adoption.
  • Rules with costs of $1 million must be adopted by a two-thirds vote.
  • Rules with costs of $1 million require a two-thirds vote for adoption.
  • Rules with significant economic impacts must be reported to legislative oversight committees.
  • Temporary and emergency rules become effective upon entry into the North Carolina Administrative Code.
  • The Office of State Budget and Management must certify adherence to regulatory principles.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-07-29 Veto Received From House
2025-07-29 Placed on Todays Calendar
2025-07-29 Veto Overridden
2025-07-03 Withdrawn From Cal
2025-07-03 Placed On Cal For 07/29/2025
2025-06-30 Placed On Cal For 07/14/2025
2025-06-27 Vetoed 06/27/2025
2025-06-27 Received from the Governor

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes procedural mechanisms (e.g., required fiscal notes, legislative ratification, and higher voting thresholds) specifically to ensure that new agency rules are scrutinized for their financial impact, aiming to prevent inefficient or unnecessarily costly regulations. Its stated purpose is to enhance the efficiency, accountability, and transparency of government rulemaking.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring fiscal analysis, legislative ratification, and stricter voting requirements for expensive rules, the bill directly targets the reduction of unnecessary regulatory burdens and government costs. These mechanisms are designed to streamline rulemaking and prevent the adoption of inefficient or duplicative regulations.

Evidence:

  • 'Requires rules with an aggregate financial cost of $20 million or more over five years to be ratified by the General Assembly.'
  • 'Requires a two-thirds vote for rules costing at least $1 million and a unanimous vote for those costing at least $10 million.'
  • 'Agencies must prepare a fiscal note for proposed rule changes that have a substantial economic impact.'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill does not create a new entity (like a task force), it does create new procedural requirements that are explicitly aimed at promoting efficiency and cost-effectiveness in government operations. The language is clear in targeting government efficiency through fiscal scrutiny.

Senate - 474 - The DAVE Act.

Legislation ID: 164092

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

The DAVE Act creates the Division of Accountability, Value, and Efficiency within the Department of State Auditor. It mandates state agencies to report on their use of public funds and vacant positions, allowing the Division to evaluate the necessity of these agencies and positions. The Division will utilize data analysis tools, including artificial intelligence, to assess spending effectiveness and identify duplications, ultimately providing recommendations to the General Assembly for potential agency dissolutions and position eliminations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies may be required to submit reports annually.
  • Agencies must describe all positions that have been vacant for six months or more.
  • Agencies must describe all vacant positions for six months or more, including vacancy dates and explanations.
  • Agencies must describe all vacant positions, including vacancy dates and reasons for delays.
  • Agencies must explain how they utilize public funds.
  • Agencies must provide an explanation of public fund usage.
  • Allows the use of AI and other tools to analyze spending and effectiveness.
  • Division has discretion to require annual reports from agencies.
  • Division may consult with the Joint Legislative Commission on Governmental Operations.
  • Division may employ AI and other tools to analyze spending and effectiveness.
  • Division may reassess and report results annually.
  • Division must include recommendations on which agencies or positions should be dissolved or eliminated.
  • Includes recommendations for dissolving agencies and eliminating positions based on assessments.
  • Requires state agencies to describe vacant positions, including vacancy dates and reasons for the length of vacancies.
  • Requires state agencies to explain their use of public funds.
  • Requires the Division to report findings by December 31, 2025.
  • Requires the Division to review agency reports and other relevant information.
  • Requires the State Auditor to organize and administer the Division as necessary.
  • The assessment must review submitted reports and additional relevant information.
  • The assessment will review submitted reports and other relevant information.
  • The Division may use AI and other tools to evaluate spending effectiveness and identify duplicative spending.
  • The Division may use AI and tools to analyze spending and effectiveness.
  • The Division will have powers and duties to assess state agencies.
  • The report must include recommendations on agencies to be dissolved and positions to be eliminated.
  • The report must include recommendations on agency dissolutions and position eliminations.
  • The State Auditor must create the Division.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-10 Ref To Com On Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House
2025-04-10 Passed 1st Reading
2025-04-09 Regular Message Sent To House
2025-04-09 Regular Message Received From Senate
2025-04-08 Amend Adopted A2
2025-04-08 Amend Tabled A3
2025-04-08 Amend Tabled A5
2025-04-08 Passed 3rd Reading

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: This bill directly creates a new division with the explicit mission to improve government efficiency and value by evaluating agency necessity and identifying cost savings through data-driven analysis.

Mechanism of Influence: The Division will collect data, use AI and analytics to assess agency performance, and recommend structural changes such as dissolutions or eliminations, all aimed at making government operations more efficient and less costly.

Evidence:

  • 'creates the Division of Accountability, Value, and Efficiency within the Department of State Auditor'
  • 'mandates state agencies to report on their use of public funds and vacant positions'
  • 'The Division will utilize data analysis tools, including artificial intelligence, to assess spending effectiveness and identify duplications'
  • 'providing recommendations to the General Assembly for potential agency dissolutions and position eliminations.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent and mechanisms, leaving little ambiguity about its focus on efficiency and cost savings.

Senate - 593 - Local Government Audits.

Legislation ID: 162719

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

H.B. 593 modifies the procedures for local governments and school administrative units in selecting auditors for annual financial audits. It mandates that these entities must solicit sealed bids for auditors, ensures that only certified auditors can be selected, and outlines the consequences for failing to comply with audit requirements. Additionally, it provides for the withholding of sales tax distributions for non-compliance and establishes a process for appeals regarding audit failures.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Annual audit reports must be filed with the secretary within nine months of the fiscal year-end.
  • Audit contracts must be in writing and approved by the secretary.
  • Audit contracts must be in writing and include all terms and conditions.
  • Auditors must be certified by the State Auditor.
  • Audit reports must be submitted to the Local Government Commission and other relevant authorities.
  • Bidding process for auditors must be followed.
  • Contracts must be submitted for approval to the secretary.
  • Failure to comply may result in withholding of sales tax distributions.
  • Failure to submit an audit report within 12 months may result in withholding of sales tax distributions.
  • Governance boards must solicit sealed bids for auditors at least once every five years.
  • Local governments must submit annual audit reports within nine months of the fiscal year end to avoid penalties.
  • Local school administrative units must have their accounts audited annually by certified public accountants.
  • Mandates sealed bidding for auditor selection at least once every five years.
  • Requires local governments to have annual audits conducted by certified public accountants.
  • The board of education must select auditors based on sealed bids.
  • Units must be notified of non-compliance and have the opportunity to appeal.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-16 Re-ref to the Com on State and Local Government, if favorable, Appropriations, if favorable, Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House
2025-04-16 Withdrawn From Com
2025-04-16 Serial Referral To Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House Stricken
2025-04-01 Passed 1st Reading
2025-04-01 Ref to the Com on Appropriations, if favorable, Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House
2025-03-31 Filed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: This bill establishes procedural requirements for how local governments and school units select auditors and comply with audit mandates, which are mechanisms to ensure financial accountability and potentially improve government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By standardizing auditor selection (sealed bids, certification requirements) and enforcing timely audits (with penalties for non-compliance), the bill aims to improve the effectiveness of government oversight and the integrity of financial reporting, which can lead to more efficient government operations.

Evidence:

  • 'modifies the procedures for local governments and school administrative units in selecting auditors for annual financial audits'
  • 'mandates that these entities must solicit sealed bids for auditors'
  • 'outlines the consequences for failing to comply with audit requirements'
  • 'withholding of sales tax distributions for non-compliance'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill focuses on audit procedures and compliance, it does not explicitly state that its primary purpose is to promote government efficiency, but the measures have a clear efficiency and accountability rationale.

Senate - 819 - DIT Agency Bill.

Legislation ID: 163025

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

H.B. 819 introduces significant changes to the General Statutes that govern the Department of Information Technology, emphasizing the need for centralized cybersecurity management and the establishment of the North Carolina Longitudinal Data System. This bill aims to facilitate data sharing among educational institutions and state agencies while ensuring compliance with data privacy laws. Additionally, it provides funding for cybersecurity initiatives and mandates assessments of information technology spending across state agencies to identify redundancies and improve efficiency.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies are required to submit all requested data and reports to the Department.
  • Agencies must provide data and assistance for the assessment.
  • Allocates up to $25 million annually for cybersecurity enhancements.
  • Emergency funding is capped and prioritized for restoration of broadband service.
  • Emergency funding is limited to costs not covered by other reimbursements.
  • Entities must elect to participate in IT programs by submitting a written request through designated officials.
  • Entities must elect to participate in IT programs in writing.
  • Funds must be used for installation materials for satellite internet service for the grantees own use.
  • Funds must be used for installation materials for satellite internet service only for grantees own use.
  • Limits the linkage of student and workforce data to five years post-secondary education completion.
  • Mandates annual assessments of state agency compliance with cybersecurity standards.
  • Mandates the development of a data security and safeguarding plan.
  • Pole owners must provide timely estimates for make-ready work.
  • Pole owners must review access requests and provide estimates within specified time frames.
  • Projects must maximize the use of the best available technology.
  • Projects must meet specific technical requirements and offer low-cost broadband options for low-income households.
  • Providers can receive reimbursement for 50% of eligible costs or up to $10,000 per pole replaced.
  • Providers can receive reimbursement for 50% of eligible pole replacement costs or up to $10,000 per pole.
  • Requires a comprehensive assessment of IT spending, including cybersecurity tools and enterprise software licenses.
  • Requires a third-party assessment of enterprise IT spending to identify inefficiencies.
  • Requires compliance with FERPA, IDEA, HIPAA, and other privacy laws when handling data.
  • Requires the Center to create and publish an inventory of individual student data proposed to be accessible in the System.
  • Requires the system to facilitate data exchange among educational institutions and agencies.
  • Specific authorities must approve participation for each exempt entity.
  • The Department must report findings on duplicative spending and recommendations by October 1, 2026.
  • The Office must develop a methodology for determining cost thresholds for projects.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-26 Special Message Received From House
2025-06-26 Passed 1st Reading
2025-06-26 Ref To Com On Rules and Operations of the Senate
2025-06-26 Special Message Sent To Senate
2025-06-25 Passed 2nd Reading
2025-06-25 Amend Adopted A1
2025-06-25 Ordered Engrossed
2025-06-25 Passed 3rd Reading

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly mandates assessments and reporting requirements for information technology spending, with the stated goal of identifying redundancies and improving efficiency across state agencies.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring agencies to submit data and participate in IT spending assessments, and by mandating the Department to report on duplicative spending and make recommendations, the bill creates structural mechanisms aimed at streamlining government operations and reducing costs.

Evidence:

  • Agencies must provide data and assistance to the Department for assessing information technology spending and strategies for consolidation.
  • The Department must report findings on duplicative spending and recommendations by October 1, 2026.

Ambiguity Notes: The language clearly links the assessments and reports to the goals of identifying duplicative spending and improving efficiency, leaving little ambiguity about its intent.

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill requires annual compliance assessments for state agency cybersecurity and a third-party assessment of enterprise IT spending to identify inefficiencies.

Mechanism of Influence: These requirements establish ongoing oversight and external review processes that are designed to uncover inefficiencies, reduce overlap, and improve the effectiveness of government IT operations.

Evidence:

  • Mandates annual assessments of state agency compliance with cybersecurity standards.
  • Requires a third-party assessment of enterprise IT spending to identify inefficiencies.

Ambiguity Notes: The focus on efficiency and elimination of duplicative spending is explicit in the text.

Analysis 3

Why Relevant: The establishment of the North Carolina Longitudinal Data System is aimed at improving data sharing and analysis among agencies, which can streamline processes and enhance government responsiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By creating a centralized data system and requiring inventories and data safeguarding plans, the bill seeks to modernize and coordinate government functions, reducing redundant data practices.

Evidence:

  • This section establishes the North Carolina Longitudinal Data System (NCLDS), which is designed to collect and analyze student and workforce data to improve educational outcomes and facilitate data sharing among agencies.

Ambiguity Notes: While the primary focus is on data sharing and privacy, the intent to improve efficiency through better coordination is clear.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

North Dakota

Index of Bills

House - 1031 - AN ACT to amend and reenact section 1-01-49, subdivision g of subsection 1 of section 12.1-32-15, subdivision b of subsection 1 of section 14-07.6-01, section 18-01-36, subdivision j of subsection 4 of section 27-20.3-16, subsection 19 of section 45-13-01, subsection 7 of section 49-02-02, section 52-02-18, subsection 5 of section 54-10-28, section 54-52.6-02.2, subsection 3 of section 57-02-08.8, subsection 2 of section 57-38-30.3, and subsection 1 of section 57-40.5-03 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to technical corrections and improper, inaccurate, redundant, missing, or obsolete references; to repeal sections 1-01-18, 1-01-20, 1-01-21, 1-01-27, 1-01-29, 1-01-30, 1-01-36, 1-01-40, 1-01-41, 1-01-42, 1-01-45, 1-01-46, 1-01-47, and 1-01-51 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to technical corrections and improper, inaccurate, redundant, missing, or obsolete references; and to provide an effective date.

Legislation ID: 92309

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill No. 1031 proposes amendments to multiple sections of the North Dakota Century Code, focusing on technical corrections, including the repeal of outdated sections and the clarification of definitions such as children, sexual offender, and partnership. The bill aims to streamline legal language and ensure that the references within the code are accurate and relevant. Additionally, it includes provisions related to the public employees retirement system and the processes for performance audits.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Mandates additional employer contributions for eligible employees who transfer to the defined contribution plan.
  • Requires eligible employees to be participating members of the public employees retirement system for no more than five years.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-19 Filed with Secretary Of State 03/14
2025-03-18 Signed by Governor 03/14
2025-03-13 Signed by Speaker
2025-03-13 Sent to Governor
2025-03-12 Signed by President
2025-03-10 Returned to House
2025-03-07 Reported back, do pass, place on calendar 7 0 0
2025-03-07 Second reading, passed, yeas 47 nays 0

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill amends section 52-02-18 to outline the process for conducting performance audits of Job Service North Dakota, including the role of the state auditor. Performance audits are a recognized mechanism for evaluating government efficiency and effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By specifying the process for independent performance audits, the bill establishes a procedural mechanism to assess and potentially improve the efficiency of a state agency.

Evidence:

  • 'Amends section 52-02-18 to outline the process for conducting performance audits of job service North Dakota, including the role of the state auditor.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not explicitly state that the purpose of the audit is to improve efficiency, but performance audits by definition typically evaluate efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of government operations.

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill amends subsection 5 of section 54-10-28 to require the presentation of IT compliance review results to specific committees. Such reviews can identify inefficiencies or risks in government IT operations.

Mechanism of Influence: Requiring the presentation of IT compliance review results to oversight committees can help ensure that inefficiencies or compliance issues are identified and addressed, potentially leading to more efficient government operations.

Evidence:

  • 'Amends subsection 5 of section 54-10-28 to require the presentation of IT compliance review results to specific committees.'

Ambiguity Notes: The provision is about compliance review presentation, not explicitly about efficiency, but compliance reviews often uncover inefficiencies.

House - 1368 - A BILL for an Act to amend and reenact section 28-32-18 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to voiding and amending administrative rules by the administrative rules committee.

Legislation ID: 93302

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill modifies section 28-32-18 of the North Dakota Century Code, detailing the grounds on which the administrative rules committee may void rules, the procedure for considering rules, and the process for amending or repealing rules. It establishes specific criteria for voiding rules, outlines the consequences of agency representatives non-appearance, and allows for expedited amendments when agreed upon by the committee and the agency.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agency has fourteen days to file a petition for review.
  • Allows the agency to file a petition for review within fourteen days.
  • Amendments or repeals must be agreed upon by the agency and committee.
  • If no agency representative appears, rules are held over for the next meeting.
  • Mandates agency representation at the committee meeting for rule consideration.
  • Mandates reconsideration of amended rules at a subsequent meeting with public comment allowed.
  • Mandates that rules are considered void if no agency representative appears when scheduled.
  • Requires agreement between the committee and agency for rule changes.
  • Requires rules to be considered by the committee within a specific timeframe before publication.
  • Requires subsequent committee reconsideration with public comment if requested.
  • Requires the committee to make specific findings to void a rule.
  • Requires written notice to the adopting agency within three business days.
  • Requires written notice to the adopting agency within three business days of a rule being found void.
  • Rules adopted as emergency rules are void if not represented at the subsequent meeting.
  • Rules may be voided if not addressed by the agency in subsequent meetings.
  • Rules not considered until an agency representative appears.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-27 Committee Hearing 09:00 (State and Local Government)
2025-02-13 Introduced, first reading, referred toState and Local Government
2025-02-06 Received from House
2025-02-05 Second reading, passed, yeas 84 nays 7
2025-02-03 Amendment adopted, placed on calendar
2025-01-31 Reported back amended, do pass, amendment placed on calendar 11 0 2
2025-01-30 Committee Hearing 03:00 (Political Subdivisions)
2025-01-13 Introduced, first reading, referred toPolitical Subdivisions

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes and empowers a legislative committee (the administrative rules committee) with enhanced procedural tools to oversee, amend, or void agency rules, which is a structural mechanism aimed at improving government responsiveness and regulatory efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By allowing expedited amendments/repeals and clarifying the grounds and procedures for voiding rules, the bill could reduce bureaucratic delays, eliminate unnecessary or unauthorized regulations, and streamline the rulemaking process, directly targeting government efficiency and effectiveness.

Evidence:

  • 'The committee and agency can agree to amend or repeal a rule without following the standard adoption process if deemed necessary.'
  • 'The administrative rules committee can void a rule if it finds specific grounds such as lack of authority, emergency situations, non-compliance with legislative intent, conflicts with state law, and other criteria.'
  • 'Requires subsequent committee reconsideration with public comment if requested.'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill's primary focus is on procedural clarity and oversight, its explicit mechanisms (expedited amendments, voiding unauthorized rules) are designed to make government operations more efficient. However, the bill does not create new entities nor mandate broad studies or audits, but rather enhances the powers and procedures of an existing oversight committee.

House - 1434 - A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new section to chapter 28-32 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the expiration of administrative rules and a review process administered by the governor; and to amend and reenact section 28-32-06 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the force and effect of administrative rules.

Legislation ID: 93450

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill introduces a new section to the North Dakota Century Code, mandating that administrative rules expire ten years after their effective date unless reviewed and renewed by the governor. It outlines the responsibilities of the governor in notifying agencies about rule expirations, reviewing rules, and potentially extending their effectiveness. Additionally, it amends existing provisions regarding the force and effect of rules, specifying conditions under which they may expire or be repealed.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must report to the governor to facilitate the review process.
  • Requires agencies to amend or repeal rules determined to be expired by the governor.
  • Rules expire ten years after their effective date unless renewed by the governor.
  • Rules have the force of law until amended, declared invalid, or expired by the governor after one year.
  • The governor can grant extensions to agencies or commissions.
  • The governor may exempt certain rules from the expiration process.
  • The governor must notify agencies one year before a rules expiration.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-05 Second reading, failed to pass, yeas 0 nays 92
2025-01-31 Reported back, do not pass, placed on consent calendar 12 0 1
2025-01-30 Committee Hearing 02:30 (Political Subdivisions)
2025-01-13 Introduced, first reading, referred toPolitical Subdivisions

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes a systematic review process for administrative rules, explicitly designed to prevent outdated or unnecessary regulations from persisting, which is a structural mechanism aimed at increasing government efficiency and responsiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By instituting mandatory periodic review and potential expiration of rules, the bill forces agencies and the governor's office to regularly evaluate the necessity and effectiveness of existing regulations, potentially eliminating redundant, obsolete, or burdensome rules, and thus streamlining government operations.

Evidence:

  • rules expire ten years after their effective date unless renewed by the governor
  • governor must notify agencies one year before a rule's expiration
  • agencies must report to the governor to facilitate the review process
  • governor can grant extensions or exemptions

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill's primary stated mechanism is rule expiration, the intent to promote efficiency is strongly implied by the requirement for regular review and the ability to eliminate unnecessary rules. However, the bill does not explicitly use the word 'efficiency' or 'cost savings.'

House - 1442 - A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new section to chapter 54-35 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the creation of a legislative task force on government efficiency; to provide an expiration date; and to declare an emergency.

Legislation ID: 93474

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill creates a legislative task force on government efficiency, consisting of various appointed members, including state officials and legislators. The task force is tasked with reviewing budgets, collaborating with executive agencies, and submitting annual reports on its findings and recommendations for enhancing efficiency and reducing costs in state government operations. The task force is set to operate until July 31, 2031.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Annual report submission to legislative management detailing findings and recommendations.
  • Chairman is appointed from the legislative assembly.
  • Collaborate with agencies to find efficiency improvements and cost-saving measures.
  • Collaborate with agencies to identify efficiency improvements and cost-saving measures.
  • Includes the chief information officer, budget director, and other appointed members.
  • Legislative council provides staffing through July 31, 2031.
  • Mandates monthly meetings of the committee.
  • Members receive regular salary and reimbursement for expenses.
  • Must meet at least once each quarter.
  • Must review budgets and reports from various state agencies.
  • Requires the committee to include at least one member from each standing committee of the House and Senate.
  • Review and analyze budgets and reports from executive branch agencies, boards, and commissions.
  • Review the effectiveness and necessity of existing programs and laws.
  • Submit an annual report detailing findings and progress in implementing cost-saving measures.
  • Task force members serve two-year terms.
  • This Act is effective through July 31, 2031.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-05 Committee Hearing 09:30 (Finance and Taxation)
2025-02-18 Received from House
2025-02-18 Introduced, first reading, (emergency), referred toFinance and Taxation
2025-02-17 Second reading, passed, yeas 88 nays 2, Emergency clause carried
2025-02-13 Amendment adopted, placed on calendar
2025-02-12 Reported back amended, do pass, amendment placed on calendar 13 0 1
2025-02-11 Committee Hearing 08:45 (Industry, Business and Labor)
2025-01-15 Introduced, first reading, referred toIndustry, Business and Labor

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly creates a task force with the stated purpose of improving government efficiency and reducing costs through structural and procedural review of state operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing a formal body tasked with analyzing budgets, collaborating with agencies, and reporting on efficiency improvements, the bill directly implements a mechanism for ongoing evaluation and enhancement of government effectiveness and cost-saving.

Evidence:

  • 'Establishes a legislative task force on government efficiency to analyze and improve state government operations.'
  • 'Collaborate with agencies to find efficiency improvements and cost-saving measures.'
  • 'Annual report submission to legislative management detailing findings and recommendations.'

Ambiguity Notes: The duties are clearly defined as focusing on efficiency and cost reduction, with specific requirements for collaboration and reporting. There is little ambiguity regarding its relevance to government efficiency.

Senate - 2251 - A BILL for an Act to amend and reenact section 54-10-01, subsection 5 of section 54-10-14, and sections 54-10-22 and 54-10-27 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to audits conducted by the state auditor and charges for audits.

Legislation ID: 94377

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill modifies existing laws related to the state auditors responsibilities in conducting audits of state agencies and political subdivisions. It outlines the auditors powers, the frequency of audits, the costs associated with these audits, and the requirements for audits of professional boards. The bill also establishes guidelines for billing practices and clarifies the auditors authority in various auditing scenarios.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must use nongeneral fund moneys to pay for audit costs, with provisions for using general fund moneys if necessary.
  • Allows boards with less than $200,000 in annual receipts to submit an annual report instead of undergoing an audit.
  • Allows for performance audits as deemed necessary by the legislative assembly.
  • Auditor can audit under oath any relevant personnel.
  • Audits of agricultural commodity groups have specific fee structures.
  • Boards must provide for audits every two years or submit an annual report if under $200,000 in receipts.
  • Boards must provide for audits every two years unless they have less than $200,000 in annual receipts, in which case they can submit an annual report instead.
  • Charges for audits must be equal to the cost of the audit.
  • Fees for additional examinations may be charged if reports are not filed.
  • Imposes a fee for the review of annual reports.
  • Mandates the state auditor to charge agencies for audit costs, with specific provisions for agricultural commodity groups.
  • Political subdivisions must retain 25% of any progress payment until the audit is accepted.
  • Public officers must provide facilities and documents for audit.
  • Reports must be in the format prescribed by the state auditor.
  • Requires audits every two years by a certified public accountant for boards with sufficient receipts.
  • Requires the state auditor to audit each state agency every two to four years.
  • Requires the state auditor to audit each state agency once every two to four years.
  • State auditor can issue subpoenas for documents and testimony related to audits.
  • State auditor must audit each state agency every two to four years.
  • Twenty-five percent of progress payments must be retained until audit acceptance.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-24 Amendment adopted
2025-03-24 Rereferred toAppropriations
2025-03-21 Reported back amended, do pass, amendment placed on calendar 13 0 1
2025-03-06 Committee Hearing 03:30 (Government and Veterans Affairs)
2025-02-18 Introduced, first reading, referred toGovernment and Veterans Affairs
2025-02-04 Received from Senate
2025-02-04 Motion to reconsider failed
2025-02-03 Division B passed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly addresses mechanisms for evaluating government performance by modifying the audit process for state agencies and boards. Audits are a primary tool for uncovering inefficiencies, duplications, and unnecessary expenditures, which aligns with the goal of promoting government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating regular audits and reports, and empowering the auditor to require cooperation and access to information, the bill aims to ensure accountability and improve operational effectiveness in government entities. The structured audit schedule and reporting requirements are procedural mechanisms to promote efficiency and cost control.

Evidence:

  • 'requires occupational and professional boards to conduct audits every two years or submit an annual report'
  • 'state auditor must audit each state agency every two to four years'
  • 'public officers must provide facilities and documents for audit'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not explicitly state 'to promote efficiency' as its purpose, but the requirement for regular audits and reports is a standard, recognized mechanism for improving efficiency and effectiveness in government operations.

Senate - 4025 - A concurrent resolution directing the Legislative Management to consider studying all state laws to identify laws that are outdated, unnecessary, or cause undue burden on this state and its citizens.

Legislation ID: 94790

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This concurrent resolution calls for a comprehensive review of all state laws by the Legislative Management. The goal is to identify laws that may no longer serve their intended purpose or that create unnecessary challenges for the citizens of North Dakota. The findings and any legislative recommendations are to be reported to the next Legislative Assembly.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Requires identification of laws that are outdated or unnecessary.
  • Requires the Legislative Management to study all state laws.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-20 Second reading, failed to adopt
2025-03-14 Reported back, do not pass, placed on calendar 5 1 0
2025-03-06 Committee Hearing 02:30 (State and Local Government)
2025-02-21 Introduced, first reading, referred toState and Local Government

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes a structural mechanism (a comprehensive study by Legislative Management) aimed at identifying and potentially eliminating outdated or unnecessary laws, which is directly tied to improving government efficiency and reducing administrative burdens.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring a review of all state laws to find those that no longer serve their purpose or create unnecessary challenges, the resolution could lead to the repeal or amendment of inefficient or redundant regulations, streamlining government operations.

Evidence:

  • 'calls for a comprehensive review of all state laws by the Legislative Management'
  • 'identify laws that may no longer serve their intended purpose or that create unnecessary challenges'
  • 'findings and any legislative recommendations are to be reported to the next Legislative Assembly'

Ambiguity Notes: The resolution is broad in directing a review of all laws, but its stated purpose is clear: to identify outdated or burdensome laws, which is a core government efficiency goal.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

Ohio

Index of Bills

House - 11 - Regards legislative rule approval and fiscal analyses of rules

Legislation ID: 143853

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends several sections of the Revised Code to establish a framework for legislative review and approval of administrative rules. It introduces provisions for the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review (JCARR) to evaluate proposed rules and allows for third-party fiscal analyses to ensure transparency and accountability in the rule-making process. Additionally, it requires state agencies to publicly post relevant policy documents to improve public access to information regarding agency regulations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Chairpersons must seek approval from their respective chambers to request an independent fiscal analysis.
  • Mandates that agencies prepare and file a detailed rule summary and fiscal analysis with each proposed rule.
  • Mandates that revisions to proposed rules also be filed with JCARR and reviewed within specified timeframes.
  • Prohibits agencies from adopting rules until they have been reviewed by JCARR and the review period has expired without invalidation.
  • Requires agencies to file proposed rules and fiscal analyses with JCARR for review.
  • Requires a law authorizing certain rules to be enacted before adoption.
  • Specifies the information that must be included in the fiscal analysis.
  • The time for JCARR to adopt an invalidating resolution is tolled while awaiting the analysis.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-28 Referred to committee
2025-01-23 Introduced

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes procedural mechanisms (JCARR review, independent fiscal analysis, required fiscal transparency) that are designed to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of government regulation-making. The intent is explicit: to ensure rules are necessary, cost-effective, and transparent before adoption, thereby reducing unnecessary or inefficient regulation.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring legislative review, detailed fiscal analyses, and public disclosure, the bill creates structural checks that can prevent duplicative, costly, or burdensome rules. The ability to request third-party fiscal analysis adds an independent layer of scrutiny, likely leading to more cost-effective and efficient government operations.

Evidence:

  • 'establish a framework for legislative review and approval of administrative rules'
  • 'allows for third-party fiscal analyses to ensure transparency and accountability'
  • 'requires state agencies to publicly post relevant policy documents'
  • 'requires agencies to prepare a complete rule summary and fiscal analysis for each proposed rule'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's language is specific about improving transparency and accountability, and about the mechanisms for fiscal and procedural review. While it does not use the phrase 'government efficiency' directly, its structure and requirements clearly serve that goal.

House - 176 - Establish a universal regulatory sandbox program

Legislation ID: 144815

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill introduces new sections to the Revised Code that establish a framework for a universal regulatory sandbox program in Ohio. The program is designed to enable businesses to demonstrate innovative offerings without the usual regulatory barriers. It also outlines the creation of an advisory committee and a regulatory relief division to oversee the program and recommend necessary changes to state laws and regulations that may hinder business innovation.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must provide a report on potential consumer harm and recommendations within thirty business days.
  • Applicants must confirm jurisdiction and establish a physical or virtual location in the state.
  • Applications must disclose criminal convictions and provide a detailed description of the innovative offering.
  • Committee to include members from various business interests and state agencies.
  • Establishes a regulatory relief division to identify laws that can be waived for sandbox participants.
  • Members to be appointed by the governor and legislative leaders.
  • Reports must include participant information and recommendations for regulatory changes.
  • Requires consultation with applicable agencies to facilitate the sandbox program.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-19 Referred to committee
2025-03-12 Introduced

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes new bodies (Advisory Committee, Regulatory Relief Division) whose mission includes identifying and recommending the removal of regulatory barriers to innovation, which is a structural mechanism to improve government efficiency and responsiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: The Advisory Committee and Regulatory Relief Division are empowered to review regulations, identify inefficiencies, recommend changes, and oversee a process that streamlines regulatory requirements for innovative businesses, directly targeting bureaucratic streamlining and modernization.

Evidence:

  • establishes the Universal Regulatory Sandbox Program Advisory Committee to provide guidance and recommendations for the regulatory relief division
  • Establishes a regulatory relief division to identify laws that can be waived for sandbox participants
  • Requires consultation with applicable agencies to facilitate the sandbox program
  • requires the Common Sense Initiative Office to submit annual reports on the activities of the regulatory relief division and the sandbox program to the General Assembly

Ambiguity Notes: While the primary focus is on enabling business innovation, the bill's provisions for reviewing and recommending changes to regulations, as well as annual reporting to the legislature, are explicitly designed to improve the efficiency of government regulatory processes.

House - 248 - Revise the Auditor of State law

Legislation ID: 142448

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

H. B. No. 248 proposes amendments to multiple sections of the Revised Code. It seeks to clarify the roles and responsibilities of public officials regarding financial management and auditing. The bill outlines procedures for contracting financial services, mandates audits of public offices, prescribes financial reporting requirements, and establishes training programs for local officials to improve their financial management skills.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Audits must occur at least once every two fiscal years, or annually if required by federal law.
  • Contracts for financial services must be authorized by a governing body and comply with state accounting requirements.
  • Financial reports must be filed within 60 to 150 days after the fiscal year ends, depending on accounting practices.
  • Penalties for late reporting are set at $25 per day, up to $750.
  • Political subdivisions must cover the costs of training for their officials.
  • Public offices must provide necessary information for audits upon request.
  • Public officials must have a surety bond that covers losses from contracted services.
  • Training must be held annually for newly elected officials and can also include continuing education for existing officials.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-07 Referred to committee
2025-04-29 Introduced

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly aims to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations by strengthening financial oversight, standardizing audit procedures, and enhancing the skills of public officials through mandatory training.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating regular audits, clear reporting deadlines, and training, the bill creates procedural mechanisms that are explicitly designed to improve governmental efficiency, reduce the risk of mismanagement, and ensure compliance with financial regulations.

Evidence:

  • Establishes the frequency and scope of audits for public offices by the Auditor of State, ensuring compliance with financial regulations.
  • Mandates financial reporting for public offices, including deadlines and penalties for late submissions.
  • Requires the Auditor of State to conduct training programs for newly elected local officials to enhance their understanding of government accounting and budgeting.

Ambiguity Notes: The language is specific regarding audits, reporting, and training, leaving little ambiguity about its intent to improve efficiency in financial management.

House - 59 - Revise and streamline the states occupational regulations

Legislation ID: 129112

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill, introduced by Representatives Fowler Arthur and Hiner, aims to enact legislation that revises and streamlines existing occupational regulations. It is part of a broader effort initiated by S.B. 255 of the 132nd General Assembly to enhance the work environment and opportunities for the workforce in Ohio.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-12 Referred to committee
2025-02-04 Introduced

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's explicit focus is on streamlining and simplifying occupational regulations to improve efficiency for workers and employers. This directly aligns with the criteria of reducing administrative burdens and regulatory inefficiencies.

Mechanism of Influence: By revising and simplifying regulations, the bill would reduce bureaucratic complexity, potentially eliminate unnecessary procedures, and make compliance easier. This is a structural mechanism aimed at improving the effectiveness of government oversight and regulatory frameworks.

Evidence:

  • This provision focuses on revising and simplifying the current occupational regulations to make them more accessible and efficient for workers and employers in Ohio.
  • aims to enact legislation that revises and streamlines existing occupational regulations

Ambiguity Notes: While the abstract does not specify the creation of new entities or mandated studies, the core purpose is clearly to promote government efficiency in occupational regulation. The language is broad but unambiguously focused on efficiency.

Oklahoma

Index of Bills

House - 1752 - Central purchasing; Central Purchasing Act of 2025; effective date.

Legislation ID: 62512

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 1752 introduces the Central Purchasing Act of 2025, which is a new piece of legislation intended to streamline and regulate the central purchasing processes in Oklahoma. The act is designed to enhance efficiency and accountability in government procurement activities.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-04 Second Reading referred to Rules
2025-02-03 Authored by Representative Moore
2025-02-03 First Reading

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to enhance efficiency and accountability in government procurement, which directly aligns with efforts to improve government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By streamlining and regulating central purchasing, the act seeks to reduce bureaucratic inefficiencies, potentially lower costs, and improve the effectiveness of government procurement.

Evidence:

  • The act is designed to enhance efficiency and accountability in government procurement activities.
  • streamline and regulate the central purchasing processes

Ambiguity Notes: While the summary does not specify the detailed mechanisms, the stated purpose is clear and relevant to government efficiency.

House - 1791 - Service Oklahoma; creating the Service Oklahoma Efficiency Act of 2025; effective date.

Legislation ID: 60309

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill introduces the Service Oklahoma Efficiency Act of 2025, which aims to streamline and improve the efficiency of the services offered by Service Oklahoma. It sets forth the framework for this initiative and specifies that it will not be codified into the Oklahoma Statutes.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-04 Second Reading referred to Rules
2025-02-03 First Reading
2025-02-03 Authored by Representative Kerbs

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's stated purpose is to streamline and improve the efficiency of government services provided by Service Oklahoma.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing a framework specifically aimed at increasing efficiency, the bill directly addresses the goal of making government operations more effective and less costly.

Evidence:

  • This bill introduces the Service Oklahoma Efficiency Act of 2025, which aims to streamline and improve the efficiency of the services offered by Service Oklahoma.

Ambiguity Notes: The summary does not provide details on the specific mechanisms, entities, or processes that will be used to achieve efficiency, so the breadth of its impact is unclear.

House - 2367 - Corporation Commission; creating the Corporation Commission Efficiency Act of 2025; effective date.

Legislation ID: 57135

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill establishes the Corporation Commission Efficiency Act of 2025, which is intended to streamline and enhance the effectiveness of the Corporation Commissions operations. It aims to implement reforms that will facilitate better governance and oversight within the commissions framework.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-04 Second Reading referred to Rules
2025-02-03 First Reading
2025-02-03 Authored by Representative Hilbert

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill is explicitly designed to promote government efficiency by streamlining and enhancing the effectiveness of the Corporation Commission's operations.

Mechanism of Influence: It proposes reforms to facilitate better governance and oversight, which are core mechanisms for improving government efficiency and effectiveness.

Evidence:

  • intended to streamline and enhance the effectiveness of the Corporation Commission's operations
  • implement reforms that will facilitate better governance and oversight within the commission's framework
  • Corporation Commission Efficiency Act of 2025

Ambiguity Notes: While the abstract clearly states the intent to enhance efficiency, the specific reforms or mechanisms are not detailed in the provided text. The title and purpose are explicit, but further details would be needed to assess the concrete steps proposed.

House - 2728 - Administrative rule process; enacting the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act of 2025; effective date.

Legislation ID: 55948

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

HB2728 enacts the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act of 2025, which mandates that any administrative rule proposed by state agencies must be approved by the legislature before it can take effect. This bill seeks to empower lawmakers to have a direct say in the regulatory process, potentially reducing the number of unnecessary regulations imposed on citizens and businesses.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must adhere to the new rule review process starting from the effective date of the Act.
  • Agencies must analyze whether the proposed rule is federally mandated.
  • Agencies must analyze whether the rule is federally mandated.
  • Agencies must comply with provisions of the updated Administrative Procedures Act.
  • Agencies must conduct economic impact analyses for major rules.
  • Agencies must consult with local governments and affected businesses.
  • Agencies must consult with local governments and affected entities.
  • Agencies must consult with local governments and solicit information from relevant stakeholders.
  • Agencies must consult with local governments when preparing economic impact statements.
  • Agencies must detail the economic impact, including compliance costs exceeding $1 million over five years.
  • Agencies must determine if the rule is federally mandated and whether it exceeds federal requirements.
  • Agencies must publish rules in the Oklahoma Register.
  • Agencies must quantify implementation and compliance costs exceeding $1,000,000 over five years.
  • Annual reports summarizing evaluations must be published.
  • Conduct a comprehensive economic impact analysis detailing costs and benefits.
  • Consult with local governments and stakeholders when preparing economic impact statements.
  • Defines Agency as any state entity authorized to promulgate rules, excluding judicial and legislative branches.
  • Defines implementation and compliance costs for proposed rules.
  • Defines Implementation and compliance costs related to the costs incurred by businesses and individuals due to new rules.
  • Defines Major rule as any administrative rule expected to incur implementation costs of $1,000,000 or more over five years.
  • Definitions of key terms related to administrative rules are modified.
  • Establishes criteria for determining which rules require legislative oversight.
  • LEAU must analyze economic impact statements within 21 days of receiving proposed rules.
  • LEAU must analyze proposed rules within 21 days of submission.
  • LEAU must conduct an independent analysis of economic impact statements within 21 days of receiving proposed rules.
  • LEAU must conduct an independent analysis of proposed major rules within 21 days.
  • LEAU must conduct independent analyses of major rules within 21 days of submission.
  • LEAU must publish all analyses on its website.
  • LEAU must report findings to legislative committees.
  • LEAU must submit an annual report detailing its evaluations and findings.
  • LEAUs findings must be made publicly available.
  • LEAU to be formed with a maximum of five full-time employees.
  • LEAU to conduct Regulatory Impact Analyses (RIAs) for major rules.
  • LEAU to produce determinations on whether a rule is a major rule.
  • LEAU to report findings to legislative committees and ensure transparency of its analyses.
  • Legislative procedures leading to a final vote on a bill under this act are not reviewable by courts.
  • LOFT must analyze agency budgets and evaluate compliance with laws.
  • LOFT must analyze proposed rules within 21 days.
  • LOFT must conduct rule impact analyses for major rules.
  • LOFT must report if proposed rules could exceed $1 million in compliance costs.
  • Major rules must have an economic impact of $200,000 or more.
  • Mandates a comprehensive economic impact analysis on affected entities.
  • Mandates a public comment period before legislative approval.
  • Mandates LOFT to conduct rule impact analyses for major rules.
  • Mandates LOFT to publish an annual report on its findings.
  • Mandates reporting to legislative committees on compliance costs exceeding $1,000,000.
  • Must include a cost-benefit analysis and other relevant information.
  • Must include an evaluation of costs and benefits for new rules.
  • Nonmajor rules are those that do not meet the criteria for major rules.
  • Requires a Chief Economist appointed by legislative leaders.
  • Requires a constitutional majority in both chambers for approval of major rules.
  • Requires agencies to analyze whether proposed rules are mandated by federal law.
  • Requires analysis of existing rules when requested by legislative committees.
  • Requires cooperation from state agencies in providing necessary data.
  • Requires legislative approval for any major rule through a constitutional majority vote in both chambers.
  • Requires legislative approval for major rules.
  • Requires legislative approval for major rules before they can take effect.
  • Requires legislative approval for major rules through a measure receiving a constitutional majority in each chamber.
  • Requires LOFT to analyze proposed budgets of executive branch agencies.
  • Requires LOFT to analyze proposed major rules within 21 days.
  • Requires quantification of regulatory impacts in the report.
  • Requires state agencies to submit proposed rules to the legislature for review.
  • Requires training for agency personnel on the new procedures.
  • Specifies the criteria for emergency rules.
  • Updates definitions for terms used in the Administrative Procedures Act.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-21 Approved by Governor 05/21/2025
2025-05-15 Sent to Governor
2025-05-15 Enrolled, signed, to Senate
2025-05-15 Enrolled measure signed, returned to House
2025-05-14 SAs read, adopted
2025-05-14 Coauthored by Representative(s) Duel, Hilbert, Olsen, Hays, Stark, George, Grego, Hardin, Townley, West (Kevin), Osburn, Roberts, Miller, Culver, Wolfley, Strom, Fetgatter, Lowe (Dick), Dobrinski, Staires, Burns, Eaves, Turner, Hall, Wilk, Blair, Adams, Chapman, Caldwell (Chad), Bashore, Pfeiffer
2025-05-14 Referred for enrollment
2025-05-14 Fourth Reading, Measure and Emergency Passed: Ayes: 74 Nays: 12

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes a structural procedural mechanism—legislative review of administrative rules—explicitly designed to prevent unnecessary or burdensome regulations, with the stated intent of promoting government efficiency and responsiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring legislative approval for new administrative rules, the bill aims to reduce regulatory burdens and unnecessary rules, streamline the regulatory process, and ensure that regulations are justified and efficient.

Evidence:

  • 'mandates that any administrative rule proposed by state agencies must be approved by the legislature before it can take effect.'
  • 'potentially reducing the number of unnecessary regulations imposed on citizens and businesses.'
  • 'outlines the procedures that state agencies must follow when proposing new administrative rules, including the requirement for legislative approval.'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill's description states the goal is to reduce unnecessary regulations, it does not directly create a new entity (e.g., a commission or task force), but it does set up a new process for oversight and control. The intent to improve efficiency is explicit.

Senate - 318 - Administrative rules; creating the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act of 2025; requiring Legislative Office of Fiscal Transparency to conduct certain analyses. Effective date.

Legislation ID: 55933

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 318 modifies the responsibilities of the Legislative Office of Fiscal Transparency and introduces a new division for reviewing administrative rules. It mandates the Office to conduct rule impact analyses for major rules proposed by state agencies, ensuring that these rules are evaluated for their economic and social effects. Additionally, the bill updates existing laws regarding the approval process for emergency rules and requires agencies to submit rule impact statements to the Office.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must consult with local governments and affected entities during the analysis process.
  • Agencies must consult with local governments and affected entities when preparing the analysis.
  • Agencies must disclose if a rule is mandated by federal law and if it exceeds federal requirements.
  • Agencies must file copies of adopted rules with key legislative leaders and the Governor within ten days of adoption.
  • Agencies must file reports on new rules with the Governor and legislative leaders within ten days of adoption.
  • Defines Agency as any state entity authorized to create rules, excluding judicial and legislative branches.
  • Defines Agency as any state officer or department except judicial and legislative branches.
  • Defines Implementation and compliance costs as direct costs associated with compliance with proposed rules.
  • Defines Implementation and compliance costs as direct costs related to compliance with rules.
  • Defines Major rule as any rule expected to incur costs of $1 million or more over five years.
  • Defines Major rule as any rule expected to incur costs over $1,000,000 within five years.
  • Includes a statement of need, legal basis, examination of alternatives, evaluation of costs and benefits, sources consulted, and key assumptions in the analysis.
  • LEAU must analyze proposed rules within 21 days of submission.
  • LEAU must complete an independent analysis of proposed major rules within 21 days of receipt.
  • LEAU to be created within 90 days of the acts effective date and may employ up to five full-time equivalent employees.
  • LEAU to be created within the Legislative Office of Fiscal Transparency.
  • LEAU to report findings to legislative committees.
  • Major rules require a joint resolution with a constitutional majority in both legislative chambers for approval before taking effect.
  • Mandates that the Office conducts performance evaluations and independent comprehensive performance audits as directed by the oversight committee.
  • Must conduct and submit a detailed economic impact analysis addressing costs and benefits of the proposed rule.
  • Must report findings to legislative committees and ensure agencies comply with analysis requirements.
  • Reports must include a rule impact statement and a summary of public comments.
  • Requires a detailed economic impact analysis including costs and benefits.
  • Requires agencies to indicate if a rule is federally mandated.
  • Requires legislative approval for major rules via a joint resolution with a constitutional majority.
  • Requires the Office to conduct rule impact analyses for major rules defined in Section 250.3 of Title 75.
  • Rules must be submitted in a specified format and include detailed reports on their economic impact and public input received.
  • The division shall employ no more than five full-time employees.
  • The Office must complete a rule impact analysis for a major rule within 15 legislative session days after submission.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-10 Placed on General Order
2025-03-05 Reported Do Pass as amended Appropriations committee; CR filed
2025-03-05 Title stricken
2025-02-24 Coauthored by Representative Woolley
2025-02-13 Coauthored by Representative Kendrix (principal House author)
2025-02-13 Reported Do Pass, amended by committee substitute Administrative Rules committee; CR filed
2025-02-13 Coauthored by Senator Jett
2025-02-13 Referred to Appropriations

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates a new division specifically to review administrative rules and conduct impact analyses, which are structural mechanisms aimed at improving government efficiency and accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring independent, timely analyses of major rules—including cost-benefit evaluations and alternatives—the bill is designed to prevent unnecessary or inefficient regulations, reduce administrative burdens, and ensure government actions are cost-effective.

Evidence:

  • 'Establishment of a Division for Rule Review'
  • 'The Office must complete a rule impact analysis for a major rule within 15 legislative session days after submission.'
  • 'Mandates that the Office conducts performance evaluations and independent comprehensive performance audits as directed by the oversight committee.'
  • 'Evaluation of costs and benefits, sources consulted, and key assumptions in the analysis.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill explicitly states the mission of the new division and the analyses is to evaluate economic and social effects, including cost-benefit, which directly ties to government efficiency. There is little ambiguity as the language is clear about the purpose and requirements.

Senate - 821 - State fiscal affairs; modifying the information required on certain form to include certain technology needs and estimated expenditures.

Legislation ID: 62709

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 821 seeks to amend Section 34.36 of Title 62 of the Oklahoma Statutes, which governs the reporting of budgetary needs by state agencies. The bill introduces additional requirements for agencies to provide detailed information about their technology needs and estimated expenditures, along with other budgetary analyses. This aims to ensure more informed decision-making and accountability in state fiscal affairs.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies can opt-out of shared services if they can demonstrate lower costs independently.
  • Agencies must list technology needs and estimated expenditures.
  • Agencies must provide a budget analysis of existing and proposed programs.
  • Agencies must provide a list of similar programs administered by other entities and their interactions.
  • Approval must be obtained before any funds are encumbered for technology-related expenditures.
  • A statement of interaction with similar programs from other agencies is required.
  • Certification required for technology purchases, leases, or rentals.
  • Exempts specific higher education institutions from certain budget reporting requirements.
  • Forms must be uniform and clearly designate required information.
  • Include a statement of program objectives and tactics.
  • Includes a detailed budget analysis using performance-informed budgeting techniques.
  • List actual expenditures and personnel required for each program.
  • Lowest-ranking agencies must contract with the Office of Management and Enterprise Services for shared financial services.
  • Mandates an analysis of existing and proposed programs using performance-informed budgeting techniques.
  • Mandates a ranking of programs by priority.
  • Mandates a uniform reporting form approved by the Director of the Office of Management and Enterprise Services.
  • Mandates that lower-ranking agencies enter contracts for shared financial services if cost-effective.
  • Provide quantifiable outcomes and ranking of programs by priority.
  • Publish a shared services cost-performance assessment report by January 1.
  • Quantifiable program outcomes must be included to measure efficiency and effectiveness.
  • Reports must include a budget analysis, program interactions, statutory authority, and quantifiable objectives.
  • Requires agencies to enter contracts for shared services if it leads to cost savings.
  • Requires agencies to submit budget requests by October 1 each year.
  • Requires a quantification of information technology needs and estimated expenditures.
  • Requires a report documenting the cost of shared services for each state agency.
  • Requires detailed reporting of actual expenditures from previous years.
  • Requires quantification of program needs and outcomes.
  • Requires state agencies to report on technology needs and estimated expenditures.
  • State agencies must submit an itemized request for funds by October 1 each year.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-02 Referred to Appropriations and Budget General Government Subcommittee
2025-04-01 Second Reading referred to Appropriations and Budget
2025-03-24 First Reading
2025-03-24 Engrossed to House
2025-03-18 Referred for engrossment
2025-03-18 General Order, Considered
2025-03-18 Measure passed: Ayes: 44 Nays: 0
2025-02-27 Coauthored by Representative Pae (principal House author)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly targets government efficiency by mandating detailed, standardized, and performance-informed budget reporting from state agencies. It also seeks to identify and implement cost savings through shared services and requires agencies to justify independent operations if not using shared services.

Mechanism of Influence: Creates procedural reforms (uniform forms, detailed reporting, performance metrics), mandates cost analysis of shared services, and gives authority to require shared service contracts where cost savings are identified. These measures are structural and procedural mechanisms to improve efficiency, reduce duplication, and promote cost-effectiveness.

Evidence:

  • 'Agencies must include a comprehensive analysis of their budget requests, detailing past expenditures, personnel needs, and expected revenues.'
  • 'Mandates a ranking of programs by priority.'
  • 'State agencies are required to submit an itemized budget request... including technology expenditures and performance metrics.'
  • 'Must provide a list of similar programs administered by other entities and their interactions.'
  • 'The Director... must publish a report on the cost of shared services... facilitating potential cost savings.'
  • 'Agencies can opt-out of shared services if they can demonstrate lower costs independently.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's language is explicit about improving informed decision-making, accountability, and cost savings, leaving little ambiguity regarding its focus on efficiency.

Oregon

Index of Bills

House - 2402 - Directs every agency to review the agencys administrative rules and amend the rules to simplify the rules and eliminate redundancy.

Legislation ID: 116022

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 2402 requires all state agencies in Oregon to review their administrative rules by January 1, 2027. The bill aims to simplify these rules and remove any redundancies both within and between agencies. This initiative is intended to enhance clarity and efficiency in the regulatory framework.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must simplify their rules and eliminate redundancies with other agencies rules.
  • Every agency must review its administrative rules by January 1, 2027.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-17 Referred to Emergency Management, General Government, and Veterans with subsequent referral to Ways and Means.
2025-01-13 First reading. Referred to Speakers desk.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly mandates a government-wide initiative to review, simplify, and streamline administrative rules, with the explicit goal of removing redundancies and improving efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring agencies to examine and revise their rules for clarity and redundancy, the bill aims to reduce bureaucratic overlap, unnecessary complexity, and administrative burden, leading to a more efficient regulatory environment.

Evidence:

  • The bill aims to simplify these rules and remove any redundancies both within and between agencies.
  • This initiative is intended to enhance clarity and efficiency in the regulatory framework.
  • Every agency must review its administrative rules by January 1, 2027.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent to promote efficiency, but the specific criteria for 'simplification' and 'redundancy' may be subject to agency interpretation.

House - 3803 - Directs the Oregon Department of Administrative Services to develop enterprise strategic workforce plans and to work with executive department agencies on implementation.

Legislation ID: 117258

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 3803 directs the Oregon Department of Administrative Services (DAS) to develop strategic workforce plans, create task forces for defining agency functions and performance measures, and implement reporting requirements for public funds distributed to non-profit entities. It also establishes audit teams to focus on small public entities and enhance economic returns on investment. The bill sets deadlines for the implementation of these provisions and includes sunset clauses for certain task forces.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must conform their rules to the task forces determinations.
  • Creates an economic impact team to prioritize audits based on potential return on investment.
  • Establishes a process for the Oregon Department of Administrative Services to inform entities about reporting requirements.
  • Establishes a small agency team for auditing public entities with fewer than 75 employees.
  • Mandates agencies to submit agency-specific strategic workforce plans for review and compliance.
  • Mandates redaction or anonymization of exempt information under ORS 192.311 to 192.478.
  • Recommends adjustments to performance measures for state agencies.
  • Requires entities receiving public funds to file reports detailing expenditure categories.
  • Requires identification of applicable grants and public fund distributions by the Oregon Department of Administrative Services.
  • Requires the Oregon Department of Administrative Services to develop and update strategic workforce plans every four years.
  • Requires the publication of aggregated information on public fund distributions on the Oregon transparency website.
  • Task force to identify and eliminate obsolete definitions and standards.
  • Task force to meet every two years for performance measure reviews.
  • Task force to recommend improvements to key performance measures.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-27 In committee upon adjournment.
2025-05-14 Recommendation: Do pass with amendments, be printed A-Engrossed, and be referred to Ways and Means.
2025-05-14 Referred to Ways and Means by order of Speaker.
2025-05-07 Work Session held.
2025-03-31 Public Hearing held.
2025-03-04 Referred to Rules.
2025-02-27 First reading. Referred to Speakers desk.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes new task forces and audit teams specifically tasked with identifying and implementing cost savings, improving performance measurement, and streamlining agency functions—core mechanisms to enhance government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating strategic workforce planning, performance reviews, and the elimination of obsolete standards, the bill targets structural and procedural inefficiencies. The creation of audit teams and task forces directly supports ongoing evaluation and improvement of government operations.

Evidence:

  • empowers the Oregon Department of Administrative Services to create enterprise strategic workforce plans
  • establishes a task force to create uniform definitions and standards across state agencies, aiming to reduce administrative variations and improve budgeting decisions
  • Creates an economic impact team to prioritize audits based on potential return on investment
  • Establishes a small agency team for auditing public entities with fewer than 75 employees
  • establishes the Key Performance Measure Task Force to enhance the effectiveness of performance measures in assessing government outcomes

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill requires or authorizes studies, audits, reports, and regular reviews of government performance, all with the explicit goal of improving efficiency and accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: Mandated reporting, transparency measures, and performance reviews are designed to uncover duplicative or inefficient practices, promote best practices, and ensure responsible use of public funds.

Evidence:

  • Mandates agencies to submit agency-specific strategic workforce plans for review and compliance
  • Establishes a process for the Oregon Department of Administrative Services to inform entities about reporting requirements
  • Task force to recommend improvements to key performance measures

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 3

Why Relevant: The bill includes sunset clauses for certain task forces, indicating that some are temporary study groups focused on evaluating and improving government processes.

Mechanism of Influence: Temporary task forces can provide focused evaluation and recommendations for structural reforms, which can then be implemented to improve efficiency.

Evidence:

  • includes sunset clauses for certain task forces

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 1089 - Requires contracting agencies to purchase common off-the-shelf software or other information technology products or services that do not require customization through an information technology marketplace portal.

Legislation ID: 115591

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 1089 mandates state agencies to procure common off-the-shelf software through a designated online marketplace, streamlining the purchasing process. It also establishes a grant and loan program managed by the Oregon Department of Administrative Services to assist agencies in replacing outdated technology. The bill creates a Technology Modernization Fund to support these initiatives and outlines the responsibilities of the State Chief Information Officer in overseeing the marketplace and fund management.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must use preapproved marketplace portals for certain software purchases.
  • All funds received must be credited to the Technology Modernization Fund.
  • Consultation with an advisory board for grant and loan decisions.
  • Evaluation of procurement processes for grant and loan recipients.
  • Moneys in the fund are continuously appropriated for administrative expenses.
  • Priority for projects that yield significant cost savings.
  • Purchases must not require extensive customization.
  • Reports must assess ongoing costs and savings from funded projects.
  • Total purchase value must not exceed a specified cap.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-25 Referred to Information Management and Technology.
2025-02-25 Introduction and first reading. Referred to Presidents desk.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to improve government efficiency by streamlining software procurement, supporting technology modernization, and prioritizing cost-saving initiatives.

Mechanism of Influence: It establishes new structural and procedural mechanisms: a centralized purchasing marketplace, a dedicated modernization fund, a grant/loan program, biannual reporting requirements, and an advisory board. These are all designed to reduce costs, eliminate duplication, modernize operations, and improve oversight.

Evidence:

  • Senate Bill 1089 mandates state agencies to procure common off-the-shelf software through a designated online marketplace, streamlining the purchasing process.
  • Establishes a grant and loan program managed by the Oregon Department of Administrative Services to assist agencies in replacing outdated technology.
  • Creates a Technology Modernization Fund to support these initiatives.
  • Mandates biannual reporting by the Oregon Department of Administrative Services on the costs and outcomes of the modernization efforts.
  • Priority for projects that yield significant cost savings.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 431 - Requires the Secretary of State to study state offices and submit findings to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to general government not later than September 15, 2026.

Legislation ID: 114984

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 431 mandates the Secretary of State to examine state offices and submit a report with findings and potential legislative recommendations to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to general government by September 15, 2026. The provision is set to be repealed on January 2, 2027.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Requires a report to be submitted to the interim committees related to general government.
  • Requires the Secretary of State to conduct a study of state offices.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-17 Referred to Rules.
2025-01-13 Introduction and first reading. Referred to Presidents desk.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill mandates a study and report by a government official (Secretary of State) specifically targeting state offices, with the intent to provide findings and legislative recommendations to improve government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring the Secretary of State to examine state offices and report findings and recommendations to legislative committees, the bill establishes a formal evaluation process that could uncover inefficiencies, duplications, or opportunities for improvement in government structure and processes.

Evidence:

  • mandates the Secretary of State to examine state offices and submit a report with findings and potential legislative recommendations
  • report to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to general government

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not explicitly state that the study's purpose is to promote efficiency or cost savings, but the inclusion of 'findings and potential legislative recommendations' to general government committees strongly suggests an intent to improve government operations. However, the specific focus (efficiency, cost, modernization, etc.) is not spelled out.

Senate - 651 - Requires the Secretary of State to study methods for reducing the paperwork filing burden on businesses in this state.

Legislation ID: 115187

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 651 mandates the Secretary of State to study and identify methods for alleviating the paperwork burden faced by businesses in Oregon. The findings and potential legislative recommendations are to be reported to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to business by September 15, 2026. The bill includes a sunset provision, repealing the study requirement on January 2, 2027.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • The report is due no later than September 15, 2026.
  • The Secretary of State must submit a report with findings and recommendations to the interim committees related to business.
  • The study requirement is repealed on January 2, 2027.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-30 Public Hearing held.
2025-01-17 Referred to Labor and Business.
2025-01-13 Introduction and first reading. Referred to Presidents desk.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: This bill mandates a formal study aimed at identifying and recommending methods to streamline bureaucratic paperwork requirements for businesses, a clear effort to improve government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring the Secretary of State to evaluate and propose ways to reduce paperwork burdens, the bill seeks to uncover inefficiencies and suggest reforms that could make government processes less cumbersome and more responsive to business needs.

Evidence:

  • The Secretary of State is required to conduct a study on reducing the paperwork filing burden on businesses in Oregon.
  • The Secretary of State must submit a report with findings and recommendations to the interim committees related to business.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its focus on reducing the paperwork burden, which is a direct measure of administrative efficiency. However, the specific methods or scope of study are not detailed, leaving room for interpretation in implementation.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

Pennsylvania

Index of Bills

Senate - 104 - An Act providing for a pilot program to increase the complement of Office of Inspector General employees and for report to the General Assembly.

Legislation ID: 194631

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill proposes the implementation of a pilot program to increase the staffing of the Office of Inspector General by at least 50% over a two-year period, contingent on funding. The additional staff will focus on investigating claims of fraud and misconduct. A report detailing the outcomes of this pilot program must be submitted to the General Assembly after one year of the new hires.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Mandates that the total number of employees increases by at least 50% from the number on January 31, 2025.
  • Report must include total investigations completed, dollar amounts recovered, and costs associated with new hires.
  • Report to be submitted to specific committees within the Senate and House of Representatives.
  • Requires the hiring of additional employees within six months of the effective date.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-22 Referred toState Government

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly creates a pilot program and mandates a report evaluating the effect of increased staffing on government oversight functions. The stated purpose is to improve the detection and investigation of fraud and misconduct, which aligns with improving government efficiency and effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By increasing staff and requiring outcome-based reporting, the bill introduces a structural mechanism (a pilot program) to test whether more resources in the Inspector General's office lead to better performance and cost recovery. The mandatory report provides a procedural evaluation of the pilot's impact, supporting data-driven decisions on government operations.

Evidence:

  • 'pilot program to increase the number of employees in the Office of Inspector General by at least 50% to investigate claims...'
  • 'Report must include total investigations completed, dollar amounts recovered, and costs associated with new hires.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not explicitly state that its goal is to promote 'government efficiency' in broad terms, but the focus on fraud investigation and reporting on cost recovery strongly implies an intent to make government operations more effective and less wasteful.

Senate - 245 - An Act establishing the Regulatory Sandbox Program, the Regulatory Relief Office and an advisory committee; and providing for their powers and duties.

Legislation ID: 17625

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 245 introduces the Regulatory Sandbox Program Act, which creates a framework for businesses to test innovative products or services in a controlled environment with regulatory flexibility. The Act establishes a Regulatory Relief Office to oversee the program and an advisory committee to provide guidance. It outlines the definitions, roles, and processes involved in applying for and participating in the sandbox, including requirements for applicants and the responsibilities of regulatory agencies.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Requires applicants to submit detailed applications for participation in the sandbox.
  • Requires a two-thirds vote to override agency disapproval of applications.
  • Requires the appointment of a director and staff to administer the office.
  • The committee must consist of members representing various business interests and legislative bodies.
  • The office must act as a liaison between businesses and regulatory agencies.
  • The office must consult with applicable agencies and provide public notice of applications.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-13 Referred to INTERGOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes new governmental entities (Regulatory Relief Office and Advisory Committee) whose mission is to oversee a program designed to improve regulatory efficiency and responsiveness, particularly by streamlining processes for innovative businesses.

Mechanism of Influence: The Regulatory Relief Office and Advisory Committee are tasked with identifying and implementing regulatory flexibility, coordinating between agencies, and evaluating applications for participation. This structure is intended to reduce bureaucratic barriers and administrative burdens for businesses, thus promoting government efficiency.

Evidence:

  • 'establishes a Regulatory Relief Office to oversee the program and an advisory committee to provide guidance'
  • 'framework for businesses to test innovative products or services in a controlled environment with regulatory flexibility'
  • 'office must act as a liaison between businesses and regulatory agencies'

Ambiguity Notes: While the primary focus is on regulatory flexibility for businesses, the creation of the office and committee is explicitly to streamline and modernize regulatory processes, which aligns with the goal of improving government efficiency.

Senate - 444 - An Act amending the act of June 25, 1982 (P.L.633, No.181), known as the Regulatory Review Act, further providing for definitions and for existing regulations.

Legislation ID: 194951

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This legislation modifies the existing framework for regulatory review in Pennsylvania by providing a clearer definition for regulations that have significant economic impacts and establishing a structured process for reviewing these regulations after they have been in effect for three years. The bill also mandates agencies to report on the status and impact of these regulations, ensuring that they remain in the public interest.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must provide detailed reports on the regulations implementation and economic impact.
  • Mandates agencies to report on the status and impact of economically significant regulations after three years.
  • Reports must include public comments and whether the regulation meets public interest criteria.
  • Requires a public comment period following the publication of the agencys report.
  • Requires the commission to prioritize reviews of existing regulations upon request from the Senate or House committees.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-11 Referred toIntergovernmental Affairs & Operations
2025-06-10 Re-reported as committed
2025-06-10 Third consideration and final passage, (27-23)
2025-06-10 (Remarks see Senate Journal Page ....)
2025-06-09 Re-referred toAppropriations
2025-06-09 Second consideration
2025-06-04 First consideration
2025-06-04 Reported as committed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes ongoing reporting and review requirements for economically significant regulations, with a specific goal of ensuring these regulations remain necessary and effective. It creates a structured mechanism (agency reports, public comment, commission review) to identify regulations that may be outdated, unnecessarily burdensome, or no longer in the public interest, which aligns directly with efforts to improve government efficiency and effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating periodic agency reports and enabling independent commission reviews, the bill creates procedural mechanisms to evaluate and potentially streamline or eliminate inefficient or costly regulations. The inclusion of public feedback and economic impact analysis further supports the goal of reducing administrative burdens and regulatory inefficiencies.

Evidence:

  • 'Agencies must report on the implementation status, public feedback, economic impact, and ongoing necessity of economically significant regulations, including any need for amendments or repeals.'
  • 'The bill introduces a new definition for economically significant regulation...'
  • 'The commission can recommend changes based on public interest criteria.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not explicitly use the term 'efficiency,' but the required evaluation of economic impact, necessity, and public interest, as well as the potential for amendment or repeal, strongly implies a focus on efficiency and effectiveness in government regulation.

Senate - 462 - An Act amending the act of June 25, 1982 (P.L.633, No.181), known as the Regulatory Review Act, further providing for definitions and for existing regulations; and establishing the Office of Government Efficiency and providing for its power and duties.

Legislation ID: 194969

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends the Regulatory Review Act to introduce definitions related to the newly established Office of Government Efficiency. It empowers this office to review existing regulations, recommend modifications, and ensure that regulations are not unduly burdensome. The office will also facilitate public input on regulatory changes and report annually to the General Assembly and the Governor on its findings and recommendations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Mandates annual reporting to the General Assembly and Governor on recommended changes and progress.
  • Mandates the identification of at least two existing regulations for repeal when a new regulation is promulgated.
  • Requires the commission to review existing regulations upon request from the General Assembly.
  • Requires the establishment of a public website for receiving suggestions and reports on government practices.
  • The office must adopt rules for reviewing statutes and regulations.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-19 Referred toIntergovernmental Operations

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a new Office of Government Efficiency, whose explicit mission is to review regulations for efficiency, reduce burdens, and recommend modifications to streamline government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By creating a dedicated office with authority to review, recommend, and report on regulatory improvements, the bill establishes a structural mechanism to promote ongoing government efficiency and effectiveness. The requirement to identify regulations for repeal with each new regulation further enforces efficiency.

Evidence:

  • 'establishes the Office of Government Efficiency, detailing its powers, duties...'
  • 'empowers this office to review existing regulations, recommend modifications, and ensure that regulations are not unduly burdensome.'
  • 'Mandates annual reporting to the General Assembly and Governor on recommended changes and progress.'
  • 'Mandates the identification of at least two existing regulations for repeal when a new regulation is promulgated.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's language is clear in its intent to promote efficiency, though the specific criteria for what constitutes 'unduly burdensome' regulations may be subject to interpretation by the office.

Senate - 474 - An Act providing for zero-based budgeting relating to the Commonwealths budget review.

Legislation ID: 194981

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill establishes the Commonwealth Zero-Based Budgeting Act, mandating a comprehensive review of state government programs through zero-based budgeting. The Secretary of the Budget is required to review all programs at least once every five years, with a phased approach starting in 2025. Agencies must submit detailed plans justifying their existence and expenditures, while certain educational services are exempt from this review.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must submit a zero-based budget plan that includes justifications for activities, impact estimates of discontinuation, and expenditure accounts for maintaining services.
  • Agencies must submit a zero-based budget plan that includes justifications for their activities and detailed expenditure accounts.
  • Exempts class size, school curriculum, and direct services from zero-based budget review.
  • Exempts class size, school curriculum, and direct services provided by teachers from zero-based budget review.
  • Requires indirect services, like administrative costs, to undergo zero-based budget review.
  • Requires the Secretary of the Budget to review every state program at least once every five years.
  • Requires the Secretary of the Budget to review every state program every five years.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-24 First consideration
2025-06-24 Reported as amended
2025-03-19 Referred toFinance

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a recurring, structured review process (zero-based budgeting) explicitly designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations by requiring agencies to justify their expenditures and existence.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating periodic, comprehensive budget justifications and reviews for all state programs, the bill creates a procedural mechanism to identify waste, eliminate unnecessary spending, and ensure that government resources are allocated efficiently.

Evidence:

  • mandating a comprehensive review of state government programs through zero-based budgeting
  • Agencies must submit detailed plans justifying their existence and expenditures
  • outlines the rationale for adopting zero-based budgeting, highlighting the inefficiencies of traditional budgeting methods and the need for accountability in government spending

Ambiguity Notes: The language is clear in its intent to promote government efficiency and accountability through zero-based budgeting. The exemption for certain educational services is specific and does not undermine the overall efficiency goal.

Senate - 63 - A Resolution urging each member of the Pennsylvania Congressional Delegation to commend and support the Department of Government Efficiency.

Legislation ID: 195454

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This resolution highlights the achievements of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in reducing waste and improving government processes. It emphasizes the need for continued support and resources for DOGE, especially in light of its significant savings for taxpayers and the importance of incorporating technological advancements in public services.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-09 Referred toIntergovernmental Operations

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The resolution explicitly focuses on government efficiency, supporting an entity (DOGE) whose mission is to improve government operations, reduce waste, and incorporate technology to streamline processes.

Mechanism of Influence: By calling for resources and support for DOGE, the resolution aims to empower this department to continue and expand its efficiency initiatives. It also encourages the adoption of technological solutions for better public service delivery.

Evidence:

  • The Senate calls for ensuring that DOGE has the necessary resources to continue its work in enhancing government efficiency and accountability.
  • The Senate urges the Pennsylvania Congressional Delegation to commend and support the Department of Government Efficiency for its efforts in improving government efficiency.
  • The resolution emphasizes the importance of embracing technological advancements to improve public services and reduce costs.

Ambiguity Notes: While the resolution is largely commendatory and does not itself establish new structural mechanisms or mandates, it does directly address the mission of government efficiency and the need for continued efforts and support.

Senate - 810 - An Act amending the act of June 25, 1982 (P.L.633, No.181), known as the Regulatory Review Act, further providing for definitions, for proposed regulations and procedures for review and for final-form regulations and final-omitted regulations and procedures for review; providing for regulations deemed withdrawn; further providing for procedures for subsequent review of disapproved final-form or final-omitted regulations; providing for concurrent resolution required for economically significant regulations; further providing for existing regulations; and providing for State agency regulatory compliance officers and for Office of Government Efficiency.

Legislation ID: 195301

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends the Regulatory Review Act of 1982 to include new definitions, revise procedures for the review of proposed regulations, and establish requirements for economically significant regulations. It also introduces protocols for the withdrawal of regulations and outlines the roles of the Office of Government Efficiency and State agency regulatory compliance officers.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies cannot reissue similar regulations unless authorized by new legislation.
  • Agencies must designate a regulatory compliance officer.
  • Agencies must identify two existing regulations for repeal when promulgating a new regulation.
  • Agencies must request a concurrent resolution for economically significant regulations.
  • Agencies must submit a copy of the commissions order to the General Assembly for concurrent resolution approval.
  • Agencies must submit proposed regulations to the Legislative Reference Bureau and the commission simultaneously.
  • Allows the commission to review existing regulations at least every three years.
  • A regulation is deemed withdrawn if it does not have explicit statutory authority for its purpose.
  • Committees may report a concurrent resolution within 14 days to prevent promulgation of disapproved regulations.
  • Defines economically significant regulation as one that incurs costs over $1,000,000 annually.
  • Establishes the Office of Government Efficiency as a new entity within the regulatory framework.
  • If a committee disapproves a regulation, the commission cannot act on it for a specified period.
  • It must report annually to the General Assembly on its findings and recommendations.
  • Regulations cannot be promulgated without this approval.
  • Requires a two-thirds vote in each house to override the Governors veto.
  • Requires estimates of costs to be prepared by the Independent Fiscal Office.
  • The commission has up to 30 days to approve or disapprove regulations after receipt.
  • The General Assembly has 30 calendar days or ten legislative days to act on the veto.
  • The General Assembly has 30 calendar days or ten legislative days to consider the resolution.
  • The office must adopt rules for reviewing statutes and regulations.
  • The officer must provide guidance and opinions on regulatory compliance within 20 business days.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-30 Referred toIntergovernmental Operations

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes the Office of Government Efficiency, a nonpartisan entity tasked with reviewing statutes and regulations to enhance government efficiency, and mandates annual reports with recommendations for improvement.

Mechanism of Influence: This office will systematically review government operations and regulations to identify inefficiencies, redundancies, and opportunities for cost savings, and will recommend modifications or repeals. Its findings are reported to the legislature for potential action.

Evidence:

  • 'Establishes a nonpartisan Office of Government Efficiency to review existing statutes and regulations for potential modifications or repeals and to enhance government efficiency.'
  • 'It must report annually to the General Assembly on its findings and recommendations.'

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill requires agencies to designate regulatory compliance officers whose role includes facilitating communication and ensuring compliance, which is a structural mechanism to improve regulatory efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By designating compliance officers, agencies are expected to streamline regulatory processes, improve responsiveness, and reduce administrative burdens for regulated entities.

Evidence:

  • 'Each agency must designate a regulatory compliance officer to facilitate communication with regulated entities and ensure compliance with regulations.'

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 3

Why Relevant: The bill mandates that agencies, when promulgating new regulations, must identify two existing regulations for repeal, and establishes regular reviews of existing regulations. This is a procedural mechanism aimed at reducing regulatory burden and improving efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: This 'two-out for one-in' rule directly targets regulatory accumulation and encourages agencies to eliminate outdated or unnecessary rules, thus streamlining government functions.

Evidence:

  • 'Agencies must identify two existing regulations for repeal when promulgating a new regulation.'
  • 'Allows the commission to review existing regulations at least every three years.'

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 4

Why Relevant: The bill revises the procedures for review and approval of regulations, particularly those with significant economic impact, and requires detailed cost estimates and fiscal analysis.

Mechanism of Influence: These procedural changes are intended to ensure that only cost-effective and necessary regulations are approved, reducing unnecessary regulatory expansion and associated costs.

Evidence:

  • 'Agencies must submit a concurrent resolution for approval of economically significant regulations.'
  • 'Requires estimates of costs to be prepared by the Independent Fiscal Office.'

Ambiguity Notes: None

South Carolina

Index of Bills

House - 3485 - Annual audits; provide state auditor shall audit each county, municipality, judicial office, and school district; repeal certain sections

Legislation ID: 196807

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Bill 3485 proposes amendments to the South Carolina Code of Laws to require annual audits of school districts, counties, municipalities, and other public entities by the State Auditor. It repeals several existing sections related to county and municipal audits, consolidating the auditing process under a single authority to ensure thorough oversight of public funds.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Repeals Section 11-7-25 regarding periodic audits of certain county and municipal offices.
  • Repeals Section 4-9-150 regarding county audits.
  • Repeals Section 5-7-240 regarding municipal audits.
  • Repeals Section 59-17-100 regarding school district audit reports.
  • Requires annual audits for all specified public entities by the State Auditor.
  • Requires the State Auditor to audit all state agencies, counties, municipalities, judicial offices, and school districts annually.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-14 Referred to Committee on Judiciary ( House Journal-page 221 )
2025-01-14 Introduced and read first time ( House Journal-page 221 )
2024-12-05 Prefiled
2024-12-05 Referred to Committee on Judiciary

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a structural mechanism (annual audits by the State Auditor) designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations. It consolidates audit functions, which is an explicit effort to streamline bureaucratic processes and enhance oversight.

Mechanism of Influence: By centralizing audit responsibilities under the State Auditor and repealing fragmented requirements, the bill is intended to eliminate duplicative efforts, reduce administrative burden, and provide consistent, thorough oversight of public funds.

Evidence:

  • consolidating the auditing process under a single authority to ensure thorough oversight of public funds
  • Repeals several existing sections of the code that relate to audits of counties, municipalities, and school districts, streamlining the auditing process

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its goal of streamlining and consolidating audit processes for efficiency. There is little ambiguity regarding its intent to improve government operations.

House - 3854 - Earmark, Accountability, Integrity, and Transparency Act

Legislation ID: 195560

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill introduces the "Earmark Responsibility, Accountability, Integrity, and Transparency Act" which mandates that organizations receiving state funds must submit itemized reports on how the funds are spent. It outlines the requirements for these organizations to provide quarterly updates and a final accounting of expenditures, including receipts. Failure to comply will result in the obligation to repay the funds received, plus interest.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • All state agency contributions to organizations must adhere to the reporting requirements outlined in this act.
  • Applies to all contributions from state agencies to organizations, regardless of funding source.
  • Interest will be applied to the amount owed.
  • Mandates justification for unexpended funds to avoid return of funds.
  • Mandates quarterly itemized spending updates with receipts after funds are received.
  • Organizations must account for any unexpended funds and justify their status.
  • Organizations must repay the total funds received if they fail to provide required updates.
  • Organizations must submit an initial report detailing how the funds will be spent and the public goals to be achieved.
  • Quarterly itemized spending updates must be provided to the state agency and include receipts for purchases.
  • Requires accounting of unexpended funds in quarterly reports after two fiscal years.
  • Requires final accounting of expenditures after funds are fully spent.
  • Requires organizations to submit a spending report before receiving funds.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-30 Referred to Committee on Ways and Means ( House Journal-page 41 )
2025-01-30 Introduced and read first time ( House Journal-page 41 )

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill introduces structural procedural requirements (mandatory reporting, justification, and potential clawback of funds) explicitly aimed at increasing the efficiency and accountability of government spending. These mechanisms are designed to ensure state funds are used as intended and reduce waste or misuse.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating detailed, periodic financial reporting and requiring justification for unspent funds, the bill would likely streamline oversight, reduce the risk of misallocation, and promote more efficient use of public resources. The threat of repayment incentivizes compliance and careful fund management.

Evidence:

  • 'organizations receiving state funds must submit itemized reports on how the funds are spent'
  • 'quarterly updates and a final accounting of expenditures, including receipts'
  • 'Failure to comply will result in the obligation to repay the funds received, plus interest.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not create a new entity or commission, but it does establish a systematic reporting and accountability process that directly targets government efficiency. Its language is clear about its objectives and mechanisms.

Senate - 254 - Small Business Regulatory Freedom Act: , h3021

Legislation ID: 195678

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends various sections of the South Carolina Code of Laws to establish the Small Business Regulatory Review Committee, which will evaluate regulations pending reauthorization and make recommendations to the General Assembly. The bill also outlines requirements for agencies when promulgating regulations, including the need for cost-benefit analyses and the identification of existing regulations to remove. It aims to ensure that regulations do not exceed the necessary scope and are subject to periodic review and automatic expiration.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must cite specific statutory authority for proposed regulations.
  • Agencies must file a document with the Legislative Council containing various required elements such as the full text of regulations, a request for review, and a detailed rationale for the regulation.
  • Agencies must file regulations within specified time limits.
  • Agencies must report on regulations they intend to repeal or amend after review.
  • Assessment reports must include a cost-benefit analysis.
  • Challenges must be brought in a court of competent jurisdiction.
  • Committee is tasked with reducing regulatory requirements by 25%.
  • Committee must evaluate the impact of regulations on small businesses and economic development.
  • Committees must take action on regulations within 120 days.
  • Courts must not defer to agency interpretations and must resolve ambiguities against increased agency authority.
  • Documents must include a rationale for the regulation and a fiscal impact statement.
  • Exemptions are provided for regulations required by federal law.
  • Existing regulations must be updated within three years or they expire.
  • If costs exceed $1 million over five years, a statement of economic impact is required.
  • If no action is taken in 60 days, the regulation must be placed on the full committee agenda.
  • Joint resolutions must include a synopsis and summary of assessment reports.
  • Regulations are effective upon publication unless disapproved within 120 days.
  • Regulations must be readopted before expiration to remain in effect.
  • Reports must disclose effects on public health and the environment.
  • The House and Senate will provide necessary staff support to the committee.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-21 Referred to Committee on Judiciary ( Senate Journal-page 4 )
2025-01-21 Introduced and read first time ( Senate Journal-page 4 )

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly creates a new committee with the explicit mission to review, reduce, and streamline government regulations, which is a structural mechanism to improve government efficiency and reduce unnecessary administrative burdens.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing the Small Business Regulatory Review Committee and requiring agencies to justify, update, or remove regulations, the bill sets up an ongoing process for identifying and implementing cost savings and efficiency improvements. The periodic review, cost-benefit analysis, and automatic expiration provisions are designed to reduce redundancy and excessive regulation.

Evidence:

  • 'The Small Business Regulatory Review Committee is established to review regulations pending reauthorization and make recommendations regarding their retention or removal.'
  • 'Committee is tasked with reducing regulatory requirements by 25%.'
  • 'All proposed regulations must include assessment reports that demonstrate the benefits outweigh the costs.'
  • 'Agencies cannot promulgate regulations without express statutory authority and must identify two existing regulations to remove for each new regulation proposed.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit about its focus on regulatory efficiency and reduction. The requirement to reduce regulatory requirements by 25% is a clear quantitative target. Some discretion remains in how the committee evaluates 'impact' and 'necessity,' but the overall intent is unambiguous.

Senate - 318 - Commission on Fiscal Restraint and Government Efficiency; provide for duties and obligations; prioritize spending cuts and establish a date that spending cuts must be reported; other provisions: , h3926

Legislation ID: 199632

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

The bill creates a commission tasked with identifying areas for spending reductions in the state budget, reviewing regulations to ease burdens on businesses and citizens, and recommending improvements to government efficiency. The commission will report its findings and recommendations to the General Assembly and the Governor by specified deadlines, and it will be dissolved after its final report in 2026.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • A follow-up report on the commissions other duties must be submitted by October 1, 2026.
  • Commission chair is the Director of the Department of Administration, who is a non-voting member.
  • Commission composed of three members each appointed by the President of the Senate, Speaker of the House, and Governor.
  • Commissioners serve without compensation or benefits.
  • Commission is repealed on October 2, 2026.
  • Commission members cannot be members of the General Assembly or have conflicts of interest.
  • Commission members must be appointed by the President of the Senate, Speaker of the House, and Governor.
  • Commission members must be appointed by the President of the Senate, Speaker of the House, and the Governor.
  • Commission members must not be part of the General Assembly or have conflicts of interest.
  • Commission members serve without compensation.
  • Conduct a survey of state government structure and funding.
  • Evaluate government programs for elimination or consolidation.
  • Final report on all findings due by October 1, 2026.
  • First report due by October 1, 2025, focusing on spending reductions.
  • First report due by October 1, 2025, on appropriations reductions.
  • First report on spending reductions due by October 1, 2025.
  • Identify areas for spending reductions and redundant regulations.
  • Identify areas for spending reductions and regulatory repeals.
  • Identify redundant or conflicting regulations and government programs for restructuring.
  • Identify redundant or oppressive regulations and suggest repeals.
  • Initial report on spending reductions due by October 1, 2025.
  • Make recommendations for consolidating or restructuring government entities.
  • Members cannot be part of the General Assembly or have conflicts of interest.
  • Members must not be part of the General Assembly or have conflicts of interest.
  • Members serve without compensation and are not entitled to state benefits.
  • Publish reports on General Assembly and Governors websites.
  • Report findings on spending reductions by October 1, 2025.
  • Report findings to specified legislative leaders by deadlines.
  • Report findings to the General Assembly and the Governor by specified deadlines.
  • Reports to be published on the General Assemblys and Governors websites.
  • Review appropriations and identify areas for spending reductions.
  • Review appropriations to identify spending reductions.
  • Second report due by October 1, 2026, covering additional findings.
  • Second report due by October 1, 2026, on additional findings.
  • Subsequent report on additional findings due by October 1, 2026.
  • Subsequent report on other findings due by October 1, 2026.
  • The chair of the commission is the Director of the Department of Administration or their designee, who cannot be a General Assembly member.
  • The chair of the commission will be the Director of the Department of Administration.
  • The commission cannot issue subpoenas.
  • The commission is set to sunset on October 2, 2026.
  • The commission must report its findings on spending reductions by October 1, 2025.
  • The commission shall have three members appointed by the President of the Senate, three by the Speaker of the House, and three by the Governor.
  • The joint resolution will be repealed on October 2, 2026.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-08 Roll call Ayes-34 Nays-11 ( Senate Journal-page 65 )
2025-05-08 Amended ( Senate Journal-page 65 )
2025-05-08 Read third time and sent to House ( Senate Journal-page 65 )
2025-05-07 Roll call Ayes-35 Nays-6 ( Senate Journal-page 65 )
2025-05-07 Read second time ( Senate Journal-page 65 )
2025-05-07 Committee Amendment Adopted ( Senate Journal-page 65 )
2025-05-07 Amended ( Senate Journal-page 65 )
2025-02-25 Scriveners error corrected

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly creates a commission with the explicit purpose of improving government efficiency and reducing costs.

Mechanism of Influence: The commission is empowered to review appropriations and regulations, conduct surveys of government structure and funding, and recommend spending reductions and regulatory repeals. Its findings are reported to state leadership for potential action.

Evidence:

  • Establishes the Commission on Fiscal Restraint and Government Efficiency
  • responsibilities to review state appropriations and regulations to identify areas for efficiency improvements
  • Identify areas for spending reductions and regulatory repeals

Ambiguity Notes: The commission’s duties are clearly specified as relating to government efficiency; there is no ambiguity about the intent.

Senate - 533 - Legislative Audit Council; grant subpoena powers; expand prerequisites for holding the position of director; expand access to records and facilities upon request and provide penalties for failure to comply; other provisions

Legislation ID: 196480

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Bill 533 aims to amend the South Carolina Code of Laws to provide the Legislative Audit Council with the authority to issue subpoenas for documents and sworn testimony necessary for conducting audits. It also revises qualifications for the Councils director, expands access to agency records, and defines the confidentiality of audit records, establishing penalties for non-compliance.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must explain any delays in providing requested records.
  • Agencies must provide access to records during operating hours.
  • Agencies must provide access to records upon request.
  • All audit working papers are confidential unless specified otherwise.
  • All records and working papers of the Legislative Audit Council, except final audit reports, are confidential.
  • Director must have a bachelors degree and at least five years of relevant experience.
  • Director must have a Bachelors degree from an accredited institution.
  • Failure to comply can result in misdemeanor charges and fines.
  • Failure to comply may result in misdemeanor charges and fines.
  • Individuals must comply with subpoenas or face contempt of court charges.
  • Individuals refusing subpoenas may be held in contempt of court.
  • Legislative Audit Council can issue subpoenas and compel testimony.
  • Legislative Audit Council may issue subpoenas and compel testimony.
  • Legislative Audit Council may issue subpoenas to state agencies and contractors.
  • No member of the General Assembly can be appointed as Director.
  • Prohibits current or former members of the General Assembly from being appointed as Director.
  • Requires at least five years of relevant experience, with three years in a managerial capacity.
  • Requires compliance from state agencies and individuals with subpoenas.
  • Violations may lead to fines and dismissal from public office.
  • Violations may result in misdemeanor charges, fines, and dismissal from public office.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-04 Scriveners error corrected
2025-04-02 Introduced and read first time ( Senate Journal-page 5 )
2025-04-02 Referred to Committee on Judiciary ( Senate Journal-page 5 )

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly empowers the Legislative Audit Council to more effectively conduct audits of government agencies by granting subpoena authority and expanding access to records. These changes are explicitly aimed at improving the Council's ability to uncover inefficiencies, waste, or mismanagement within government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By allowing the LAC to compel the production of documents and testimony, the bill strengthens oversight and accountability mechanisms, which are key to identifying and addressing inefficiencies and improving government performance. Enhanced access and authority can lead to more thorough and effective audits.

Evidence:

  • grants the Legislative Audit Council the authority to issue subpoenas for documents and sworn testimony from state agencies and their contractors
  • expands access to agency records
  • necessary for conducting audits

Ambiguity Notes: The language is specific about audit authority and subpoena power, but does not create a new entity or mandate specific studies. Its primary focus is on strengthening an existing oversight body.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

South Dakota

Index of Bills

Senate - 1051 - update provisions on the interim legislative oversight of administrative rulemaking.

Legislation ID: 75719

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 1051 amends several sections of South Dakota law to enhance the legislative oversight of administrative rules. It establishes clearer definitions for agencies and rules, updates the structure and function of the Interim Rules Review Committee, and mandates the preparation of impact statements for proposed rules that affect small businesses. The bill aims to streamline the rulemaking process while ensuring that the interests of small businesses are considered.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must correct rules within 180 days of notification.
  • Agencies must publish emergency rules and provide justifications for their necessity prior to adoption.
  • Agencies must publish notices in at least three newspapers and provide opportunities for public comment.
  • Agencies must publish the text of the emergency rule and provide reasons for its necessity.
  • Agencies must serve documents related to the proposed rule at least twenty days prior to the public hearing.
  • Agencies must serve proposed rules for approval before public hearings.
  • Agencies must serve proposed rules to relevant officials and publish notices at least twenty days prior to public hearings.
  • Bureau of Finance and Management must prepare its own fiscal note for review.
  • Certificate of true copy filed with the secretary of state.
  • Clarifies what constitutes a Rule and specifies exceptions.
  • Code counsel must notify agencies of necessary changes before hearings.
  • Committee consists of six members from both the Senate and House, with no more than four from the same political party.
  • Committee consists of six members with no more than four from the same political party.
  • Committee consists of three senators and three representatives, with political party representation limits.
  • Committee meetings are open to the public and must allow interested persons to present evidence.
  • Committee must choose a chair and vice chair.
  • Committee must prepare a schedule of meetings based on proposed agency rules.
  • Committee reviews proposed agency rules and makes recommendations.
  • Defines Agency to include various state entities and exclude certain governmental units unless specified by law.
  • Defines agency to include various state entities but exclude the Legislature and certain other units unless specified by statute.
  • Defines Contested case and outlines its exclusions.
  • Defines contested case to exclude certain proceedings such as inmate disciplinary matters and student academic proceedings.
  • Defines small business as a business entity with twenty-five or fewer full-time employees.
  • Delegated duties must be documented and filed with the secretary of state.
  • Delegated duties must be documented and filed with the Secretary of State.
  • Emergency rules must be distinguished from permanent rules.
  • Emergency rules must be published and justified with specific reasons for urgency.
  • Emergency rules revert to original permanent rules after 90 days unless further amended.
  • Fee increases cannot exceed 20% of the previous years budget.
  • Filed with code counsel in a prescribed format.
  • Fiscal note must explain the computed effects of the proposed rule.
  • Fiscal notes must explain the financial effects of proposed rules on state agencies and subdivisions.
  • Fiscal notes must explain the financial effects of the proposed rule and be prepared by the Bureau of Finance and Management.
  • Identify prior rules that are amended or repealed.
  • Impact statement must include a narrative explanation, identification of affected small businesses, and alternatives to the proposed rule.
  • Impact statements must be written in plain language and include an estimate of affected small businesses and compliance requirements.
  • Impact statements must include explanations of effects, identification of affected businesses, and alternative methods for compliance.
  • Meetings are open to the public and must be scheduled annually.
  • Meetings must be open to the public and allow for public input.
  • Members are compensated for their time spent on committee business.
  • Members must be appointed before the end of each regular session in odd-numbered years.
  • Members serve two-year terms and are appointed before the adjournment of odd-numbered year sessions.
  • Members serve two-year terms and must be appointed before the adjournment of each regular session in odd-numbered years.
  • Members serve two-year terms, filling vacancies as they arise.
  • Must provide affidavit and relevant federal documentation.
  • Notices must be published in at least three newspapers of general circulation and provided to individuals who request advance notice.
  • Notices must include a description of the proposed rule and how to submit comments.
  • Notices must include a description of the proposed rule and instructions for submitting comments.
  • Petition must include text of proposed changes and reasons for the proposal.
  • Presentation to the Interim Rules Review Committee for permanent rules.
  • Public hearings must allow for public comment and must be documented.
  • Public hearings must be held to allow for public comment and participation.
  • References to publications must include details on accessibility and cost.
  • Rule adoption requires completion of § 1-26-4 or § 1-26-5 for emergency rules.
  • Rules must be signed by the appropriate authorities and filed with the Secretary of State.
  • Rules must reference the agencys authority and the statute they implement.
  • Rules must specify the exact sections being incorporated.
  • Rulings have the same status as agency decisions in contested cases.
  • Signed by a majority of the multi-member body or authorized officer.
  • Statement must be issued within 30 days of request.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-13 Signed by the Governor
2025-03-05 Delivered to the Governor
2025-03-04 Signed by the President
2025-03-03 Signed by the Speaker
2025-02-27 Do Pass as amended
2025-02-26 Do Pass
2025-02-26 Schedule for hearing
2025-02-03 Refer to Committee

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes and empowers the Interim Rules Review Committee, a legislative oversight body, to review and schedule meetings on proposed agency rules. It also requires agencies to prepare fiscal notes and impact statements, which are procedural mechanisms intended to improve government transparency and performance.

Mechanism of Influence: By structuring and empowering a committee to oversee agency rulemaking, and by mandating fiscal and impact analyses, the bill directly aims to streamline processes, reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens, and ensure government actions are cost-effective and responsive to public and business concerns.

Evidence:

  • 'establishes clearer definitions for agencies and rules, updates the structure and function of the Interim Rules Review Committee'
  • 'mandates the preparation of impact statements for proposed rules that affect small businesses'
  • 'aims to streamline the rulemaking process'
  • 'Mandates that agencies include a fiscal note with proposed rules, detailing the financial impact on state revenues and expenditures.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill’s intent to promote efficiency is indicated by its focus on streamlining procedures and requiring impact/fiscal analyses, though it does not use the word 'efficiency' explicitly. Its provisions are nonetheless clearly aimed at making government rulemaking more effective and less burdensome.

Senate - 1206 - revise provisions on interim transfers and appropriations.

Legislation ID: 75955

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 1206 amends existing statutes related to the management of state funds, including definitions of key terms such as Agency, Budget unit, and General contingency funds. It outlines the authority and processes for transferring appropriations, the role of the special committee in managing these funds, and establishes requirements for reporting and accountability regarding state expenditures. The bill aims to enhance fiscal oversight and ensure appropriations are used as intended.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-24 Defer to the 41st legislative day
2025-02-24 Schedule for hearing
2025-02-21 Schedule for hearing
2025-02-19 Schedule for hearing
2025-02-18 Schedule for hearing
2025-02-10 Schedule for hearing
2025-02-03 First read in House and referred

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes and empowers a 'special committee' with explicit oversight and program evaluation duties related to state fiscal operations. It mandates reporting, accountability, and public hearings, all with the stated aim of improving fiscal oversight and ensuring appropriations are used as intended.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring annual revenue projections, codifying fund transfer processes, and empowering a committee to evaluate programs and hold hearings, the bill introduces structural and procedural mechanisms to enhance efficiency, transparency, and responsiveness in government financial operations.

Evidence:

  • 'The bill aims to enhance fiscal oversight and ensure appropriations are used as intended.'
  • 'The special committee is tasked with releasing funds from general contingency appropriations and overseeing state fiscal policies, including program evaluations and public hearings.'
  • 'Repeals an old section...streamlining the process for fund transfers.'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill's primary focus is fiscal oversight, it explicitly mentions program evaluations and hearings, which are mechanisms for identifying inefficiencies and improving government operations. The intent to 'streamline' is supported by the repeal of outdated provisions and more rigorous approval processes.

Senate - 146 - revise provisions on interim transfers and appropriations.

Legislation ID: 76614

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 146 amends various sections of the South Dakota Codified Laws to clarify and enhance the processes for budgetary appropriations, transfers, and the use of contingency funds. It outlines the roles of state agencies, the special committee, and the Bureau of Finance and Management in managing state funds, ensuring that appropriations are used for their intended purposes, and establishing procedures for transferring funds between budget units.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • All appropriations must be classified according to chapter 4-7 for accounting purposes.
  • A majority vote of the special committee is necessary to release funds.
  • Any action on fund release must be approved by a majority of the special committee.
  • Certain transfers require approval by the special committee.
  • Defines Agency as a principal functional and administrative entity of state government.
  • Defines Budget unit as a unit of government within an agency with separate appropriations.
  • Defines Fund source as the source of funds appropriated in the general appropriation bill.
  • Funds appropriated may only be used for specific purposes outlined in the appropriation act.
  • Funds may only be used for specific purposes as provided in the general appropriation act.
  • Measures must be proposed if budget shortfalls exceed specified percentages.
  • No warrants may be issued in excess of the appropriated amount without specific legislative provisions.
  • Permanent transfers between budget units are only allowed under specific conditions.
  • Projections must include actual revenue for the last two fiscal years and estimates for the current year.
  • Requests for funds must be submitted in writing to the Governor and the special committee.
  • Requests must detail the proposed usage and necessity for the funds.
  • Revenue projections must include actual revenue from the last two fiscal years.
  • The committee may hold public hearings and summon witnesses.
  • The committee may hold public hearings to evaluate budget reports.
  • The Governor must notify the special committee for consideration of emergency fund releases.
  • The Governor must recommend requests deemed necessary to the special committee.
  • The special committee must continually evaluate and coordinate state budgetary policy.
  • The special committee must review and approve fund releases from general contingency funds.
  • Transfers between program accounts must be requested and approved in writing.
  • Transfers must be approved by a majority vote of the Executive Board.
  • Transfers must be approved by the Bureau of Finance and Management.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-13 Signed by the Governor
2025-03-10 Delivered to the Governor
2025-03-06 Signed by the Speaker
2025-03-06 Signed by the President
2025-03-05 Do Pass as amended
2025-03-04 Schedule for hearing
2025-03-04 Do Pass
2025-02-25 First read in House and referred

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill outlines the responsibilities of a special committee in managing contingency funds and reviewing state fiscal policies, including continual evaluation and coordination of state budgetary policy.

Mechanism of Influence: By empowering a special committee to oversee contingency funds and coordinate fiscal policy, the bill creates a structural mechanism designed to improve government efficiency and responsiveness in budget management.

Evidence:

  • The special committee must continually evaluate and coordinate state budgetary policy.
  • This provision outlines the responsibilities of the special committee in managing general contingency funds and reviewing state fiscal policies.

Ambiguity Notes: The language does not explicitly state that the purpose is to promote government efficiency, but the continual evaluation and coordination roles strongly imply this intent.

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: Provisions requiring annual revenue projections and detailed procedures for fund transfers and contingency fund requests are intended to improve fiscal discipline and transparency.

Mechanism of Influence: Mandating structured processes for revenue projections, fund transfers, and contingency fund requests can help reduce fiscal inefficiencies and ensure funds are used appropriately.

Evidence:

  • This provision requires the Bureau of Finance and Management and the Legislative Research Council to submit annual revenue projections...
  • This provision details the procedures for transferring appropriated funds between programs and departments, requiring written requests and approvals.

Ambiguity Notes: While these provisions do not explicitly state an efficiency goal, the procedural improvements are generally recognized as mechanisms for enhancing government effectiveness.

Analysis 3

Why Relevant: The bill repeals outdated provisions and updates definitions, which can help eliminate confusion and streamline government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: Modernizing legal definitions and removing obsolete rules can reduce administrative burdens and clarify responsibilities.

Evidence:

  • This provision repeals an outdated section regarding the allocation of appropriated funds...
  • This provision amends the definitions of key terms used in the chapter...

Ambiguity Notes: The repeal and definitional updates are not explicitly tied to efficiency, but their practical effect is to streamline processes.

Senate - 149 - improve the operations and effectiveness of South Dakota.

Legislation ID: 76623

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 149 aims to implement measures that will improve the overall operations of state government in South Dakota. The bill introduces provisions that will streamline processes, enhance accountability, and ensure that state resources are utilized effectively to serve the citizens of South Dakota.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-21 Table
2025-02-03 Refer to Committee
2025-01-30 First Reading Senate

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's stated intent is to improve the operations and effectiveness of state government, which directly aligns with the goal of promoting government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By streamlining processes and enhancing accountability, the bill aims to make government more efficient and effective. The focus on effective resource utilization further supports efficiency.

Evidence:

  • implement measures that will improve the overall operations of state government
  • streamline processes, enhance accountability, and ensure that state resources are utilized effectively
  • intent to improve the operations and effectiveness of the state government

Ambiguity Notes: The abstract and provisions are broad and general; specific mechanisms, such as the creation of a task force or commission, are not detailed. However, the explicit intent to improve government operations and efficiency is clear.

Senate - 176 - clarify the discovery procedures and powers and to modify the administration of the Government Operations and Audit Committee.

Legislation ID: 76687

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 176 amends existing legislation to provide the Government Operations and Audit Committee with clearer authority to examine records, issue subpoenas, and conduct investigations. The bill outlines the committees powers to summon witnesses, take depositions, and use civil discovery procedures. It also stipulates that subpoenas must be ratified by the Executive Board of the Legislative Research Council before issuance, ensuring oversight of the committees investigative powers.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Allows for the delegation of investigative powers to committee members or individuals authorized by the committee.
  • Allows the committee to issue subpoenas for documents or individuals.
  • Allows the committee to issue subpoenas for individuals or documents.
  • Allows the committee to take depositions and issue written interrogatories.
  • Any investigations must comply with state and federal confidentiality laws.
  • Authorizes the committee to enforce compliance with subpoenas or discovery requests.
  • Committee consists of ten members: five from the Senate and five from the House, with specific committee representation.
  • Committee may issue subpoenas for documents or individuals.
  • Enables the committee to take depositions and issue interrogatories.
  • Enables the committee to use chapter 21-34 procedures for enforcement.
  • Individuals conducting investigations must comply with state and federal confidentiality laws.
  • Mandates a report to be submitted to both legislative houses after each session.
  • Must have ratification from the Executive Board of the Legislative Research Council before issuing subpoenas.
  • Must report findings to both houses of the Legislature.
  • Permits the committee to take depositions and issue written interrogatories.
  • Requires ratification by the Executive Board of the Legislative Research Council before issuing subpoenas.
  • Requires the appointment of five House members, including one from the Judiciary Committee.
  • Requires the appointment of five Senate members, including one from the Judiciary Committee.
  • Requires the committee to consist of five Senate members and five House members, with at least one member from the Judiciary Committee in each house.
  • Requires the committee to ratify subpoena issuance through the Executive Board of the Legislative Research Council.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-31 Signed by the Governor
2025-03-13 Delivered to the Governor
2025-03-11 Signed by the Speaker
2025-03-10 Signed by the President
2025-03-06 Concur in amendments
2025-03-04 Do Pass as amended
2025-02-26 Schedule for hearing
2025-02-26 Do Pass as amended

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly empowers a legislative oversight entity (the Government Operations and Audit Committee) to investigate and audit government operations, which is a structural mechanism to improve government efficiency and accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: By granting the committee powers to access records, compel testimony, and issue subpoenas, the bill enables more thorough investigations of government performance, potential inefficiencies, and administrative practices. This can lead to the identification and correction of waste, fraud, or duplicative efforts.

Evidence:

  • 'provide the Government Operations and Audit Committee with clearer authority to examine records, issue subpoenas, and conduct investigations.'
  • 'powers to summon witnesses, take depositions, and use civil discovery procedures.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not explicitly state that the goal is to improve government efficiency, but the structure and powers given to the committee are standard mechanisms used to achieve such outcomes. The intent is inferred from the nature of the committee and its functions.

Senate - 53 - make modifications to the implementation, review, and oversight of the internal control system of the state.

Legislation ID: 76363

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 53 modifies the internal control system for state agencies in South Dakota. It defines key terms, outlines the responsibilities of the State Board of Internal Control, and mandates annual reviews of internal control measures by each agency. The bill emphasizes the need for compliance with established guidelines and the importance of ethical conduct within state agencies.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies may share an internal control officer if agreed.
  • Allows the board to promulgate rules to ensure effective internal control management.
  • Defines key terms necessary for understanding the internal control framework.
  • Each state agency must have an internal control officer.
  • Establishes guidelines for internal control systems.
  • Mandates annual review of the risk and control matrix.
  • Requires evaluation and testing of internal controls.
  • Requires submission of review results to the statewide internal control officer.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-03 Schedule for hearing
2025-02-03 Table
2025-01-14 First read in Senate and referred

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes procedural mechanisms (annual reviews, officer designations, board oversight) specifically aimed at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations through better internal controls.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating regular reviews, standardized reporting, and centralized oversight, the bill is designed to identify inefficiencies, prevent waste, and streamline agency operations. The board's rulemaking authority and evaluation responsibilities further institutionalize ongoing efforts to improve performance and compliance.

Evidence:

  • Each state agency is required to conduct an annual review of its internal controls and submit findings to the board.
  • Establishes guidelines for internal control systems.
  • Requires evaluation and testing of internal controls.
  • The board is authorized to create rules for implementing and managing the internal control system.
  • Agencies must designate an internal control officer to ensure compliance with internal control standards.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 61 - modify the authority of the Board of Internal Control.

Legislation ID: 76387

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 61 amends existing statutes to clarify the roles and responsibilities of the State Board of Internal Control, including the establishment of guidelines for internal controls, the designation of internal control officers within state agencies, and the requirement for annual reviews of internal control systems. The bill aims to ensure compliance with ethical standards and improve the effectiveness of internal controls to prevent financial malfeasance.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies can share an internal control officer under certain agreements.
  • Agencies may agree to share an internal control officer.
  • Agencies may share an internal control officer if agreed upon.
  • Agencies may share an internal control officer through an agreement.
  • Agencies may share an internal control officer under an agreement.
  • Agencies must assess the adequacy of their internal controls and risk mitigation strategies annually.
  • Board consists of seven members including representatives from state agencies, the commissioner of the Bureau of Finance and Management, the state auditor, and appointees from the Board of Regents and the Chief Justice.
  • Board consists of seven members including three appointed by the Governor, the commissioner of the Bureau of Finance and Management, the state auditor, the executive director of the Board of Regents, and the state treasurer.
  • Board must create guidelines for internal control systems and procedures for risk reviews.
  • Board must meet monthly for the first year and at least quarterly thereafter.
  • Board must provide a code of conduct and conflict of interest policy for state agencies.
  • Bureau of Finance and Management to provide administrative support.
  • Conduct an annual review of the agencys risk and control matrix.
  • Conduct an annual risk review of the agencys risk management processes.
  • Conduct annual reviews of the agencys risk and control matrix.
  • Create a code of conduct and conflict of interest policy for state agencies.
  • Develop procedures for conducting state agency risk reviews.
  • Each agency must designate an internal control officer.
  • Each agency must have an internal control officer.
  • Each member appointed by the Governor serves a three-year term, with staggered initial terms.
  • Each state agency must conduct an annual risk review and submit results to the board.
  • Each state agency must designate an internal control officer.
  • Establish guidelines for an effective internal control system for state agencies.
  • Establish guidelines for effective internal control systems.
  • Establish guidelines for internal control systems.
  • Evaluate and test the effectiveness of internal controls.
  • Evaluate and test the effectiveness of internal controls in state agencies.
  • Evaluates the effectiveness of internal controls in state agencies.
  • Internal control auditor must inspect and review agency compliance with guidelines and policies.
  • Members appointed by the Governor serve staggered three-year terms.
  • State agencies must provide access to necessary personnel and records for compliance reviews.
  • Submit results of the review to the Board of Internal Control.
  • Submit results of the risk review to the Board in a designated manner.
  • Submit review results and any updates to the Board of Internal Control.
  • The Board consists of seven members including four appointed by the Governor, the commissioner of the Bureau of Finance and Management, the state auditor, and an appointee from the Board of Regents.
  • The Board consists of seven members, including representatives from state agencies and key state officials.
  • The Board must maintain guidelines for internal controls and a conflict-of-interest policy.
  • The Board will provide guidelines and standards for internal control officers.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-13 Signed by the Governor
2025-03-10 Delivered to the Governor
2025-03-06 Signed by the Speaker
2025-03-06 Signed by the President
2025-03-03 Amend
2025-03-03 Do Pass as amended
2025-02-26 Reconsider (vote by which passed/lost)
2025-02-26 Schedule for hearing

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates and empowers a permanent oversight entity (the State Board of Internal Control) whose explicit mission is to improve the effectiveness of internal controls within state agencies, which is a core mechanism for promoting government efficiency and preventing waste or malfeasance.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring annual reviews, designating internal control officers, and granting rulemaking authority to the Board, the bill institutes structural and procedural mechanisms to evaluate and improve government operations, reduce risk, and ensure cost-effective management.

Evidence:

  • 'establishing guidelines for internal controls, a code of conduct, and evaluating the effectiveness of internal controls.'
  • 'State agencies are required to conduct an annual review of their internal control systems and submit the results to the Board.'
  • 'The Board is granted the authority to create rules to implement and manage internal control systems.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its purpose and mechanisms; there is little ambiguity regarding its intent to improve efficiency and effectiveness in government operations.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

Tennessee

Index of Bills

House - 1300 - State Government - As introduced, requires state departments and agencies to submit annual reports on achieving economic efficiency to the governor in addition to committees of the general assembly. - Amends TCA Title 3; Title 4; Title 8 and Title 9.

Legislation ID: 178822

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends certain sections of the Tennessee Code Annotated to streamline the reporting process for government efficiency initiatives. Specifically, it mandates that progress reports on economic efficiency be submitted to the governor, thereby ensuring that the states executive branch is informed about these efforts.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Requires annual reports on economic efficiency to be submitted to the governor.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-12 P2C, caption bill, held on desk - pending amdt.
2025-02-10 Intro., P1C.
2025-02-06 Filed for introduction

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly addresses government efficiency by mandating reporting on economic efficiency initiatives and ensuring these reports reach the governor, which may improve oversight and responsiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring progress reports on economic efficiency to be submitted to the governor, the bill aims to enhance executive awareness and potentially facilitate more timely or effective policy responses to efficiency initiatives.

Evidence:

  • mandates that progress reports on economic efficiency be submitted to the governor
  • modifies the existing requirement for annual reporting on economic efficiency

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not establish a new body or require new studies, but it does modify reporting channels to potentially improve government operations. The scope of 'economic efficiency' is not further defined, but the intent to promote efficiency is explicit.

House - 321 - Computers and Electronic Processing - As enacted, requires each department, agency, office, commission, institution, or instrumentality of the executive branch to accept electronic transmissions; defines the meaning of electronic transmission as applicable to this states code; removes the terms "fax" or "facsimile" in certain statutes and replaces the terms with electronic transmission. - Amends TCA Title 1; Title 2; Title 3; Title 4; Title 5; Title 7; Title 8; Title 9; Title 10; Title 11; Title 12; Title 13; Title 16; Title 20; Title 22; Title 24; Title 31; Title 33; Title 36; Title 38; Title 39; Title 40; Title 43; Title 44; Title 45; Title 47; Title 48; Title 49; Title 50; Title 53; Title 54; Title 55; Title 56; Title 61; Title 62; Title 63; Title 64; Title 65; Title 66; Title 67; Title 68; Title 69 and Title 71.

Legislation ID: 178202

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends various sections of the Tennessee Code Annotated to facilitate the acceptance of electronic transmissions for documents that were previously submitted by fax or mail. It establishes definitions and guidelines for electronic communication, including the types of documents that can be transmitted electronically, the procedures for their submission, and the requirements for maintaining records of these transactions. The bill aims to streamline operations within state agencies and the judicial system by promoting the use of electronic submissions.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Courts must establish procedures for electronic document submissions.
  • Defines electronic transmission to exclude fax communications.
  • Replaces outdated terms with electronic transmission across various statutes.
  • Requires all executive branch entities to accept electronic submissions.
  • The provisions of the act will be enacted starting January 1, 2026.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-04 Pub. Ch. 94
2025-04-04 Effective date(s) 01/01/2026
2025-03-28 Signed by Governor.
2025-03-20 Transmitted to Governor for his action.
2025-03-19 Signed by Senate Speaker
2025-03-19 Signed by H. Speaker
2025-03-11 Enrolled; ready for sig. of H. Speaker.
2025-03-10 Amendment withdrawn. (Amendment 1 - SA0036)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's primary purpose is to streamline government operations by mandating the acceptance of electronic document submissions across state agencies and courts, which directly aims to improve efficiency and modernize government functions.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring agencies and courts to accept electronic transmissions, the bill reduces reliance on outdated methods (fax, mail), speeds up processing times, decreases administrative burdens, and facilitates recordkeeping. It also prompts courts to create rules for electronic filing, further standardizing and improving government procedures.

Evidence:

  • 'The bill aims to streamline operations within state agencies and the judicial system by promoting the use of electronic submissions.'
  • 'Mandates that all executive branch departments and agencies accept electronic transmissions of documents that could have been submitted by fax before the enactment of this law.'
  • 'Encourages courts to develop rules for the electronic submission of documents, detailing necessary procedures and requirements.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit about its efficiency goals and mechanisms; there is little ambiguity that its intent is to make government operations more efficient by adopting electronic communication.

House - 338 - State Government - As introduced, authorizes the head of each administrative department, the state treasurer, the secretary of state, and the adjutant general to file electronically with the governor the annual report concerning the functions, management, and financial transactions of such persons department or agency for the preceding fiscal year. - Amends TCA Title 3; Title 4; Title 8; Title 9; Title 10; Title 12; Title 13; Title 14; Title 15; Title 41; Title 50 and Title 57.

Legislation ID: 178217

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends specific sections of the Tennessee Code Annotated to facilitate the electronic submission of reports required by state government entities. It aims to streamline administrative processes and improve efficiency in governmental operations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Reports must be submitted electronically as an option.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-03 P2C, caption bill, held on desk - pending amdt.
2025-01-27 Intro., P1C.
2025-01-23 Filed for introduction

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly seeks to improve the efficiency of government operations by enabling electronic submission of required reports, which is a clear procedural mechanism aimed at making government less costly and more responsive.

Mechanism of Influence: By allowing electronic submission, the bill reduces paperwork, speeds up reporting processes, and may lower administrative costs associated with handling physical documents. It modernizes a government function and streamlines bureaucracy.

Evidence:

  • 'facilitate the electronic submission of reports required by state government entities'
  • 'streamline administrative processes and improve efficiency in governmental operations'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is specific in its scope (electronic submission of reports) and explicitly states the goal of improving efficiency. The language is not overly broad or ambiguous in this context.

House - 828 - Medical Occupations - As introduced, directs the commissioner to conduct a study on creating new or streamlining existing pathways to careers as primary care providers in this state for individuals who have medical training as noncommissioned officers in the armed forces of the United States; requires the commissioner to conduct the study using existing department resources; requires the commissioner to deliver findings and recommendations from the study to the chief clerk of the senate, chief clerk of the house of representatives, and the legislative librarian no later than December 31, 2025. - Amends TCA Title 4; Title 33; Title 63 and Title 68.

Legislation ID: 130660

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This act mandates a study by the commissioner of health to explore and recommend ways to create or streamline pathways for individuals with military medical training to become primary care providers in Tennessee. The study will identify administrative barriers, educational requirements, and methods for recruiting veterans into healthcare roles such as physicians, nurses, and physician assistants, with findings due by December 31, 2025.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Deliver findings and recommendations by the specified deadline.
  • Determine educational requirements for licensure that align military training with existing training.
  • Identify administrative barriers in current law or rule.
  • Recommend methods for recruiting veterans into the primary care workforce.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-10 Assigned to s/c Health Subcommittee
2025-02-06 P2C, ref. to Health Committee
2025-02-05 Intro., P1C.
2025-02-04 Filed for introduction

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly mandates a study to identify and recommend ways to streamline administrative processes and reduce barriers for military-trained individuals to enter the healthcare workforce. This directly aligns with the goal of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations by evaluating and potentially eliminating unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring a study focused on removing administrative barriers and streamlining licensure pathways, the bill creates a procedural mechanism (a mandated evaluation) designed to make government functions—in this case, healthcare workforce credentialing—more efficient and responsive.

Evidence:

  • The study will identify administrative barriers, educational requirements, and methods for recruiting veterans into healthcare roles
  • The commissioner of health is required to conduct a study on facilitating career pathways for military-trained medical professionals to enter primary care roles
  • Identify administrative barriers in current law or rule

Ambiguity Notes: While the act is targeted at a specific sector (healthcare workforce entry for military-trained personnel), the language clearly focuses on administrative efficiency and process improvement.

Senate - 329 - Computers and Electronic Processing - As enacted, requires each department, agency, office, commission, institution, or instrumentality of the executive branch to accept electronic transmissions; defines the meaning of electronic transmission as applicable to this states code; removes the terms "fax" or "facsimile" in certain statutes and replaces the terms with electronic transmission. - Amends TCA Title 1; Title 2; Title 3; Title 4; Title 5; Title 7; Title 8; Title 9; Title 10; Title 11; Title 12; Title 13; Title 16; Title 20; Title 22; Title 24; Title 31; Title 33; Title 36; Title 38; Title 39; Title 40; Title 43; Title 44; Title 45; Title 47; Title 48; Title 49; Title 50; Title 53; Title 54; Title 55; Title 56; Title 61; Title 62; Title 63; Title 64; Title 65; Title 66; Title 67; Title 68; Title 69 and Title 71.

Legislation ID: 179101

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends various sections of the Tennessee Code Annotated to facilitate the acceptance of electronic transmissions for documents that were previously submitted via fax or similar methods. It defines electronic transmission and outlines the responsibilities of state agencies and courts in implementing these changes. The bill seeks to streamline communication and filing processes in governmental operations and is set to take effect on January 1, 2026.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • All executive branch entities must accept electronic submissions.
  • All references to fax in the code are to be replaced with electronic transmission.
  • Courts may create procedures for accepting electronic documents.
  • Define any fees associated with electronic submissions.
  • Defines electronic transmission as non-paper communications that can be stored and reproduced.
  • Establish types of documents that can be submitted electronically.
  • Excludes fax from the definition.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-04 Comp. became Pub. Ch. 94
2025-03-10 Sponsor(s) Added.
2025-03-10 Companion House Bill substituted
2025-03-07 Placed on Senate Regular Calendar for 3/10/2025
2025-03-04 Recommended for passage with amendment/s, refer to Senate Calendar Committee Ayes 9, Nays 0 PNV 0
2025-02-25 Placed on Senate State and Local Government Committee calendar for 3/4/2025
2025-02-12 Passed on Second Consideration, refer to Senate State and Local Government Committee
2025-02-10 Introduced, Passed on First Consideration

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's explicit purpose is to streamline government operations by replacing outdated fax submissions with electronic transmissions, thereby improving efficiency and modernizing communication processes across agencies and courts.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring agencies and courts to accept electronic documents and by updating legal definitions and procedures, the bill reduces administrative burdens, speeds up document processing, and facilitates more efficient inter-agency and public communication.

Evidence:

  • 'The bill seeks to streamline communication and filing processes in governmental operations'
  • 'Requires all executive branch departments and agencies to accept documents submitted electronically instead of through fax.'
  • 'Clarifies the intent of the General Assembly to promote efficient document filing'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent and mechanisms; the only ambiguity may be in the discretion given to courts to develop their own procedures, but the overarching mandate to promote efficiency is explicit.

Texas

Index of Bills

House - 12 - Relating to the review and audit of certain state agency operations.

Legislation ID: 129877

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

H.B. No. 12 amends the Government Code to establish clearer definitions and requirements for regulatory agencies and their reviews. It mandates that state agencies post notices of reviews on their websites, solicit public input, and undergo efficiency audits. Additionally, it introduces provisions for limited reviews of regulatory agencies and requires the establishment of an implementation plan for audit recommendations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must cover the costs of the audits.
  • Agencies must cover the costs of their audits.
  • Agencies must deliver implementation plans within 90 days of receiving audit recommendations.
  • Agencies must deliver implementation plans within 90 days of receiving audit reports.
  • Agencies must include performance analysis in their reports based on established criteria.
  • Agencies must justify any recommendations they decline to implement.
  • Agencies must notify affected individuals about public hearings.
  • Agencies must notify licensed individuals about public hearings.
  • Agencies must pay for the audit costs.
  • Agencies must pay for the costs incurred during the audits.
  • Agencies must post a notice on their website about the review.
  • Agencies must post notices about reviews on their websites.
  • Agencies must post notices on their websites about ongoing reviews.
  • Agencies must post notices on their websites and notify relevant stakeholders.
  • Agencies must post notices on their websites regarding the review and public participation opportunities.
  • Agencies must report on rulemaking activities.
  • Agencies must report on their progress addressing identified deficiencies.
  • Agencies must report on their rulemaking activities and public participation in rulemaking every six years.
  • Agencies must report rulemaking activities to the commission.
  • Agencies must solicit input from those regulated by them.
  • Agencies must submit implementation plans within 90 days of receiving audit reports.
  • Agencies must submit implementation plans within 90 days of receiving audit results.
  • All state agencies must undergo an efficiency audit.
  • All state agencies must undergo efficiency audits.
  • Analyze the agencys performance over the last ten years.
  • Conducts limited reviews of regulatory agencies every six years.
  • Defines a regulatory agency as one with statewide authority to grant or revoke licenses.
  • Defines regulatory agencies based on their constitutional or statutory creation, executive branch affiliation, statewide authority, and licensing powers.
  • Defines regulatory agency based on constitutional or statutory creation, executive branch affiliation, statewide authority, and licensing capabilities.
  • Defines regulatory agency based on specific criteria.
  • Each agency must be audited every two years.
  • Each state agency must undergo an efficiency audit.
  • Each state agency must undergo an efficiency audit every four years before potential abolition under the Texas Sunset Act.
  • Evaluates agency performance measures and targets.
  • Evaluate the alignment of performance measures with agency goals.
  • External auditors are not subject to direction from the audited agency.
  • Improvement suggestions for key performance measures.
  • Include findings and recommendations regarding agency performance.
  • Include findings based on established criteria.
  • Includes findings on agency performance over the past 10 years.
  • Includes findings on review criteria and recommendations for agency performance improvement.
  • Mandates efficiency audits for all state agencies.
  • Mandates efficiency audits for each state agency every four years before their scheduled abolishment.
  • Mandates notification to licensed individuals about public hearings.
  • Must be created by constitution or statute.
  • Must be created by the constitution or statute.
  • Must be in the executive branch of state government.
  • Must be part of the executive branch of state government.
  • Must have statewide authority.
  • Must have the authority to grant, deny, renew, revoke, or suspend licenses or certifications.
  • Must have the authority to manage licenses and certifications.
  • Must have the power to grant, deny, renew, revoke, or suspend licenses or certifications.
  • Provide recommendations for agency operations and performance measures.
  • Recommendations for agency improvement must be documented.
  • Recommendations for improvement must be included in the reports.
  • Recommendations for limited reviews must be included in legislative actions.
  • Recommendations on agency abolition, continuation, or reorganization.
  • Recommendations on agency functions and performance measures must be made based on the reviews.
  • Recommendations on the consolidation or reorganization of programs.
  • Recommendations to improve agency operations and performance measures.
  • Recommends actions on agency continuation, reorganization, or abolishment.
  • Recommends improvements for agency operations and management without changing enabling statutes.
  • Recommends limited reviews based on identified deficiencies in rulemaking processes.
  • Regulatory agencies must notify licensed individuals about public hearings.
  • Reports must include findings on agency performance over the last ten years.
  • Reports on the audits must be published online.
  • Requires agencies to notify licensed individuals about public hearings on their reviews.
  • Requires agencies to publish audit reports online.
  • Requires analysis of performance measures from the General Appropriations Act.
  • Requires commission to provide public participation information.
  • Requires recommendations for improving agency operations and performance measures.
  • Requires regulatory agencies to report on their rulemaking activities.
  • Requires reports on progress addressing deficiencies.
  • Requires state agencies to post review notices on their websites.
  • Requires the commission to analyze performance measures and provide recommendations for improvement.
  • Requires the commission to provide information on public participation in agency reviews.
  • Requires the commission to solicit public input on agency performance reviews.
  • Solicits input from interested parties on agency performance.
  • Suggests consolidation or reorganization of programs within state agencies.
  • The commission must prepare a report on the review findings.
  • The state auditor contracts external auditors by March 1 of the audit year.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-20 Effective on 9/1/25
2025-06-20 Signed by the Governor
2025-05-26 Sent to the Governor
2025-05-25 Signed in the House
2025-05-25 Signed in the Senate
2025-05-24 Reported enrolled
2025-05-23 House concurs in Senate amendment(s)-reported
2025-05-23 House concurs in Senate amendment(s)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates and strengthens structural and procedural mechanisms (audits, reviews, implementation plans, public input processes) explicitly aimed at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating regular efficiency audits, requiring implementation plans, enabling limited reviews for deficiencies, and recommending operational improvements and consolidations, the bill directly targets cost savings, streamlining, and modernization of government functions.

Evidence:

  • Requires state agencies to submit implementation plans for audit recommendations within a specified timeframe.
  • Introduces mandatory efficiency audits for state agencies to evaluate their operations and resource management.
  • Mandates efficiency audits for each state agency every four years before their scheduled abolishment.
  • Recommends improvements for agency operations and management without changing enabling statutes.
  • Suggests consolidation or reorganization of programs within state agencies.

Ambiguity Notes: None

House - 1545 - Relating to the sunset review process and certain governmental entities subject to that process.

Legislation ID: 203726

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

H.B. No. 1545 introduces a structured sunset review process for certain governmental entities, including the Texas Funeral Service Commission and the Texas Juvenile Justice Department. It sets forth guidelines for limited-scope reviews, establishes sunset dates for several agencies, and amends the Texas Sunset Act to enhance oversight and reporting requirements, ultimately striving for improved effectiveness in state agency functions.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Abolished unless continued in existence by the legislature.
  • Agencies must report information regarding their operations and legislative priorities to the Sunset Advisory Commission.
  • Agencies must report information to the commission before their scheduled review or abolition dates.
  • Agencies must report on the application of criteria and evaluate the need for required reports.
  • Agencies must submit reports regarding their operations and any changes in reporting requirements.
  • Amend Section 15.212, Finance Code, to set a sunset date for the Credit Union Department.
  • Amend Section 2003.023, Government Code, to establish a review schedule.
  • Amend Section 801.003, Occupations Code, to establish a sunset date.
  • Amend Section 8503.0021(a), Special District Local Laws Code, to set a review schedule.
  • Amend several sections of the Government Code to improve the sunset review process.
  • Assess the regulation of willed body programs and anatomical donation organizations.
  • Conduct a limited-scope review focusing on regionalization duties.
  • Conduct a limited-scope review of the Texas Funeral Service Commission for the 90th Legislature.
  • Conduct a limited-scope review of the Texas Juvenile Justice Department.
  • Conducts a limited-scope review for the 90th Legislature.
  • Conducts a limited-scope review of the Texas Funeral Service Commission for the 90th Legislature.
  • Evaluates the commissions administration of willed body programs and anatomical organizations.
  • Mandates a report from the Texas Juvenile Justice Department by September 1, 2026.
  • Repeal Section 12, Chapter 358 (S.B. 1424), Acts of the 88th Legislature, Regular Session, 2023.
  • Repeals Section 12, Chapter 358, Acts of the 88th Legislature.
  • Requires a limited-scope review of the Texas Juvenile Justice Department for the 90th Legislature.
  • Requires the Credit Union Department and Commission to be reviewed under the Texas Sunset Act.
  • Requires the State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners to be reviewed under the Texas Sunset Act.
  • Requires the State Office of Administrative Hearings to undergo periodic reviews.
  • Subject to Chapter 325, Government Code (Texas Sunset Act).
  • Subject to review under Chapter 325, Government Code (Texas Sunset Act).
  • Submit a report by September 1, 2026, addressing specific areas of concern.
  • Submit a report by September 1, 2026, on various aspects of juvenile justice.
  • Submits a report by September 1, 2026, on various operational aspects.
  • Take effect immediately if passed by two-thirds of the legislature.
  • The Act takes effect immediately if it receives a two-thirds vote; otherwise, it takes effect on the specified date.
  • The board is subject to Chapter 325, Government Code (Texas Sunset Act).
  • The commission must identify responsible agencies for multistate agreements and establish review schedules.
  • The Credit Union Department and Credit Union Commission are subject to Chapter 325, Government Code (Texas Sunset Act).
  • The office shall be reviewed during the periods in which state agencies abolished in 2031 are reviewed.
  • The Sunset Advisory Commission must conduct public hearings prior to agency reviews.
  • The Texas Juvenile Justice Department must submit a report by September 1, 2026, to various legislative bodies detailing its operations and compliance with federal investigations.
  • The Texas Optometry Board is subject to Chapter 325, Government Code (Texas Sunset Act).
  • The Texas Pharmaceutical Initiative is subject to Chapter 325, Government Code (Texas Sunset Act).

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-20 Signed by the Governor
2025-06-20 Effective immediately
2025-06-02 Sent to the Governor
2025-06-02 Signed in the Senate
2025-06-02 Signed in the House
2025-06-02 Reported enrolled
2025-06-01 House adopts conference committee report
2025-06-01 Senate adopts conf. comm. report-reported

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes and amends procedures for the sunset review process—a formal mechanism for evaluating the efficiency, effectiveness, and necessity of state agencies. The explicit purpose is to improve oversight, streamline government, and ensure agencies remain effective and necessary.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring regular, structured reviews and reports on agency performance, the bill empowers the legislature and oversight bodies to identify inefficiencies, duplicative functions, and opportunities for cost savings or process improvements. Agencies may be restructured, reformed, or abolished based on these findings.

Evidence:

  • introduces a structured sunset review process for certain governmental entities
  • sets forth guidelines for limited-scope reviews
  • amends the Texas Sunset Act to enhance oversight and reporting requirements
  • ultimately striving for improved effectiveness in state agency functions
  • mandates a limited-scope review of the Texas Funeral Service Commission
  • establishes a limited-scope review of the Texas Juvenile Justice Department

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its intent and mechanisms; the sunset process is well-defined in Texas law as a tool for government efficiency.

House - 2818 - Relating to the artificial intelligence division within the Department of Information Resources.

Legislation ID: 21372

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

H.B. ANo. A2818 creates a new division focused on artificial intelligence within the Texas Department of Information Resources. This division will oversee the use of generative AI technology to modernize legacy systems and assist state agencies in their projects. The bill also mandates the preparation of cost analysis reports to evaluate the benefits of using AI technology compared to traditional methods.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Allows hiring of personnel necessary for the divisions duties.
  • Allows hiring personnel necessary for the divisions duties.
  • Allows hiring personnel necessary for the divisions duties, including from higher education institutions.
  • Allows the department to adopt necessary rules for the division.
  • Allows the department to adopt rules for implementing and managing the division.
  • Allows the department to adopt rules for the divisions administration.
  • Allows the department to adopt rules for the implementation of the artificial intelligence division.
  • Allows the department to create rules to implement Subchapter S.
  • Allows the department to hire necessary personnel for the division.
  • Allows the division to use department-developed AI technology or contract with vendors for AI technology implementation.
  • Allows the division to use or contract for generative AI technology to complete projects.
  • Allows the division to use or contract generative AI technology for project completion.
  • Allows the use of either department-developed technology or contracting with vendors for project completion.
  • Empowers the department to adopt rules for the AI division.
  • Empowers the department to adopt rules necessary for the divisions establishment and administration.
  • Empowers the department to create rules for the divisions operation.
  • Mandates a concise overview demonstrating cost efficiencies achieved through AI technology.
  • Mandates a concise overview of cost and time efficiencies achieved.
  • Mandates a report summarizing time, money, and resource savings from using generative AI compared to traditional methods.
  • Mandates coordination of AI-related activities to streamline resource use.
  • Mandates that at least 90% of the contract work must be completed by the vendors AI technology.
  • Mandates that the executive director oversee the divisions organization.
  • Mandates the executive director to oversee the divisions administration.
  • Mandates the executive director to oversee the divisions organization and administration.
  • Mandates the hiring of necessary personnel to administer the division.
  • Mandates the preparation of a cost analysis report for each project completed using generative AI technology.
  • Requires a concise overview demonstrating the efficiencies achieved through generative AI.
  • Requires a concise overview of cost and time efficiencies from the AI technology.
  • Requires a cost analysis report for each generative AI project, detailing time, money, and resources saved.
  • Requires a cost analysis report summarizing resources saved by using generative AI technology.
  • Requires a cost analysis report summarizing time, money, and resources saved through generative AI technology.
  • Requires assistance to state agencies in implementing generative AI technology for specific projects.
  • Requires a summary of resources saved compared to traditional systems.
  • Requires a summary of savings in time, money, and resources from using generative AI compared to traditional methods.
  • Requires a summary of time, money, and resources saved by using AI compared to traditional methods.
  • Requires coordination of division activities with other laws regarding AI systems to ensure efficient implementation.
  • Requires coordination of division activities with other related laws to ensure efficient implementation.
  • Requires the Department of Information Resources to establish an artificial intelligence division.
  • Requires the Department of Information Resources to establish an Artificial Intelligence Division.
  • Requires the department to establish an artificial intelligence division.
  • Requires the department to establish an Artificial Intelligence Division.
  • Requires the division to assist agencies in implementing generative AI technology for legacy system projects.
  • Requires the division to assist in AI technology implementation for legacy system projects.
  • Requires the division to assist in modernizing or replacing legacy systems using generative AI.
  • Requires the division to assist in projects aimed at modernizing or replacing legacy systems.
  • Requires the division to assist in projects that modernize or replace legacy systems.
  • Requires the division to assist state agencies in implementing generative AI technology for modernization projects.
  • Requires the establishment of an artificial intelligence division.
  • Requires the establishment of an artificial intelligence division within the department.
  • Requires the establishment of an artificial intelligence division within the Department of Information Resources.
  • Requires the executive director to oversee the divisions administration.
  • Requires the report to summarize time, money, and resource savings.
  • The report must focus on cost and time efficiencies achieved.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-20 Signed by the Governor
2025-06-20 Effective on 9/1/25
2025-05-31 Signed in the Senate
2025-05-31 Sent to the Governor
2025-05-30 Signed in the House
2025-05-29 Reported enrolled
2025-05-28 House concurs in Senate amendment(s)-reported
2025-05-28 House concurs in Senate amendment(s)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill creates a permanent division specifically focused on identifying and implementing technology solutions (AI) to modernize government operations, streamline processes, and achieve cost savings. It also mandates structured analysis and reporting on efficiency gains, directly targeting government effectiveness and resource use.

Mechanism of Influence: By centralizing AI initiatives and requiring cost-benefit analysis reports, the division will drive the adoption of more efficient technologies, reduce duplication, and provide data to support further modernization. Mandated coordination and oversight help prevent fragmented efforts and ensure government-wide improvements.

Evidence:

  • 'oversee the use of generative AI technology to modernize legacy systems and assist state agencies in their projects'
  • 'mandates the preparation of cost analysis reports to evaluate the benefits of using AI technology compared to traditional methods'
  • 'emphasizes the need for coordination...to ensure efficient implementation'
  • 'requires a concise overview demonstrating the efficiencies achieved through generative AI'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill’s language is explicit about the goals of efficiency and modernization, with clear requirements for reporting and coordination. There is little ambiguity regarding its intent to improve government operations.

House - 3743 - Relating to the management-to-staff ratio requirement for state agencies.

Legislation ID: 205891

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends the Government Code to establish a management-to-staff ratio for state agencies, specifically limiting the number of management positions to one for every 11 non-managerial positions. It requires agencies to develop procedures to minimize management roles while maintaining necessary functions. Additionally, it repeals a previous provision related to employment in management positions for agencies with over 100 full-time equivalent employees.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must comply with the reporting requirements by the specified date.
  • Agencies must create procedures to reduce management positions to the minimum necessary.
  • Establishes penalties for non-compliance, including potential fines.
  • Mandates justification for each expense to enhance accountability.
  • Mandates the creation of an online portal for public access to expenditure reports.
  • Requires a two-thirds vote from all members elected to each house for immediate effect.
  • Requires state agencies to have a management-to-staff ratio of 1:11.
  • Requires state agencies to report expenditures in a standardized format.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-13 Referred to Business & Commerce
2025-05-13 Read first time
2025-05-07 Reported engrossed
2025-05-07 Read 3rd time
2025-05-07 Passed
2025-05-07 Record vote
2025-05-07 Statement(s) of vote recorded in Journal
2025-05-07 Received from the House

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill is explicitly designed to promote government efficiency by limiting management overhead and reducing unnecessary bureaucracy within state agencies.

Mechanism of Influence: By capping the number of management positions relative to staff and requiring agencies to justify and minimize management roles, the bill aims to streamline agency operations, reduce administrative costs, and ensure resources are focused on service delivery rather than management layers.

Evidence:

  • 'establish a management-to-staff ratio for state agencies, specifically limiting the number of management positions to one for every 11 non-managerial positions.'
  • 'requires agencies to develop procedures to minimize management roles while maintaining necessary functions.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not specify detailed enforcement mechanisms or define what constitutes 'necessary' management functions, leaving some discretion to agencies in implementation.

House - 3971 - Relating to renaming the Sunset Advisory Commission the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and to the duties of that department.

Legislation ID: 206119

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends various sections of the Government Code related to the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and establishes guidelines for auditing state agencies, reviewing procurement activities, and evaluating the need for state agency functions. It emphasizes the importance of strategic fiscal reviews and public accountability, particularly in the context of relocating state agency headquarters to achieve cost savings.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must report on statutory requirements and evaluate their necessity every odd-numbered year.
  • Board consists of legislative members and public members appointed by legislative leaders.
  • Conduct public hearings before agency abolishment and report findings to the legislature.
  • Consider leasing, moving costs, and market value of current properties.
  • Department must verify agency reports and consult with budget and planning divisions before agency abolishment.
  • Effectiveness audits are only scheduled when the agency is not under review under the Texas DOGE Act.
  • Ensures that audit requirements of all bond covenants and financial agreements are satisfied.
  • Evaluate cost savings over a 10-year period for relocating agency headquarters.
  • Excludes certain agencies from review based on appropriations process.
  • Legislative members serve four-year terms; public members serve two-year terms.
  • Members cannot serve consecutive terms beyond specified limits.
  • Must not be required to register as lobbyists.
  • Must not have significant interests in businesses regulated by those agencies.
  • Public members must not be regulated by agencies they review.
  • Public members must not have conflicts of interest with agencies under review.
  • Requires auditing of federal programs at least as often as required under federal law.
  • Requires strategic fiscal reviews for state agencies under DOGE review.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-27 Referred to Delivery of Government Efficiency
2025-03-27 Read first time
2025-03-06 Filed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes and empowers the Department of Government Efficiency, a permanent entity charged with identifying and implementing cost savings, streamlining agency operations, and improving fiscal accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring agency reports on necessity, mandating strategic fiscal reviews, and evaluating the cost-effectiveness of relocating agency headquarters, the bill creates procedural mechanisms to assess and enhance government efficiency. The department's duties include verifying agency reports, conducting audits, and making recommendations for agency abolishment or consolidation, all aimed at improving operational effectiveness and reducing costs.

Evidence:

  • 'establishes guidelines for auditing state agencies, reviewing procurement activities, and evaluating the need for state agency functions'
  • 'emphasizes the importance of strategic fiscal reviews and public accountability, particularly in the context of relocating state agency headquarters to achieve cost savings'
  • 'Requires state agencies to submit reports on their operations and the necessity of their functions prior to legislative reviews.'
  • 'Department of Government Efficiency Structure'
  • 'Strategic Fiscal Review'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent to promote government efficiency through structural and procedural reforms. The language is specific regarding the duties and processes involved, leaving little ambiguity about its relevance to government efficiency.

House - 4395 - Relating to electronic submission and delivery of public securities and records of proceedings for those securities.

Legislation ID: 206535

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

H.B. No. 4395 amends Chapter 1202 of the Government Code to facilitate electronic submission and delivery of public securities and related documents. It mandates that issuers electronically submit relevant documents to the attorney general, who will also deliver them to the comptroller in an electronic format. The attorney general is responsible for informing legal authorities about these new requirements by December 1, 2025. The bill establishes that the new electronic provisions will only apply to submissions made after the effective date of the act, which is set for January 1, 2026.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Act takes effect on January 1, 2026.
  • Attorney general must advise on electronic submission requirements by December 1, 2025.
  • Attorney general must inform legal authorities about electronic submission requirements by December 1, 2025.
  • Attorney general must provide guidance on electronic submission by the specified date.
  • Attorney general must provide guidance on electronic submission procedures by December 1, 2025.
  • Documents must be accompanied by an electronic signature when applicable.
  • Issuers must submit public securities and related documents electronically with an electronic signature if applicable.
  • New provisions apply only to submissions made on or after January 1, 2026.
  • New provisions apply only to submissions made on or after the effective date.
  • New submission requirements apply only to documents submitted on or after the effective date.
  • Requires electronic signatures for submissions, if applicable.
  • Requires electronic signatures for submissions where applicable.
  • Requires issuers to submit public securities and related documents electronically to the attorney general.
  • Requires issuers to submit public securities and related documents in electronic format.
  • Requires issuers to submit public securities and related documents in electronic format to the attorney general.
  • Requires the attorney general to deliver documents to the comptroller electronically.
  • Submissions before the effective date are governed by former law.
  • The attorney general must deliver documents to the comptroller in electronic format.
  • The attorney general must deliver required documents to the comptroller in an electronic format.
  • The attorney general must provide guidance on the new electronic submission process by December 1, 2025.
  • The new electronic submission requirements apply only to documents submitted on or after the effective date of the Act.
  • The new rules apply exclusively to submissions made on or after the effective date of the act.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-20 Effective on 1/1/26
2025-06-20 Signed by the Governor
2025-05-28 Sent to the Governor
2025-05-27 Signed in the Senate
2025-05-27 Signed in the House
2025-05-26 Reported enrolled
2025-05-26 Senate passage reported
2025-05-25 Rules suspended-Regular order of business

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to modernize and streamline the process for submitting public securities documents by mandating electronic submissions and communication. This procedural change is designed to improve efficiency in government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring electronic submissions, the bill reduces paperwork, expedites processing, and likely decreases administrative burden for both issuers and government offices. The attorney general's advisory role ensures that relevant authorities are prepared for the transition, further supporting efficient implementation.

Evidence:

  • facilitate electronic submission and delivery of public securities and related documents
  • The attorney general is tasked with advising legal authorities about the new electronic submission requirements and any procedural changes necessary for efficient processing
  • Requires issuers to submit public securities and related documents in electronic format

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not explicitly state 'to promote government efficiency,' but the required shift to electronic processes and advisory responsibilities are clear procedural mechanisms for streamlining and modernizing government functions.

Senate - 1004 - Relating to the relocation of the headquarters for certain state agencies.

Legislation ID: 23176

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends the Government Code to include a new section that mandates the evaluation of cost savings associated with relocating state agency headquarters located in Travis County or adjacent counties. The Texas Facilities Commission will assist in this evaluation, which will consider various factors over a 10-year period. If cost savings are determined, the agency will be required to relocate its headquarters accordingly.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Mandates consideration of leasing or purchasing costs, moving costs, and market value of current properties.
  • Mandates consultation with the Legislative Budget Board and other relevant entities.
  • Requires preparation of a written report based on the agencys evaluation.
  • Requires the commission to evaluate cost savings related to relocating state agency headquarters.
  • Requires the commission to review reports submitted by the agency.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-24 Referred to Business & Commerce
2025-02-24 Read first time
2025-01-29 Received by the Secretary of the Senate
2025-01-29 Filed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a structural mechanism (an evaluation process led by the Texas Facilities Commission) to identify and implement government cost savings, specifically through the potential relocation of agency headquarters. It also mandates performance reviews and reporting, which are procedural mechanisms aimed at improving government efficiency and reducing costs.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring systematic evaluations and reports regarding the cost-effectiveness of agency locations and mandating relocations when savings are found, the bill could lead to reduced government expenditures and more efficient use of resources. The performance review requirements also foster ongoing oversight and potential streamlining of agency operations.

Evidence:

  • 'mandates the evaluation of cost savings associated with relocating state agency headquarters'
  • 'If cost savings are determined, the agency will be required to relocate its headquarters accordingly.'
  • 'Requires preparation of a written report based on the agency's evaluation.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its focus on cost savings and efficiency regarding agency locations. However, the process for determining 'cost savings' and how relocation decisions will be balanced against other agency needs could be subject to interpretation.

Senate - 14 - Relating to reforming the procedure by which state agencies adopt rules and impose regulatory requirements and the deference given to the interpretation of laws and rules by state agencies in certain judicial proceedings.

Legislation ID: 134030

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill establishes the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office and the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Advisory Panel to enhance the efficiency of rulemaking processes and regulatory requirements imposed by state agencies. It aims to identify unnecessary rules, improve public access to regulatory information, and ensure that rules are written in plain language. The bill also modifies existing laws regarding the judicial review of agency rules, emphasizing that courts are not required to defer to agency interpretations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Amends Section 2001.007 to require coordination for a public website for rule information.
  • Amends Section 2001.024 to include additional requirements for proposed rules.
  • Assist agencies in identifying and amending ineffective rules.
  • Assist state agencies in identifying ineffective rules and their impact.
  • Both entities will be abolished if not continued by September 1, 2037.
  • Consideration may still be given to reasonable agency determinations.
  • Coordinate with other agencies to improve public access to information.
  • Coordinate with other state agencies to improve public access to regulatory information.
  • Courts may consider agency determinations if they are reasonable and do not conflict with statutory language.
  • Courts review agency legal determinations de novo without deference.
  • Defines key terms related to the regulatory efficiency framework.
  • Establishes that the office and panel are subject to the Sunset Act, which requires periodic review and continuation of their existence.
  • Establish goals for reducing unnecessary regulations.
  • Guide must be written in plain language for public understanding.
  • Guide must help agencies reduce unnecessary rules and regulatory burdens.
  • Identify and expand opportunities for efficiencies in rule adoption and review processes.
  • It is required to coordinate with other state agencies to improve public access to regulatory information.
  • It must be written in plain language.
  • It must be written in plain language for public understanding.
  • Mandates the office to assist in reducing regulatory burdens on citizens and businesses.
  • Manual must be written in plain language for public understanding.
  • Manual must identify best practices for preparing local employment impact statements and fiscal notes.
  • Members serve two-year terms and can be replaced if vacancies arise.
  • Members serve two-year terms and may be reimbursed for expenses.
  • Office must assist agencies in identifying ineffective rules and their costs.
  • Office must coordinate efforts to improve public access to regulatory information.
  • Office must identify opportunities for rule adoption efficiencies.
  • Panel may meet as needed to assist the office.
  • Panel members may be reimbursed for expenses but serve without compensation.
  • Panel members should have expertise in regulatory processes.
  • Report must be posted on a publicly accessible website.
  • Report must describe activities undertaken in the previous two years.
  • Requires courts to provide a reasonable time for agencies to revise or readopt rules during remand.
  • Requires courts to review all questions of law without giving deference to agency determinations.
  • Requires the governor and lieutenant governor to appoint panel members by January 1, 2026.
  • Requires the office to identify unnecessary and ineffective rules.
  • The guide should assist agencies in documenting their compliance with regulatory reduction goals.
  • The manual must be written in plain language for public understanding.
  • The manual must include best practices for preparing fiscal notes and local employment impact statements.
  • The office must assist state agencies in identifying unnecessary rules and their costs.
  • The office must identify opportunities for regulatory efficiencies.
  • The office must submit a report by December 1 of each even-numbered year.
  • The panel consists of seven members with expertise in regulatory processes.
  • The panel is composed of seven members from various sectors, including regulated businesses and academia.
  • The report must include activities, findings, and legislative recommendations.
  • The Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office and Advisory Panel are subject to the Texas Sunset Act.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-23 Signed by the Governor
2025-04-23 Effective on 9/1/25
2025-04-14 Signed in the House
2025-04-14 Sent to the Governor
2025-04-10 Signed in the Senate
2025-04-09 Additional sponsor(s) authorized
2025-04-09 Record vote
2025-04-09 Passed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes new entities (the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office and Advisory Panel) specifically to identify and implement regulatory efficiency measures, including reducing unnecessary rules and streamlining processes.

Mechanism of Influence: Creates permanent and advisory bodies within the governor's office tasked with reviewing, recommending, and assisting in the implementation of efficiency measures across state agencies. Mandates regular reporting and publication of best practices to drive continuous improvement.

Evidence:

  • establishes the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office and the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Advisory Panel to enhance the efficiency of rulemaking processes and regulatory requirements imposed by state agencies
  • The office must submit a biennial report detailing its activities and any legislative recommendations to improve regulatory efficiency
  • The office is required to publish a manual that outlines best practices for state agencies in conducting regulatory analyses and economic impact assessments
  • The office must prepare a guide to help state agencies reduce rules and regulatory requirements
  • Mandates the office to assist in reducing regulatory burdens on citizens and businesses
  • Requires the office to identify unnecessary and ineffective rules

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 1943 - Relating to the review and audit of certain state agency operations.

Legislation ID: 211503

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends the Government Code to establish clearer definitions and procedures for the review and audit of state agencies, particularly regulatory agencies. It mandates public participation in the review process, requires agencies to notify stakeholders about reviews, and introduces efficiency audits to evaluate the effectiveness of agency operations. The bill also outlines the responsibilities of the Sunset Advisory Commission in conducting these audits and reporting findings to the legislature.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies are responsible for the costs of these audits.
  • Agencies must deliver plans within 90 days of receiving audit recommendations.
  • Agencies must post notice of their reviews on their websites and notify licensed individuals.
  • Agencies must undergo efficiency audits every four years.
  • Commission must inform the public about participation opportunities.
  • Conducts assessments of rulemaking processes and public participation in rule creation.
  • Defines regulatory agency as an entity with authority to grant or revoke licenses and that operates under the executive branch.
  • Evaluates performance measure targets and their alignment with agency goals.
  • Includes a comprehensive analysis of regulatory agency performance over the past decade.
  • Recommendations on agency reorganization and performance improvements are required.
  • The Act takes effect on September 1, 2025.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-17 Referred to Business & Commerce
2025-03-17 Read first time
2025-03-05 Received by the Secretary of the Senate
2025-03-05 Filed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes and empowers mechanisms (efficiency audits, Sunset Advisory Commission reviews) to evaluate and improve government agency efficiency and effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: Mandates recurring efficiency audits, requires implementation of audit recommendations, and updates reporting requirements to focus on performance and efficiency. These structural and procedural mechanisms are explicitly aimed at streamlining government operations and reducing inefficiency.

Evidence:

  • mandates efficiency audits for state agencies to evaluate their operations and resource management
  • agencies must undergo efficiency audits every four years
  • requires agencies to submit implementation plans for audit recommendations
  • outlines the recommendations the commission must make regarding the continuation or reorganization of state agencies
  • updates the reporting requirements for the Sunset Advisory Commission regarding agency performance and recommendations

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 2016 - Relating to the administration and operations of the state auditors office.

Legislation ID: 134451

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends the Government Code to modify the composition of the legislative audit committee and mandates a compliance audit of counties with populations over one million to ensure proper use of federal funds received after January 1, 2021. The State Auditor is required to conduct this audit by January 1, 2026, and report the findings, with the provision set to expire on January 1, 2027.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Audit must determine compliance with laws, regulations, and proper financial management.
  • Clarifies the end of duties for the eleventh member after casting a tie-breaking vote.
  • Requires a one-time compliance audit of populous counties regarding their use of federal funds.
  • Requires the appointment of two members of the House of Representatives by the Speaker.
  • Requires the audit to assess compliance with federal fund usage regulations.
  • Requires the legislative audit committee to include two members of the House of Representatives appointed by the Speaker.
  • Requires the lieutenant governor and speaker of the house to appoint additional committee members promptly.
  • Requires the State Auditor to conduct the audit by January 1, 2026.
  • Requires timely appointment of additional legislative audit committee members.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-31 Reported favorably w/o amendments
2025-03-31 Committee report printed and distributed
2025-03-27 Considered in public hearing
2025-03-27 Vote taken in committee
2025-03-24 Considered in public hearing
2025-03-24 Left pending in committee
2025-03-24 Scheduled for public hearing on . . .
2025-03-17 Referred to Local Government

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly requires a compliance audit of large counties' use of federal funds, aiming to ensure proper and efficient use of government resources.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating an audit and reporting on the use of federal funds, the bill establishes a procedural mechanism to evaluate county-level government performance and financial compliance, which can identify inefficiencies or misuses and potentially drive improvements.

Evidence:

  • mandates a one-time compliance audit of counties with populations over one million regarding their use of federal funds
  • Requires the audit to assess compliance with federal fund usage regulations
  • State Auditor is required to conduct this audit by January 1, 2026, and report the findings

Ambiguity Notes: The bill focuses on compliance with federal fund usage rather than broader government efficiency, but ensuring proper use of funds is directly related to efficient government operations.

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill updates the composition of the legislative audit committee, which oversees government audits and accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: By restructuring the audit committee, the bill could improve oversight and the effectiveness of government audits, indirectly promoting government efficiency.

Evidence:

  • updates the membership of the legislative audit committee to include additional representatives

Ambiguity Notes: The change in committee composition alone does not guarantee efficiency improvements, but it is structurally relevant to oversight functions.

Senate - 2401 - Relating to governmental entities subject to the sunset review process.

Legislation ID: 211953

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends specific sections of the Texas Government Code and Special District Local Laws Code to include various governmental entities under the Texas Sunset Act. The bill outlines the conditions under which these entities will be subject to review and specifies that they may be abolished unless continued in existence. The entities affected include the Texas Lottery Commission, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Texas Ethics Commission, Department of Information Resources, and several river authorities. The bill aims to enhance accountability and oversight of these governmental bodies by requiring regular reviews.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Authority is subject to review under Chapter 325 (Texas Sunset Act).
  • Authority may not be abolished.
  • Board and department must be reviewed under Chapter 325 (Texas Sunset Act).
  • Commission is abolished unless continued in existence.
  • Commission is subject to review under Chapter 325 (Texas Sunset Act).
  • Commission must be reviewed under Chapter 325 (Texas Sunset Act).
  • Commission shall be reviewed every 12 years.
  • Department is abolished unless continued in existence.
  • Department must be reviewed under Chapter 325 (Texas Sunset Act).
  • District is subject to review under Chapter 325 (Texas Sunset Act).
  • District may not be abolished.
  • Requires a two-thirds vote for immediate effect.
  • Requires periodic review as if it were a state agency.
  • Requires the Department of Information Resources to undergo review under the Texas Sunset Act.
  • Requires the Texas Department of Criminal Justice to undergo review under the Texas Sunset Act.
  • Requires the Texas Ethics Commission to be reviewed every 12 years.
  • Requires the Texas Lottery Commission to undergo review under the Texas Sunset Act.
  • The act takes effect immediately upon a two-thirds vote or on September 1, 2025.
  • The authority is subject to review under Chapter 325 but may not be abolished.
  • The Department of Information Resources is subject to review under Chapter 325.
  • The district is subject to review under Chapter 325 but may not be abolished.
  • The Texas Board of Criminal Justice and the Texas Department of Criminal Justice are subject to review under Chapter 325.
  • The Texas Ethics Commission is subject to review under Chapter 325 but will not be abolished.
  • The Texas Lottery Commission is subject to review under Chapter 325 of the Government Code.
  • They are abolished unless continued in existence.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-24 Amendment(s) considered in committee
2025-05-24 Failed to receive affirmative vote in comm.
2025-05-24 Considered in formal meeting
2025-05-02 Read first time
2025-05-02 Referred to Delivery of Government Efficiency
2025-05-01 Read 3rd time
2025-05-01 Record vote
2025-05-01 Rules suspended-Regular order of business

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The Texas Sunset Act is a statutory process designed to increase government efficiency and effectiveness by requiring periodic reviews of the performance and necessity of agencies, with the potential for restructuring or abolishing them.

Mechanism of Influence: By subjecting these entities to the Sunset review process, the bill establishes a recurring, structured evaluation mechanism aimed at identifying inefficiencies, eliminating unnecessary functions, and improving government operations.

Evidence:

  • subject the authority to the Texas Sunset Act
  • Department must be reviewed under Chapter 325 (Texas Sunset Act)
  • Commission is abolished unless continued in existence

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill itself does not prescribe specific efficiency measures, the explicit purpose of the Sunset Act is to promote government efficiency and accountability. The bill's language directly ties these entities to that process.

Senate - 2900 - Relating to a review of certain advisory entities under the jurisdiction of the comptroller of public accounts and to the repeal or redesignation of certain of those entities.

Legislation ID: 135278

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

The bill mandates a review of various advisory entities under the jurisdiction of the comptroller. It requires the comptroller to assess the necessity and operational efficiency of these entities and report findings to the legislature by December 2026. Additionally, it amends certain sections of the Government Code and repeals others to streamline processes related to these advisory entities.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Advisory committee to provide advice on investment management and distributions.
  • Annual presentation of investment performance and expected distributions to political subdivisions.
  • A report must be submitted to the legislature by December 1, 2026.
  • Assessment must determine if each entity is necessary and promotes efficient operations.
  • Comptroller must review each advisory entity associated with the office.
  • Comptroller to appoint members with relevant investment expertise.
  • Definitions related to the tobacco settlement account and advisory committee are clarified.
  • Governor must notify the comptroller and school districts within seven days of a determination.
  • Mandates a report to the legislature by December 1, 2026, detailing the findings.
  • Mandates a report to the legislature by December 1, 2026, identifying entities that are unnecessary or ineffective.
  • Mandates quarterly meetings to discuss public health challenges.
  • Mandates that funds be distributed equitably among communities.
  • Mandates the submission of a report to the legislature by a specified date.
  • Mandates training for health professionals on emergency response procedures.
  • Members may not receive compensation but can be reimbursed for necessary expenses.
  • Members must complete a training program before assuming their duties.
  • Members must complete a training program before serving.
  • Repeal of Section 403.028(f), 403.1042, 403.602(14), 403.618, and 490I.0110.
  • Requires annual budget reviews to assess funding effectiveness.
  • Requires the appointment of diverse members from various health sectors.
  • Requires the committee to advise the Texas Department of Health and the comptroller on specific duties.
  • Requires the comptroller to assess each advisory entity for necessity and operational efficiency.
  • Requires the comptroller to assess the continuing necessity of each board and commission.
  • Requires the comptroller to evaluate whether each entity promotes efficient and effective operations.
  • Requires the comptroller to present investment performance summaries to the advisory committee annually.
  • Requires the comptroller to review all advisory entities under their jurisdiction.
  • Requires the comptroller to review each advisory entity under its jurisdiction.
  • Requires the development of a comprehensive emergency response plan.
  • Requires the state auditor to submit recommendations by December 15 of each year.
  • Requires written notification to the comptroller, applicable school districts, and applicants within seven days of the governors determination.
  • Review must assess whether each entity is necessary and promotes efficient operations.
  • State auditor must submit efficiency recommendations to key state officials by December 15 each year.
  • Takes effect immediately with a two-thirds vote; otherwise, it takes effect on September 1, 2025.
  • The Act takes immediate effect with a two-thirds majority vote; otherwise, it takes effect on September 1, 2025.
  • The comptroller must appoint members with relevant expertise in finance.
  • The comptroller must assess whether each advisory entity is necessary.
  • The comptroller must conduct a review of each advisory entity by December 1, 2026.
  • The comptroller must evaluate if each entity promotes the efficient and effective operation of the office.
  • The review must determine if the advisory entities are necessary and promote efficient operations.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-06-20 Signed by the Governor
2025-06-20 Effective immediately
2025-06-03 Sent to the Governor
2025-06-02 Signed in the House
2025-06-02 Signed in the Senate
2025-06-01 Record vote
2025-06-01 Senate adopts conference committee report
2025-06-01 Senate adopts conf. comm. report-reported

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a mandated review process to evaluate the necessity and efficiency of government advisory entities, with the explicit goal of streamlining and potentially eliminating unnecessary or ineffective bodies.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring the comptroller to assess and report on the operational efficiency of advisory entities, the bill creates a structural mechanism for identifying and acting on inefficiencies within government operations. The amendments and repeals to the Government Code further support efforts to streamline processes.

Evidence:

  • requires the comptroller to assess the necessity and operational efficiency of these entities
  • report findings to the legislature by December 2026
  • amends certain sections of the Government Code and repeals others to streamline processes

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its intent to promote efficiency by reviewing and potentially eliminating unnecessary or ineffective advisory entities. The language is clear about the goal of improving government operations.

Senate - 943 - Relating to the establishment and duties of the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office and the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Advisory Panel.

Legislation ID: 210522

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill introduces the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office to identify and implement efficiencies in rule adoption, regulatory review, and contested case processes. It also establishes the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Advisory Panel to provide expertise and recommendations for improving regulatory practices. The office and panel will work together to analyze existing regulations, reduce unnecessary rules, and enhance public access to information regarding state agency regulations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Assist agencies in identifying unnecessary rules and their impacts.
  • Coordinate with multiple state agencies to create a searchable website for rules and related information.
  • Coordinate with other state agencies to improve public access to regulatory information.
  • Defines Office as the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office and Panel as the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Advisory Panel.
  • Ensure the guide is written in plain language.
  • Ensure the manual is written in plain language.
  • Establish goals for reducing regulatory requirements.
  • Governor must appoint panel members by January 1, 2026.
  • Identify opportunities for efficiency in state agencies rule adoption and regulatory review.
  • Members serve two-year terms and may be reimbursed for expenses.
  • Panel must hold its first meeting within 60 days of member appointments.
  • Subject to the Texas Sunset Act, the office and panel will be abolished on September 1, 2037, unless continued.
  • Submit a report to the governor and Legislative Budget Board by December 1 of each even-numbered year.
  • The act takes effect immediately with a two-thirds vote or on September 1, 2025, if not.
  • The guide must help agencies meet established regulatory reduction goals.
  • The manual must outline best practices for preparing local employment impact statements, regulatory analyses, fiscal notes, and public benefit notes.
  • The panel consists of seven members appointed by the governor with specific representation.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-13 Read first time
2025-02-13 Referred to Business & Commerce
2025-01-27 Received by the Secretary of the Senate
2025-01-27 Filed

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes new governmental entities (an office and an advisory panel) whose stated mission is to improve the efficiency of regulatory processes, reduce unnecessary rules, and coordinate inter-agency efforts.

Mechanism of Influence: By creating the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office and Advisory Panel, the bill sets up permanent structural mechanisms to review, streamline, and modernize regulatory functions. The required manuals, guides, and reports are procedural mechanisms to drive and track efficiency improvements.

Evidence:

  • This bill introduces the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office to identify and implement efficiencies in rule adoption, regulatory review, and contested case processes.
  • Establishes the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Advisory Panel to provide expertise and recommendations for improving regulatory practices.
  • Requires the office to create a guide to assist state agencies in reducing regulations.
  • Mandates a biennial report from the office detailing its activities and recommendations.
  • Assist agencies in identifying unnecessary rules and their impacts.
  • Identify opportunities for efficiency in state agencies rule adoption and regulatory review.

Ambiguity Notes: The language is clear that the primary goal is regulatory efficiency and reduction. The scope is broad but is anchored to regulatory processes, not all government operations.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

Utah

Index of Bills

House - 215 - Office of Legislative Auditor General Provisions

Legislation ID: 104770

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

H.B. 215 amends existing provisions related to the legislative auditor generals duties, including authority over audits, information requests, and responses from entities. It seeks to enhance the auditors ability to oversee the Utah System of Higher Education and introduces measures to prevent interference with audits. The bill also makes technical adjustments to existing laws and defines the roles and responsibilities of the auditor general and audited entities.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Entities must create and update audit response plans as needed.
  • Entities must provide access to necessary information and resources for audits as requested by the auditor general.
  • Individuals must not use intimidation or unlawful acts to interfere with audits or the auditors decisions.
  • Mandates that false information must not be provided during the audit process.
  • Other violations are classified as a class B misdemeanor.
  • Prohibits the use of force, intimidation, or deception to interfere with a legislative audit.
  • Requires individuals to refrain from altering, destroying, or concealing information related to a legislative audit.
  • The auditor general can determine who responds to audit requests, not limited to the chief officer of the entity.
  • The auditor general must notify the Audit Subcommittee of any legal violations or malfeasance identified during audits.
  • The auditor general shall conduct comprehensive audits and submit reports to the Audit Subcommittee within 75 days of completing an audit.
  • The legislative auditor general is authorized to review the effectiveness of the internal audit functions within government organizations.
  • The legislative auditor general must be a licensed CPA or certified internal auditor with at least seven years of relevant experience.
  • Violations of certain provisions are classified as a class A misdemeanor.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-07 Senate/ strike enacting clause
2025-03-07 House/ filed
2025-03-07 Senate/ to House
2025-03-07 House/ received from Senate
2025-03-05 Senate/ 2nd Reading Calendar to Rules
2025-02-24 Senate/ committee report favorable
2025-02-24 Senate/ placed on 2nd Reading Calendar
2025-02-24 Senate Comm - Favorable Recommendation

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to improve government efficiency and effectiveness by enhancing the legislative auditor general's ability to conduct thorough audits, monitor internal controls, and ensure corrective action in response to findings.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring audit response plans, empowering the auditor general to review internal audit effectiveness, and mandating cooperation from audited entities, the bill introduces structural and procedural mechanisms to identify inefficiencies, enforce accountability, and promote cost savings and improved performance in government operations.

Evidence:

  • 'Establishes requirements for audit response plans and allows the auditor general to monitor the Utah System of Higher Education.'
  • 'The legislative auditor general is authorized to review the effectiveness of the internal audit functions within government organizations.'
  • 'Entities must provide access to necessary information and resources for audits as requested by the auditor general.'
  • 'Defines and prohibits criminal interference with legislative audits.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is specific in its focus on audit functions and oversight within the Utah System of Higher Education and related government entities. The language is clear about its intent to strengthen audit mechanisms for efficiency and accountability.

House - 317 - Executive Agency Innovation Incentives

Legislation ID: 105675

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends and enacts provisions related to efficiency improvement processes and certain funding requirements in the Governors Office of Planning and Budget. It includes criteria for nonlapsing funds, processes for evaluating efficiency, and reporting requirements to ensure accountability and recognition of cost-saving measures.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must report on their plans for nonlapsing appropriations by October 1 each year.
  • Annual reporting on progress towards efficiency metrics.
  • Appropriations must be designated in the appropriations bill or granted nonlapsing authority.
  • Appropriations must be listed in specific sections to be nonlapsing.
  • Entities must report progress on efficiency metrics by October 1 each year.
  • Evaluation of government processes to assess potential for cost-savings or time-savings.
  • If efficiency improvements yield cost-savings, entities can request nonlapsing funds for employee incentives.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-19 Governor Signed
2025-03-12 House/ to Governor
2025-03-12 House/ received enrolled bill from Printing
2025-03-07 Enrolled Bill Returned to House or Senate
2025-03-07 House/ enrolled bill to Printing
2025-03-04 Bill Received from House for Enrolling
2025-03-04 Draft of Enrolled Bill Prepared
2025-03-03 House/ received from Senate

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly establishes a process for evaluating government efficiency and requires annual reporting on efficiency metrics, with a focus on identifying cost-saving and time-saving opportunities.

Mechanism of Influence: It empowers the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget and the Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst to systematically review and improve government processes, mandates regular measurement and reporting of efficiency outcomes, and provides a structural mechanism for ongoing oversight.

Evidence:

  • establishes a process for the Governors Office of Planning and Budget and the Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst to identify and evaluate government processes for efficiency improvements
  • Annual reporting on progress towards efficiency metrics
  • Evaluation of government processes to assess potential for cost-savings or time-savings

Ambiguity Notes: The language is clear that the goal is government efficiency, as evidenced by the requirement for annual progress reports and evaluations focused on cost and time savings.

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The criteria for nonlapsing appropriations are included to ensure responsible fiscal management, which supports efficiency by allowing more flexible and accountable use of funds.

Mechanism of Influence: By clarifying how appropriations can remain available across fiscal years, the provision supports long-term efficiency initiatives that may require multi-year funding.

Evidence:

  • criteria under which appropriations can be treated as nonlapsing
  • Appropriations must be designated in the appropriations bill or granted nonlapsing authority

Ambiguity Notes: While the primary focus is on financial management, its inclusion in an efficiency-focused bill suggests it is intended to support the broader goal of government efficiency.

House - 475 - Public Funds Reporting Amendments

Legislation ID: 106854

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill amends the duties of the state auditor, specifically mandating the preparation of an annual report that includes the total balance of cash, cash equivalents, and investments held by each entity managing public funds. This initiative aims to ensure better oversight of public finances and promote fiscal responsibility among state entities.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Allows for reasonable exceptions for smaller districts in accounting and reporting procedures.
  • Allows legislators to request inquiries into compliance with legal obligations.
  • Allows the auditor to conduct performance audits and reviews of public fund recipients.
  • Allows withholding of funds if a local government fails to adopt a compliant budget.
  • Auditor may audit any entity receiving public funds unless specific conditions apply.
  • Audits must adhere to generally accepted auditing standards.
  • Audits must be conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards.
  • Audit workpapers that disclose identities of whistleblowers are protected.
  • Drafts circulated for response before audit completion are protected.
  • Ensures compliance with Title 63G, Chapter 31 regarding sex discrimination.
  • Ensures state and federal funds are used appropriately for mental health and substance abuse programs.
  • Establishes audit guidelines for local mental health and substance abuse authorities.
  • Mandates audits of state finances, revenues, expenditures, and fund balances.
  • Mandates public availability of the report on the state auditors website.
  • Mandates reporting to the Legislative Management Committee upon request.
  • Mandates the manual to conform with generally accepted accounting principles.
  • Records relating to uncorroborated allegations of misconduct are protected.
  • Requires annual reporting of financial balances for all public fund-holding entities.
  • Requires annual reporting of total public fund balances by January 31 each year.
  • Requires formal notice of noncompliance before withholding funds.
  • Requires posting of inquiry results on the state auditors website.
  • Requires the preparation of a Uniform Accounting Manual for Special Districts.
  • Requires the state auditor to prepare annual reports for entities holding public funds.
  • Requires the state auditor to report non-implementation of recommendations to the Legislative Management Committee.
  • The state auditor must conduct audits of all permanent and special funds, as well as the General Fund.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-25 Governor Signed
2025-03-12 House/ received enrolled bill from Printing
2025-03-12 House/ to Governor
2025-03-07 Enrolled Bill Returned to House or Senate
2025-03-07 House/ enrolled bill to Printing
2025-03-06 Draft of Enrolled Bill Prepared
2025-03-06 Bill Received from House for Enrolling
2025-03-05 House/ received from Senate

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly aims to promote government efficiency and fiscal responsibility through mandated audits, public reporting, and standardized accounting procedures.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring regular audits, public disclosure of financial information, and standardized accounting, the bill seeks to uncover inefficiencies, ensure proper use of funds, and facilitate corrective actions, thereby streamlining government operations and improving oversight.

Evidence:

  • 'This initiative aims to ensure better oversight of public finances and promote fiscal responsibility among state entities.'
  • 'Allows the auditor to conduct performance audits and reviews of public fund recipients.'
  • 'Requires the state auditor to prepare annual reports for entities holding public funds.'
  • 'Mandates public availability of the report on the state auditors website.'
  • 'The state auditor is tasked with preparing and maintaining a Uniform Accounting Manual for Special Districts that prescribes a uniform system of accounting, budgeting, and reporting procedures.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's language is clear in its intent to promote efficiency and effectiveness in government operations, especially through its mandates for audits, annual reporting, and uniform accounting procedures.

Senate - 154 - Legislative Audit Amendments

Legislation ID: 108082

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill enacts and amends provisions regarding the legislative auditor generals authority, including the ability to request information from entities, manage audit processes, and handle privileged information. It also establishes protocols for contesting privilege claims and monitoring the operations of the Utah System of Higher Education.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Arbitrators will determine the validity of privilege claims.
  • Audit reports must be submitted to the Audit Subcommittee within 75 days of completion.
  • Disclosure to law enforcement is permitted if related to violations of law.
  • Entities must assert privilege when withholding information.
  • Entities must provide access to information requested by the auditor general unless it violates federal law.
  • Entities must provide privileged items if requested and submit claims to an arbitrator if contested.
  • Entities must submit a written statement asserting privilege for withheld items.
  • Entities must submit a written statement asserting privilege when withholding information.
  • Entities withholding privileged items must assert the privilege explicitly.
  • No legislator or public official may influence the appointment of the auditor general.
  • Records related to personal misconduct or allegations must be protected.
  • The legislative auditor general is required to monitor the health of internal audit functions.
  • The legislative auditor general may contest privilege claims and engage an arbitrator.
  • The legislative auditor general must be a licensed CPA or certified internal auditor with at least seven years of experience.
  • The legislative auditor general must prepare a list of high-risk programs and monitor internal audit functions.
  • The office must conduct audits and report findings to the Audit Subcommittee within 75 days.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-25 Governor Signed
2025-03-14 Senate/ received enrolled bill from Printing
2025-03-14 Senate/ to Governor
2025-03-12 Senate/ enrolled bill to Printing
2025-03-12 Enrolled Bill Returned to House or Senate
2025-03-11 Draft of Enrolled Bill Prepared
2025-03-11 Bill Received from Senate for Enrolling
2025-03-08 Senate/ received from House

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill specifically strengthens the legislative auditor general's capacity to monitor and evaluate government entities through audits, including setting protocols for reporting, monitoring internal audits, and handling privileged information. These measures are directly intended to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of government oversight and operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring regular audit reports, empowering the auditor general to request information (even privileged items), and monitoring internal audit health, the bill establishes structural mechanisms for continuous evaluation and improvement of government performance. The use of subpoenas and independence protections further bolster the auditor’s effectiveness in uncovering inefficiencies or misconduct.

Evidence:

  • Details the requirements for audit reporting, including timelines and monitoring of government organizations internal audits.
  • The legislative auditor general is required to monitor the health of internal audit functions.
  • Grants the legislative auditor general the authority to issue subpoenas to access necessary information for audits.
  • Audit reports must be submitted to the Audit Subcommittee within 75 days of completion.

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill clearly focuses on audit processes and oversight, it does not explicitly state that the sole or primary purpose is to promote government efficiency. However, the structure and intent of audit functions generally target improved efficiency and accountability.

Vermont

Index of Bills

House - 359 - An act relating to privatization contracts

Legislation ID: 195972

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

The bill proposes changes to existing laws regarding privatization contracts within the Vermont Executive Branch. It defines privatization contracts, establishes standards for contracting, outlines procedures for entering such contracts, and mandates fiscal and operational assessments of privatization impacts. The goal is to enhance transparency, ensure fair wages, and protect employee rights while managing privatization efforts.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Defines privatization contract as one that results in a reduction of permanent employees or replaces duties of vacant positions.
  • Establishes effective date for the act and specific provisions.
  • Requires 35 days notice to collective bargaining representatives before bidding, preparation of a detailed statement of services, and specific bid requirements regarding wages and benefits.
  • Requires an assessment of the impacts of modifying the definition of privatization contracts and increasing cost savings from 10% to 20.
  • Requires Attorney General certification for contracts over $25,000 to ensure compliance with classification and merit standards.
  • States that contracts for services are not required when there is no equivalent permanent classified employee position.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-26 Read first time and referred to the Committee on [Government Operations and Military Affairs]

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill requires an assessment of the fiscal and operational impacts of proposed changes to privatization contracts, including analysis of cost savings. This provision explicitly aims to evaluate government performance and cost efficiency related to contracting out services.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating fiscal and operational assessments, the bill creates a structural mechanism for evaluating whether privatization leads to cost savings or improved efficiency, directly tying contract approval to efficiency goals.

Evidence:

  • 'mandates an assessment of the fiscal and operational impacts of proposed changes to privatization contracts, including potential changes to definitions and required cost savings.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill does not create a permanent body or commission, but it does require systematic evaluation of efficiency as part of the contract approval process.

House - 67 - An act relating to legislative operations and government accountability

Legislation ID: 195762

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

The bill seeks to create a committee dedicated to overseeing government performance and ensuring that legislation meets its intended goals. It includes provisions for the committees structure, duties, and powers, as well as updates to reporting requirements for state agencies. The act emphasizes the importance of evidence-based policy and accountability in government operations.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must notify relevant committees if reports will be late.
  • Analyze the need for subpoena power and additional staff support in the first report.
  • Annual reporting on issues of public concern and resource needs.
  • Annual submission of requests to revise indicators to the committee.
  • Auditor to provide summaries of audits to the committee and present findings upon request.
  • Auditor to report on selected programs every two years, analyzing performance measures.
  • Committee composed of eight members from both the House and Senate, with party representation limits.
  • Committee to elect leadership and maintain meeting records.
  • Committee to examine state government performance and recommend improvements.
  • Defines government oversight as a mechanism to ensure legislative intent is properly executed.
  • Establishes the principle of government accountability through evidence-based processes.
  • Reports must be submitted by November 15 for the preceding fiscal year.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-01 Rep. [Scheu of Middlebury] moved that the Committee on [Appropriations] be relieved of the bill and that the same be recommitted to the Committee on [Government Operations and Military Affairs], which was agreed to
2025-03-12 Referred to Committee on [Appropriations] per Rule 35(a)
2025-03-12 Notice Calendar: Favorable with Amendment
2025-01-23 Read first time and referred to the Committee on [Government Operations and Military Affairs]

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly creates a permanent committee focused on government oversight, performance, and accountability, with explicit duties to improve efficiency and effectiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By establishing a committee and mandating audits, reports, and evidence-based reviews, the bill sets up structural mechanisms to identify inefficiencies, recommend improvements, and ensure legislative goals are met.

Evidence:

  • 'The bill seeks to create a committee dedicated to overseeing government performance and ensuring that legislation meets its intended goals.'
  • 'Annual Audit of Agency Programs; Pilot: This section requires periodic audits of state agency programs to assess efficiency and outcomes.'
  • 'Committee to examine state government performance and recommend improvements.'
  • 'Purpose: This section outlines the purpose of the bill, emphasizing government accountability and the importance of measuring policy success through clear metrics.'

Ambiguity Notes: The language is clear in stating the committee's purpose is to promote government efficiency and accountability. The duties and structure are well-defined, leaving little ambiguity about its intent.

Washington

Index of Bills

Senate - 5146 - Government efficiency portal

Legislation ID: 51361

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill establishes a government efficiency portal in Washington State to gather information on government services that may be duplicative or wasteful. The portal allows state employees and the public to report inefficiencies, with provisions for anonymity. The information collected will be reviewed annually by legislative committees, and state employees whose suggestions lead to savings may receive cash awards.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Portal must be publicly accessible and optimized for disabilities and mobile devices.
  • Submissions must be sent to the chairs and ranking members of the Senate Ways and Means Committee and House Appropriations Committee by January 10th each year.
  • Suggestions must result in net savings or revenue to the state to qualify for cash awards under RCW 41.60.041.
  • Users must input their name (anonymously if desired), state agency, policy area, whether they are a state employee, and a description of inefficiencies.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-01-13 First reading, referred to State Government, Tribal Affairs & Elections. (View Original Bill)
2025-01-07 Prefiled for introduction.

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's explicit purpose is to improve government efficiency by establishing a structural mechanism (the portal) to gather and act on reports of inefficiency, and by incentivizing cost-saving suggestions.

Mechanism of Influence: It creates a new reporting portal, mandates annual reviews by legislative committees, and provides financial incentives for state employees whose suggestions lead to savings. These measures are designed to streamline government operations and reduce waste.

Evidence:

  • establishes a government efficiency portal
  • gather information on government services that may be duplicative or wasteful
  • Annual transmission of submissions from the portal to legislative committees for review
  • State employees who submit actionable suggestions that lead to savings may receive cash awards
  • The legislature aims to ensure efficient investment of taxpayer dollars

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 5809 - Cost savings

Legislation ID: 157194

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill addresses the states budget challenges by eliminating specific legislative reports and an advisory committee. The legislature recognizes the need to streamline operations and reduce administrative overhead, particularly in light of the governors directive for agencies to find additional savings. As a result, the bill proposes the repeal of certain sections of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) that pertain to reports and committees that have either fulfilled their original purpose or are redundant in nature.

Key Sections

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-04-14 First reading, referred to Ways & Means. (View Original Bill)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly targets government efficiency by eliminating specific reports and an advisory committee that are considered unnecessary, thereby reducing administrative costs and streamlining operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By repealing requirements for reports and dissolving an advisory committee, the bill reduces bureaucratic workload and administrative overhead, which are explicit structural mechanisms to improve efficiency and reduce costs.

Evidence:

  • The legislature recognizes the need to streamline operations and reduce administrative overhead
  • eliminate certain reports and an advisory committee
  • repeal of three RCWs

Ambiguity Notes: The bill clearly states the intent to streamline operations and reduce overhead; however, it does not specify how much cost will be saved or detail the criteria for determining redundancy.

West Virginia

Index of Bills

House - 2008 - Executive Branch Reorganization

Legislation ID: 72937

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 2008 proposes to amend and repeal several sections of the West Virginia Code to facilitate the reorganization of the executive branch. Key changes include the redesignation of the Department of Economic Development, the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security, and the abolishment of the Department of Arts, Culture, and History. The bill also specifies that starting July 1, 2025, new hires and position transfers within these departments will be classified as exempt from state grievance procedures, thus streamlining operations and governance within the executive branch.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agreements for travel expenses from private funds are allowed.
  • All contracts must be approved by the Secretary of the Department of Commerce.
  • All contracts must be approved by the Secretary of the Division and the Secretary of the Department of Commerce.
  • All employees of the Department of Commerce shall be exempt from state grievance procedures and the classified civil service system.
  • All employees of the Department of Commerce will be exempt from state grievance procedures starting July 1, 2025.
  • All employees of the Division will be exempt from state grievance procedures starting July 1, 2025.
  • Balances at year-end do not revert to the general fund.
  • Certain documents related to business assistance will be confidential, except for agreements involving public funds.
  • Certain documents related to economic development are exempt from public disclosure.
  • Committee to represent various racing disciplines.
  • Contracts longer than one fiscal year must include cancellation clauses if funds are not appropriated.
  • Contracts must include provisions for employment and performance incentives.
  • Contracts must include provisions for hiring and performance incentives.
  • Contracts must include provisions for hiring economic development representatives and performance-based incentives.
  • Contracts with nonprofits must include provisions for hiring practices and performance-based incentives.
  • Criteria for eligibility must be developed by the Division.
  • Current classified civil service employees retain their status as long as they remain in their current position.
  • Current classified civil service employees will retain their status unless they change positions.
  • Current classified employees retain their status unless they change positions.
  • Development plans must show significant economic activity.
  • Economic development representatives are not subject to classified civil service protections.
  • Economic development representatives are paid a base salary within appropriations.
  • Employees of the Department of Commerce will be exempt from state grievance procedures starting July 1, 2025.
  • Employees of the Division of Economic Development will be exempt from state grievance procedures and the classified civil service system starting July 1, 2025.
  • Employees of the Division will be exempt from state grievance procedures starting July 1, 2025.
  • Existing programs remain effective until officially changed.
  • Fund consists of legislative appropriations and external sources.
  • Funding allocation determined by dividing total funds by the number of eligible councils.
  • Funds must be used solely for promoting business formation and related activities.
  • Funds must be used to promote business development and provide incentives for business formation or expansion.
  • Funds must be used to promote business formation and provide incentives for economic development.
  • Infrastructure must be provided at no cost to the state.
  • Job descriptions must be established by the executive director.
  • Lists all agencies, boards, and divisions under the Department of Commerce.
  • Members serve at the Governors discretion.
  • Must comply with local planning laws.
  • Specifies that employees will be exempt from state grievance procedures beginning July 1, 2025.
  • The Division may enter into agreements with other state agencies.
  • The Division may utilize existing resources from the Department of Commerce.
  • The Division must utilize existing resources of the Department of Commerce efficiently.
  • The Executive Director can hire and fire economic development representatives.
  • The Executive Director is appointed by the Governor and must have relevant experience in economic development.
  • The Executive Director is appointed by the Governor and must have relevant qualifications.
  • The Executive Director may hire and fire economic development representatives.
  • The Executive Director must develop a comprehensive economic development strategy.
  • The Executive Director must develop a comprehensive economic development strategy for West Virginia.
  • The funds administration requires approval from the Secretary of the Department of Commerce.
  • The Secretary/Executive Director may hire and fire staff as necessary.
  • The Secretary/Executive Director must be qualified in economic development.
  • The Secretary must develop a comprehensive economic development strategy.
  • The Secretary of Commerce is appointed by the Governor with Senate consent.
  • The Secretary serves at the Governors pleasure and has a specified salary.
  • The Secretary serves at the will of the Governor.
  • They may receive performance-based incentives from nonprofit funds.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-07-31 Chapter 135, Acts, Regular Session, 2025
2025-07-22 Chapter 139, Acts, Regular Session, 2025
2025-04-25 Approved by Governor 4/25/2025
2025-04-22 To Governor 4/22/2025
2025-04-12 To Governor 4/22/2025 - Senate Journal
2025-04-12 Approved by Governor 4/25/2025 - House Journal
2025-04-12 To Governor 4/22/2025 - House Journal
2025-04-12 Approved by Governor 4/25/2025 - Senate Journal

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly addresses government efficiency by reorganizing executive branch departments, consolidating or abolishing certain entities, and streamlining administrative processes.

Mechanism of Influence: By abolishing, redesignating, and restructuring departments (such as establishing the Department of Homeland Security and abolishing the Department of Arts, Culture, and History), the bill aims to reduce overlap, clarify responsibilities, and potentially cut costs. Exempting new hires and transfers from grievance procedures is intended to make personnel management more agile and less encumbered by bureaucratic processes.

Evidence:

  • 'facilitate the reorganization of the executive branch'
  • 'abolishment of the Department of Arts, Culture, and History'
  • 'new hires and position transfers within these departments will be classified as exempt from state grievance procedures, thus streamlining operations and governance'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill focuses on reorganization and streamlining, it does not explicitly mandate cost savings or efficiency studies, but the intent to improve efficiency is clear from the structural changes it proposes.

House - 3411 - Relating to commissions; removing the legislative members; and eliminating expired commissions

Legislation ID: 97252

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

House Bill 3411 proposes significant amendments to the West Virginia Code, particularly targeting the structure and composition of various legislative commissions. The bill seeks to continue the Commission on Special Investigations while removing legislative members from certain commissions and repealing outdated provisions. The intention is to modernize and clarify the roles of these commissions in state governance.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must provide information in requested formats.
  • Agency reviews must occur at least once every 15 years.
  • Allows for prior inquiry into non-compliance before court action.
  • Allows the committee to hold public hearings and administer oaths.
  • Assets must be transferred to the appropriate department or agency.
  • Committee can issue subpoenas for witnesses and documents.
  • Committee must have access to all records of state agencies.
  • Committee must provide written reasons for requesting a compliance review.
  • Cost-benefit analyses must be part of the review process.
  • Departments must prepare presentations detailing their mission, budget, and compliance with state practices.
  • Departments must prepare presentations including their mission, budget, and compliance with state personnel practices.
  • Each agency must be reviewed at least once every 15 years.
  • Each regulatory board must be reviewed at least once every 12 years.
  • Grants the committee access to all records of state agencies.
  • Limits party representation to no more than two members from the same political party.
  • Mandates a review of each regulatory board at least once every 12 years.
  • Mandates a review of each state agency at least once every 15 years.
  • Membership from a political party with less than 15% representation can include one member from that party.
  • Newly created regulatory boards must have a review date set within 12 years of their establishment.
  • No more than two members from the same political party can be appointed from each house.
  • Public hearings may be held to gather information.
  • Public hearings must be held at the committees discretion.
  • Regulatory boards must be reviewed at least once every 12 years.
  • Requires each regulatory board to be reviewed every 12 years.
  • Requires individuals subpoenaed to comply or face court enforcement.
  • Requires terminated boards to file a statement on asset disposition by June 30 of the wind-up year.
  • Requires the commission to be chaired by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Delegates.
  • Requires written reasons for requesting a compliance review.
  • Reviews may be conducted more frequently at the discretion of legislative leaders.
  • Reviews must assess compliance with laws and public interest representation.
  • Specifies an expected completion date for the compliance review.
  • Terminated agencies must file a statement on asset disposition by June 30 of the wind-up year.
  • The commission must include members from both political parties, with no more than two from the same party.
  • The commission must include the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Delegates, along with four appointed members from each house.
  • The committee has access to all records of state agencies.
  • Unexpended funds revert to the original appropriation fund or the General Revenue Fund if the fund is abolished.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-07-31 Chapter 143, Acts, Regular Session, 2025
2025-07-22 Chapter 147, Acts, Regular Session, 2025
2025-04-28 Approved by Governor 4/28/2025
2025-04-21 To Governor 4/21/2025
2025-04-12 Completed legislative action
2025-04-12 Communicated to Senate
2025-04-12 House Message received
2025-04-12 Effective from passage (Roll No. 612)

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill mandates regular reviews of state agencies and regulatory boards for effectiveness and efficiency, which directly targets government efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring periodic agency and board reviews, the government can identify inefficiencies, duplications, and areas for improvement, and implement corrective actions.

Evidence:

  • annual agency reviews to ensure that state agencies are functioning effectively and efficiently
  • Mandates a review of each state agency at least once every 15 years
  • periodic reviews of regulatory boards to assess their necessity and effectiveness

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 2

Why Relevant: The bill continues and clarifies the structure of the Commission on Special Investigations, which has oversight functions that can uncover inefficiencies and promote accountability.

Mechanism of Influence: A well-defined and empowered commission can investigate waste or mismanagement, leading to improved government operations.

Evidence:

  • Commission on Special Investigations continued; composition; appointment and terms of members.

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 3

Why Relevant: The bill gives the Joint Committee on Government Operations expanded powers to access records, hold hearings, and issue subpoenas, all of which support oversight and efficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: These powers enable the committee to monitor agency performance, investigate inefficiencies, and recommend reforms.

Evidence:

  • powers and duties of the Joint Committee on Government Operations, including access to state agency records, the ability to hold public hearings, and the authority to issue subpoenas

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 4

Why Relevant: The bill requires compliance reviews to ensure that recommendations for efficiency are actually implemented.

Mechanism of Influence: By following up on previous reviews, the government can track progress on efficiency measures and hold agencies accountable for making changes.

Evidence:

  • compliance reviews after agency or regulatory board reviews to ensure that recommendations are being followed

Ambiguity Notes: None

Analysis 5

Why Relevant: The bill mandates department presentations to a legislative committee, which increases transparency and allows for the identification of inefficiencies.

Mechanism of Influence: Regular presentations force departments to justify their operations and expenditures, encouraging efficiency and compliance.

Evidence:

  • state departments present information to the Joint Committee on Government Operations, detailing their activities, financial situations, and compliance with regulations

Ambiguity Notes: None

Senate - 452 - Relating to executive branch reorganization

Legislation ID: 72620

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 452 proposes significant amendments to the West Virginia Code, particularly concerning the Department of Commerce and its associated divisions. It seeks to establish the Division of Economic Development under the Department of Commerce, exempt new hires and employees transferring positions from state grievance procedures, and abolish the Department of Arts, Culture, and History, redistributing its functions to the Department of Tourism. The bill also outlines the authority of various secretaries and the Governor regarding appointments and operational procedures, effective July 1, 2025.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Requires all employees of the Department of Commerce to be exempt from state grievance procedures starting July 1, 2025.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-02-13 Filed for introduction
2025-02-13 Introduced in Senate
2025-02-13 To Government Organization

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill explicitly restructures government entities, consolidates departments, and reassigns functions, which are direct mechanisms for improving efficiency and reducing duplication in government operations.

Mechanism of Influence: By creating the Division of Economic Development, abolishing a separate department, and transferring its functions, the bill aims to streamline bureaucratic processes and potentially reduce administrative costs. The exemption from grievance procedures could also be intended to increase operational agility, though it may have other implications for employee rights.

Evidence:

  • 'establish the Division of Economic Development under the Department of Commerce'
  • 'abolish the Department of Arts, Culture, and History, redistributing its functions to the Department of Tourism'
  • 'exempt new hires and employees transferring positions from state grievance procedures'

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill clearly reorganizes government structure, it does not always state that the explicit goal is efficiency or cost savings, though such outcomes are generally understood to be the rationale for such moves. The exemption from grievance procedures is presented as a structural change, but its efficiency rationale is implied rather than stated.

Senate - 570 - Requiring economic impact statements for certain legislative rules

Legislation ID: 72738

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 570 amends existing provisions of the West Virginia Code to require agencies to include economic impact statements with certain proposed legislative rules. These statements will analyze the potential costs and economic effects of the rules on business operations, job creation, and overall economic growth. The bill aims to enhance transparency and accountability in the rule-making process by ensuring that economic considerations are taken into account when new rules are proposed.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Allows agencies to promulgate emergency rules without a hearing when an emergency is declared.
  • Amendments must be filed in the State Register and approved by the Secretary of State or Attorney General to become effective.
  • Any emergency rule promulgated to evade legislative provisions may be contested in court.
  • Committee can hold public hearings and must evaluate the economic impact of the proposed rule.
  • Committee can review emergency rules for compliance with authorizing law and existence of an emergency.
  • Committee must assess if the rule aligns with legislative intent and does not conflict with existing laws.
  • Committee must determine if the agency has statutory authority for the rule.
  • Committee must file notice of its action in the State Register.
  • Committee must provide reasons for recommendations other than authorization.
  • Defines economic impact statement as a detailed analysis of potential costs related to proposed rules, considering various economic factors.
  • Defines emergency as necessary for public safety, compliance with time limitations, or preventing substantial harm.
  • Draft bill must include legislative findings about the rules alignment with legislative intent.
  • Economic impact statements are required for rules affecting the state economy over specified thresholds.
  • Emergency rules cannot be disapproved for not filing prior to a time limit if mandated by statute.
  • Establishes that the definition of economic impact statement will expire three years after the effective date.
  • If an agency fails to file a notice of public hearing within 30 days, the emergency rule expires after 31 days.
  • If an authorized legislative rule on the same subject is promulgated, the emergency rule expires when the authorized rule takes effect.
  • If the Legislature disapproves the emergency rule, it expires when the disapproval law becomes effective.
  • If the proposed rule is not filed with the Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee within 90 days, the emergency rule expires after 91 days.
  • Mandates a detailed economic impact statement considering various economic factors.
  • Requires a fiscal note with economic impact analysis and historical revenue data for affected funds.
  • Requires agencies to file a notice of public hearing within thirty days of filing an emergency rule.
  • Requires agencies to file a statement of facts constituting the emergency with the Secretary of State.
  • Requires agencies to file the proposed rule with the Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee within ninety days of filing an emergency rule.
  • Requires agencies to submit a detailed economic impact statement for proposed rules that could have an economic impact exceeding $200,000 in one year or $1,000,000 over five years.
  • Requires agencies to submit full text of rules with changes clearly marked.
  • Requires agencies to submit the full text of the rule, summaries, fiscal notes, and public comments.
  • Requires public comments and agency responses to be included with the submission.
  • Specifies that emergency rules expire under certain conditions, such as the establishment of a legislative rule on the same subject.
  • Specifies the conditions under which an emergency rule expires, including time limits and legislative disapproval.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-27 Read 3rd time
2025-03-27 On 3rd reading
2025-03-27 Passed Senate (Roll No. 194)
2025-03-27 Ordered to House
2025-03-27 To Finance
2025-03-27 To House Finance
2025-03-27 House received Senate message
2025-03-27 Introduced in House

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes a structural mechanism (mandatory economic impact statements) that agencies must use when proposing rules, with the explicit purpose of improving transparency and accountability in government operations. By requiring economic analyses, it aims to ensure that new regulations are scrutinized for their cost and efficiency impacts, potentially leading to more efficient government rule-making.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring agencies to analyze and disclose the economic impact of proposed rules, the legislation creates a procedural check that could deter inefficient or unnecessarily costly regulations, encourage more cost-effective rule-making, and support better-informed legislative oversight.

Evidence:

  • Requires agencies to submit a detailed economic impact statement for proposed rules that could have an economic impact exceeding $200,000 in one year or $1,000,000 over five years.
  • The bill aims to enhance transparency and accountability in the rule-making process by ensuring that economic considerations are taken into account when new rules are proposed.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill focuses specifically on economic impact in the context of rule-making, not on broader government efficiency initiatives. Its scope is limited to the regulatory process rather than overall agency operations or inter-agency coordination.

Senate - 932 - Combining offices of Legislative Auditor and State Auditor

Legislation ID: 97006

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 932 aims to amend the Code of West Virginia to combine the offices of the Legislative Auditor and the State Auditor into a single office effective July 1, 2025. This consolidation is intended to transfer the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the Legislative Auditor to the State Auditor, thereby enhancing efficiency in state auditing functions.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Requires the transfer of all powers, duties, and responsibilities of the Legislative Auditor to the State Auditor.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-24 To Government Organization then Finance
2025-03-24 Filed for introduction
2025-03-24 Introduced in Senate
2025-03-24 To Government Organization

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill proposes a structural consolidation of two government offices with the explicit goal of enhancing efficiency in state auditing.

Mechanism of Influence: By merging duplicative offices and centralizing audit functions, the bill aims to streamline bureaucratic processes, reduce administrative overlap, and potentially lower operational costs.

Evidence:

  • This consolidation is intended to transfer the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the Legislative Auditor to the State Auditor, thereby enhancing efficiency in state auditing functions.
  • Combining the offices of the Legislative Auditor and the State Auditor

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's summary clearly states the efficiency goal, and the mechanism (merger of offices) is straightforward. However, the specific methods for achieving efficiency beyond consolidation are not detailed.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

Wisconsin

Index of Bills

Assembly - 274 - Relating to: the expiration of administrative rules. (FE)

Legislation ID: 156521

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill mandates that each chapter of the Wisconsin Administrative Code will expire seven years after its creation or last readoption unless it is actively renewed by the respective agency. The Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR) is tasked with creating a schedule for the expiration of existing code chapters. Additionally, the bill stipulates that agencies must avoid using outdated or derogatory language in their rules.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must review their rules for language that is considered derogatory or outdated.
  • Agencies must submit a notice of intent to readopt in triplicate no earlier than January 1 and no later than March 1 of the year before expiration.
  • If no objections are raised, the chapter is automatically readopted.
  • Mandates JCRAR to create an expiration schedule for existing code chapters.
  • Notice must include the purpose, references to statutes, and compliance statements.
  • Objections must be submitted in writing within a 40-day review period after notice is received.
  • Requires each chapter of the code to be reviewed and potentially readopted every seven years.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-08-11 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-30 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-13 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-12 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-03 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-02 Fiscal estimate received
2025-05-30 Introduced by Representatives Neylon, Tusler, Armstrong, Behnke, Brooks, Callahan, Dallman, Dittrich, Donovan, Duchow, Goeben, Green, Gustafson, B. Jacobson, Knodl, Kreibich, Maxey, Melotik, Moses, Murphy, Mursau, Nedweski, OConnor, Piwowarczyk, Rodriguez, Sortwell, Tittl, Tranel, Wichgers and Wittke; cosponsored by Senators Nass, Bradley, Quinn, Kapenga, Tomczyk, Hutton, Stafsholt, Cabral-Guevara and Feyen
2025-05-30 Read first time and referred to Committee on Government Operations, Accountability, and Transparency

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly establishes a structural, recurring review and expiration mechanism for administrative rules, explicitly designed to prevent outdated, redundant, or unnecessary regulations from persisting. This periodic review process is a structural mechanism to promote government efficiency and responsiveness.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring regular review and renewal, the bill forces agencies to justify the continued existence of each rule, potentially reducing regulatory burden and streamlining government operations. The involvement of legislative oversight adds an additional layer of scrutiny, encouraging efficiency and relevance in administrative regulations.

Evidence:

  • 'each chapter of the Wisconsin Administrative Code will expire seven years after its creation or last readoption unless it is actively renewed by the respective agency.'
  • 'JCRAR is tasked with creating a schedule for the expiration of existing code chapters.'
  • 'Agencies must notify the JCRAR and the legislature of their intent to readopt a chapter one year prior to its expiration, allowing for legislative review and potential objection.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill's intent to promote efficiency is implicit in its structure (automatic expiration and review), though it does not use the word 'efficiency' explicitly. However, the design and rationale are clearly aimed at reducing unnecessary bureaucracy.

Assembly - 277 - Relating to: requirements for proposed administrative rules that impose any costs.

Legislation ID: 156527

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Assembly Bill 277 modifies the requirements for economic impact analyses of proposed administrative rules. Under current law, only rules expected to impose over $10 million in costs are subject to certain requirements. This bill expands the scope to include any proposed rule that is expected to impose any costs on businesses, local governments, or individuals. The bill mandates that agencies must halt work on such rules until they either modify the rules to eliminate costs, obtain legislative approval, or offset costs with other rules. Additionally, it requires a detailed quantification of both costs and savings in the economic impact analysis.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies can use a previously promulgated rule to offset costs if it is done in the same calendar year.
  • Agencies must include a single dollar figure for total costs and savings in their analyses.
  • Agencies must list costs and savings for each affected group.
  • Mandates that agencies modify proposed rules to eliminate costs or obtain legislative approval before continuing.
  • Requires agencies to halt work on proposed rules if they expect any costs to be incurred by businesses or individuals over a two-year period.
  • Requires a revised economic impact analysis to confirm cost offsets.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-30 Introduced by Representatives Gustafson, Nedweski, Knodl, Armstrong, Penterman, OConnor, Mursau, Krug, Maxey, Green, Murphy, B. Jacobson, Dittrich, Tranel, Piwowarczyk, Kreibich, Gundrum, Brooks, Callahan, Dallman, Behnke, Goeben, Donovan, Kaufert, Tittl, Melotik, Wichgers and Wittke; cosponsored by Senators Bradley, Quinn, Tomczyk, Nass, Kapenga, Feyen, Cabral-Guevara and Hutton
2025-05-30 Read first time and referred to Committee on Government Operations, Accountability, and Transparency

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes stricter procedural requirements for agencies to analyze and justify the costs of new rules, with the explicit goal of controlling and potentially reducing regulatory burdens and associated costs. This aligns with the objective of improving government efficiency and reducing unnecessary administrative costs.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring detailed economic analyses for all rules with any cost, mandating cost elimination or legislative approval, and allowing cost offsets, the bill directly targets regulatory inefficiencies and aims to streamline rulemaking. It introduces a structural check on agency actions to ensure cost-effectiveness and responsiveness.

Evidence:

  • The bill changes the threshold for when economic impact analyses are required for proposed administrative rules, applying to any expected implementation and compliance costs, not just those over $10 million.
  • Mandates that agencies modify proposed rules to eliminate costs or obtain legislative approval before continuing.
  • Agencies must provide a detailed analysis of the economic impact, including estimates of total implementation and compliance costs and any expected cost savings.
  • Allows agencies to offset costs of a proposed rule by promulgating another rule in the same calendar year that reduces costs.

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill does not create a new entity or commission, it imposes procedural mechanisms specifically designed to enhance efficiency in government operations. The intent to promote efficiency is explicit in the requirements for cost analysis and offsets.

Senate - 275 - Relating to: statements of scope for administrative rules. (FE)

Legislation ID: 156363

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill modifies the existing laws regarding statements of scope for administrative rules. It limits agencies to one permanent or one emergency rule per statement of scope and specifies the expiration periods for these statements. Emergency rules will expire after six months, while permanent rules will continue to have a 30-month expiration period. The bill aims to streamline the rule-making process and ensure that agencies specify the type of rule they intend to promulgate.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • If both types are needed, separate statements of scope must be prepared.
  • Requires agencies to specify the type of rule in the statement of scope.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-07-24 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-25 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-20 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-16 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-13 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-12 Fiscal estimate received
2025-05-28 Fiscal estimate received
2025-05-21 Introduced by Senators Hutton, Bradley, Tomczyk, Nass, Kapenga, Feyen, Cabral-Guevara and Stafsholt; cosponsored by Representatives Knodl, Nedweski, Armstrong, Penterman, OConnor, Tusler, Mursau, Maxey, Green, Murphy, Dittrich, Tranel, Gustafson, Moses, Piwowarczyk, Neylon, Gundrum, Dallman, Callahan, Donovan, B. Jacobson, Behnke, Goeben, Kaufert, Tittl, Rodriguez, Wichgers and Wittke

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill's explicit purpose is to streamline the administrative rulemaking process, which directly addresses government efficiency by reducing procedural ambiguity and potential bureaucratic delays.

Mechanism of Influence: By requiring agencies to specify the type of rule and limiting statements of scope, the bill reduces the risk of overlapping or duplicative rulemaking efforts, making the process more orderly and efficient. Setting expiration periods also prevents outdated or unnecessary rulemaking from lingering.

Evidence:

  • The bill aims to streamline the rule-making process and ensure that agencies specify the type of rule they intend to promulgate.
  • Limits agencies to one permanent or one emergency rule per statement of scope.
  • Specifies expiration periods for statements of scope.

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is clear in its intent and mechanisms; however, the actual impact on efficiency would depend on agency compliance and the volume of rules processed.

Senate - 277 - Relating to: the expiration of administrative rules. (FE)

Legislation ID: 156370

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 277 establishes a framework for the expiration of each chapter of the Wisconsin Administrative Code after a period of seven years unless the chapter is readopted. It mandates that agencies notify the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR) of their intention to readopt a chapter, and outlines the process for objections to such readoptions. The bill also emphasizes the importance of using updated language in rules to avoid outdated or offensive terms.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must notify JCRAR of their intention to readopt chapters before the expiration date.
  • Agencies must review their rules to ensure compliance with modern language standards.
  • Agencies must submit a readoption notice to JCRAR and the legislatures chief clerks no later than March 1 of the year before expiration.
  • If no objections are raised within 40 days, the chapter is automatically readopted.
  • Requires chapters of the administrative code to be reviewed and potentially readopted every seven years.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-08-15 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-30 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-23 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-20 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-18 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-10 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-05 Fiscal estimate received
2025-06-04 Fiscal estimate received

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes a recurring sunset and review process for administrative rules, requiring agencies to periodically justify and renew regulations. This mechanism is explicitly designed to prevent outdated or unnecessary rules from persisting, which is a structural approach to streamlining government operations and reducing regulatory inefficiency.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating the expiration and review of administrative code chapters, the bill forces agencies to evaluate the necessity and relevance of their regulations regularly. This can lead to the elimination of redundant or obsolete rules, reducing administrative burden and potentially improving government efficiency.

Evidence:

  • Each chapter of the Wisconsin Administrative Code will automatically expire seven years after its initial promulgation or after it is readopted, unless the agency takes action to readopt it.
  • Agencies must notify JCRAR of their intention to readopt chapters before the expiration date.
  • Requires chapters of the administrative code to be reviewed and potentially readopted every seven years.

Ambiguity Notes: While the bill's main purpose is regulatory review, it does not establish a new commission or task force; instead, it modifies procedural requirements for existing agencies and the JCRAR. The efficiency gains depend on how rigorously agencies and the legislature conduct reviews.

Senate - 289 - Relating to: requirements for proposed administrative rules that impose any costs.

Legislation ID: 156376

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

Senate Bill 289 modifies the requirements for proposed administrative rules that impose costs on businesses, local governmental units, and individuals. Currently, rules that are expected to pass along $10,000,000 or more in costs require additional steps before they can be promulgated. This bill lowers that threshold to any amount of expected costs and requires agencies to halt work on proposed rules until they either modify them to eliminate costs, obtain legislative approval, or demonstrate that other rules can offset the costs. Furthermore, it mandates that agencies include estimated cost savings in their economic impact analyses.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies can modify proposed rules if the modification is relevant to the cost issues identified.
  • Agencies must express total cost savings as a single dollar figure in their analyses.
  • Agencies must modify proposed rules to eliminate expected costs or obtain legislative approval to proceed.
  • Agencies must prepare a revised economic impact analysis to demonstrate offsetting costs.
  • A separate rule must be promulgated in the same calendar year to offset costs of the proposed rule.
  • Cost savings must be attributed to the proposed rule regardless of discretion in the rule-making process.
  • If the estimates align, costs are paid from legislative appropriations.
  • If the independent analysis varies from the agencys estimate by 15% or more, the agency is assessed for the cost of the analysis.
  • Requires agencies to stop work on proposed rules if they are expected to impose any costs over a two-year period.
  • Revised economic impact analyses must be prepared after modifications are made.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-05-30 Read first time and referred to Committee on Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal Affairs
2025-05-30 Introduced by Senators Bradley, Cabral-Guevara, Feyen, Hutton, Kapenga, Nass, Quinn, Stafsholt and Tomczyk; cosponsored by Representatives Gustafson, Nedweski, Armstrong, Behnke, Brooks, Callahan, Dallman, Dittrich, Donovan, Goeben, Green, Gundrum, B. Jacobson, Kaufert, Knodl, Kreibich, Krug, Maxey, Melotik, Murphy, Mursau, Neylon, OConnor, Penterman, Piwowarczyk, Tittl, Tranel, Tusler, Wichgers and Wittke

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill directly targets government efficiency by imposing new requirements for agencies to identify, quantify, and reduce regulatory costs, and by mandating cost savings analysis in rulemaking.

Mechanism of Influence: It streamlines bureaucratic processes by requiring agencies to halt costly rulemaking unless costs are eliminated or offset, fosters transparency and accountability through economic impact analyses, and incentivizes agencies to consider cost-saving reforms.

Evidence:

  • 'requires agencies to estimate and include potential cost savings in their economic impact analyses for proposed rules.'
  • 'Agencies must modify proposed rules to eliminate expected costs or obtain legislative approval to proceed.'
  • 'Requires agencies to stop work on proposed rules if they are expected to impose any costs over a two-year period.'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is specific in its requirements for cost analysis and thresholds, leaving little ambiguity about its focus on efficiency. However, the effectiveness of these measures may depend on implementation and the quality of analyses produced.

↑ Back to Table of Contents

Wyoming

Index of Bills

Senate - 127 - Administrative rules-legislative review and objection.

Legislation ID: 13873

Bill URL: View Bill

Summary

This bill establishes a framework for the legislative review of administrative rules by requiring a regulatory impact analysis to be conducted for each rule submitted. The analysis must include an evaluation of costs, benefits, and alternatives, and must be made available to legislators and the public. It also includes provisions for the appropriation of funds to support this process and outlines the timeline for implementation.

Key Sections

Key Requirements

  • Agencies must file rules with the registrar of rules and provide public access.
  • Allows for implementation actions prior to the acts effective date.
  • Analysis must evaluate the costs and benefits of the rule and include consultation with the agency.
  • Analysis must include a statement of need, statutory authority, alternatives, costs, benefits, and sources of uncertainty.
  • Appropriates $400,000 for hiring two full-time equivalent employees for the legislative service office.
  • Chief economist must complete a regulatory impact analysis within specified timeframes.
  • Comments from legislators must be included in the review report.
  • Contest of noncompliance must be initiated within two years of the rules effective date.
  • Council must submit recommendations within specified timelines after receiving rules.
  • Defines major rule as one that has an economic impact of at least $1 million or significantly affects competition or employment.
  • Director and staff must be selected without political affiliation.
  • Emergency rules cannot exceed 240 days in total duration.
  • Emergency rules may take effect before ratification if declared by the governor.
  • Emergency rules must be filed with the local registrar.
  • Enables the council or any legislator to introduce legislation to prohibit implementation of a major rule after analysis is complete.
  • Establishes that the act is effective July 1, 2026, with certain sections effective immediately upon enactment.
  • Funding is allocated from the general fund for staffing purposes.
  • Governors approval is required within 40 days of filing or upon receipt of the legislative management councils recommendation.
  • Legislature must ratify or reject major agency rules within a specified timeframe.
  • Major agency rules must comply with W.S. 16-3-103.1.
  • Major agency rules require legislative ratification.
  • Mandates a report by December 1, 2025, on the legislative role in administrative rule oversight and necessary statutory changes.
  • Mandates completion of a regulatory impact analysis within 50 days of submission of the major rule.
  • Mandates that the analysis includes various cost and benefit assessments and key assumptions.
  • Mandates that the legislative service office reviews all major rules according to the new guidelines established in W.S. 28-9-109.
  • No major agency rule is valid until ratified by the legislature or authorized as an emergency rule.
  • Requires completion of a regulatory impact analysis within 50 days of rule submission.
  • Requires management council to determine if a rule is major and report to the legislature.
  • Requires the chief economist to provide a review of each rule to legislators within 15 days of submission.
  • Requires the legislative service office to notify all legislators upon receipt of agency rules for adoption.
  • Requires the legislative service office to provide major rules to each legislator within 15 days of submission.
  • Review of rules must be completed within specified timelines after submission.
  • Rules are effective after filing according to specified procedures.
  • Rules must be submitted and adopted in compliance with this section.
  • Rules must be submitted to the governor for approval before filing.
  • Salaries and expenses are determined by the management council.
  • The act takes effect on July 1, 2026, for rules notified after this date.
  • The appropriation shall not lapse or revert unless further legislative action is taken.

Sponsors

Legislative Actions

Date Action
2025-03-06 Assigned Chapter Number 128
2025-03-04 Governor Vetoed SEA No. 0059
2025-02-28 H Speaker Signed SEA No. 0059
2025-02-28 S President Signed SEA No. 0059
2025-02-27 Assigned Number SEA No. 0059
2025-02-26 H Appointed JCC01 Members
2025-02-25 S Appointed JCC01 Members
2025-02-25 S Concur:Failed 0-30-1-0-0

Detailed Analysis

Analysis 1

Why Relevant: The bill establishes a formal review process aimed at evaluating the efficiency and necessity of administrative rules, with a focus on cost-benefit analysis and consideration of alternatives. This is a structural mechanism explicitly designed to improve government efficiency and transparency.

Mechanism of Influence: By mandating regular, systematic regulatory impact analyses, the bill seeks to prevent unnecessary or inefficient rules from being enacted, encourage cost savings, and ensure that only beneficial regulations are implemented. This could reduce bureaucratic burdens and improve the effectiveness of government operations.

Evidence:

  • 'requires a regulatory impact analysis to be conducted for each rule submitted'
  • 'evaluation of costs, benefits, and alternatives'
  • 'must be made available to legislators and the public'

Ambiguity Notes: The bill is explicit in its intent to evaluate costs, benefits, and alternatives, which are standard metrics for assessing efficiency. There is little ambiguity about its purpose.