|
REFERENCE TITLE: licensing; accountability; penalties; exceeding regulation |
|
State of Arizona House of Representatives Fifty-first Legislature First Regular Session 2013
|
|
HB 2578 |
|
|
|
Introduced by Representatives Petersen, Kwasman, Livingston, Montenegro, Pierce J, Smith, Stevens, Senator Murphy: Representatives Allen, Barton, Borrelli, Boyer, Carter, Coleman, Dial, Fann, Farnsworth, Goodale, Gowan, Gray, Kavanagh, Lesko, Lovas, Mitchell, Olson, Quezada, Seel, Shope, Thorpe, Townsend, Ugenti, Senators Barto, Crandell, Griffin, Shooter, Ward, Worsley
|
AN ACT
amending sections 9‑834, 11‑1604, 41‑1030 and 48‑3644, Arizona Revised Statutes; relating to licensing decisions.
(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Section 9-834, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
9-834. Prohibited acts by municipalities and employees; civil penalty; violation; classification
A. A municipality shall not base a licensing decision in whole or in part on a licensing requirement or condition that is not specifically authorized by statute, rule, ordinance or code. A general grant of authority does not constitute a basis for imposing a licensing requirement or condition unless the authority specifically authorizes the requirement or condition.
B. Unless specifically authorized, a municipality shall avoid duplication of other laws that do not enhance regulatory clarity and shall avoid dual permitting to the maximum extent practicable.
C. This section does not prohibit municipal flexibility to issue licenses or adopt ordinances or codes.
D. Any municipal employee who knowingly bases a licensing decision in whole or in part on a licensing requirement or condition that is not specifically authorized by statute, rule, ordinance or code is:
1. Subject to a civil penalty of five hundred dollars for the first violation.
2. Guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor for the second violation.
3. Guilty of a class 6 felony for the third violation.
Sec. 2. Section 11-1604, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
11-1604. Prohibited acts by counties and employees; civil penalty; violation; classification
A. A county shall not base a licensing decision in whole or in part on a licensing requirement or condition that is not specifically authorized by statute, rule, ordinance or delegation agreement. A general grant of authority does not constitute a basis for imposing a licensing requirement or condition unless the authority specifically authorizes the requirement or condition.
B. Unless specifically authorized, a county shall avoid duplication of other laws that do not enhance regulatory clarity and shall avoid dual permitting to the maximum extent practicable.
C. This section does not prohibit county flexibility to issue licenses or adopt ordinances or codes.
D. Any county employee who knowingly bases a licensing decision in whole or in part on a licensing requirement or condition that is not specifically authorized by statute, rule, ordinance or code is:
1. Subject to a civil penalty of five hundred dollars for the first violation.
2. Guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor for the second violation.
3. Guilty of a class 6 felony for the third violation.
Sec. 3. Section 41-1030, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
41-1030. Invalidity of rules not made according to this chapter; prohibited agency action; prohibited acts by state employees; civil penalty; violation; classification
A. A rule is invalid unless it is made and approved in substantial compliance with sections 41‑1021 through 41‑1029 and articles 4, 4.1 and 5 of this chapter, unless otherwise provided by law.
B. An agency shall not base a licensing decision in whole or in part on a licensing requirement or condition that is not specifically authorized by statute, rule or state tribal gaming compact. A general grant of authority in statute does not constitute a basis for imposing a licensing requirement or condition unless a rule is made pursuant to that general grant of authority that specifically authorizes the requirement or condition.
C. An agency shall not:
1. Make a rule under a specific grant of rule making authority that exceeds the subject matter areas listed in the specific statute authorizing the rule.
2. Make a rule under a general grant of rule making authority to supplement a more specific grant of rule making authority.
D. Any state employee who knowingly bases a licensing decision in whole or in part on a licensing requirement or condition that is not specifically authorized by statute or rule is:
1. Subject to a civil penalty of five hundred dollars for the first violation.
2. Guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor for the second violation.
3. Guilty of a class 6 felony for the third violation.
Sec. 4. Section 48-3644, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
48-3644. Prohibited acts by district and employees; civil penalty; violation; classification
A. A district shall not base a licensing decision in whole or in part on a licensing requirement or condition that is not specifically authorized by statute, rule, regulation, ordinance, executive order or delegation agreement. A general grant of authority does not constitute a basis for imposing a licensing requirement or condition unless the authority specifically authorizes the requirement or condition.
B. Unless specifically authorized, a district shall avoid duplication of other laws or executive orders that do not enhance regulatory clarity and shall avoid dual permitting to the maximum extent practicable.
C. This section does not prohibit district flexibility to issue licenses or adopt ordinances or regulations.
D. Any district employee who knowingly bases a licensing decision in whole or in part on a licensing requirement or condition that is not specifically authorized by statute or rule is:
1. Subject to a civil penalty of five hundred dollars for the first violation.
2. Guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor for the second violation.
3. Guilty of a class 6 felony for the third violation.