[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6360105,"mediaKeyId","2175411-fbe25acee7953ae8fb954004c198dfbe","parentId",2175411,"title","Committee rejects bill that would bar political subdivisions from adopting hate‑crime ordinances or other speech limits","audioSeconds",2522,"startMs",4625000,"endMs",7147000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175411-fbe25acee7953ae8fb954004c198dfbe&start=4625&end=7147","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175411-fbe25acee7953ae8fb954004c198dfbe/thumbnail_4625000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6360105/North-Dakota/Committee-rejects-bill-that-would-bar-political-subdivisions-from-adopting-hatecrime-ordinances-or-other-speech-limits","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6360105-42bd47c75f50a5e1712f622896e0b14e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771220009&Signature=hC8URWxa-URSjcOscQPmdMq6IxyC50hu7HbLoyYNIXk0P0okLTJ-knacEtAhCB0fhyMtOCIJ652Zlp3FBQNOjvXOof9SBFzgp37qmi8N3xIJ~qKO-V8~i8-pu86ncnqlq-n33YgYWTbdyQl4R643vLzOSE7mnJl2MrNzNme~vCXs9kYtSlzabCziq07~5wxRfZiF0knEd2FYneHt-M9nQRrXOdLuuLCopmt1uhJoV6CdYyl3wkSV1vBlCU8sRkqEIRlubW31mAja86EjabC-e8aepivXQAyGkedhCkrjpDRI8lGzK~ZMbzSvJ50nSVpdbaNMCVNI8LadSm-u~l4VNA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House Political Subdivisions, ND","date","2025-01-30T00:00:00Z","article","Representative Matt Heilman introduced House Bill 1273, a short statute that would bar the state or any political subdivision from adopting a policy, order or ordinance that \"limits or prohibits the speech of an individual,\" language the bill specifically noted could include hate crime ordinances.

Heilman framed the measure as a First Amendment protection. \"My intent is to protect the First Amendment and people's speech,\" he said, and he argued that harassment and other criminal statutes already exist at the state and federal levels.

The committee heard multiple opponents who argued the bill is broader than necessary and would undercut local policy options, workplace rules and protections for vulnerable groups. Sergiano Witsky of the Bismarck Human Relations Committee urged lawmakers to \"strike out the words, including hate crime ordinances,\" saying such ordinances signal that cities prioritize the safety and dignity of residents and citing local incidents and FBI reporting on bias crimes. Carter Gill of the North Dakota Student Association said rescinding hate crime ordinances or similar policies could be read as permission for biased conduct and would harm vulnerable student populations.

Molly Harrington of the Office of Management and Budget testified the bill would \"have a negative impact on workplace culture, legal compliance, and organizational effectiveness,\" and she said existing employer policies that prohibit harassment and discrimination could be invalidated by the bill’s broad language. The North Dakota League of Cities opposed the bill as written, saying it is broader than the First Amendment and could prevent municipalities from adopting time, place and manner rules (for example, limiting the subject matter or time allotted at public comment) and from enforcing content‑neutral sign or conduct regulations. The League also noted that the Fargo ordinance was locally adopted after residents requested it; municipal officials rely on such ordinances to respond to constituent concerns.

Committee members debated legal and policy tradeoffs. Some members said they supported protecting speech but questioned whether the bill's language was overbroad. Others warned that the measure could create an HR problem for public employers and would remove local discretion to adopt enhanced penalties for bias‑motivated crimes. Representative Matt Tholman suggested limiting the measure to speech‑only ordinances rather than ordinances tied to criminal motive, and the sponsor said he would be open to narrowing the bill.

After discussion the committee considered a motion to recommend \"do not pass\" on House Bill 1273; the motion carried on a roll call vote recorded as 11 yeas, 0 nays, 2 absent (not voting). The committee placed the bill on the consent calendar for floor consideration with a do‑not‑pass recommendation.

Ending: The committee voted a do‑not‑pass recommendation on HB1273 after receiving multiple written and oral objections that it would preempt local policy choices and undermine workplace harassment and discrimination rules.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Political Subdivisions Jan 30, 2025 II","oneSentenceSummary","The Political Subdivisions Committee voted to recommend 'do not pass' on House Bill 1273, which would have prohibited the state and political subdivisions from adopting policies that limit or prohibit speech, including hate‑crime ordinances.","taxTitle","Political Subdivisions, House of Representatives, Legislative, North Dakota","taxId",28896,"location","North Dakota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6360106,"Committee requires short statement in abbreviated rule notices; allows optional QR code",4453,2931000,7384000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175411-fbe25acee7953ae8fb954004c198dfbe&start=2931&end=7384","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175411-fbe25acee7953ae8fb954004c198dfbe/thumbnail_2931000.jpg","/articles/6360106/North-Dakota/Committee-requires-short-statement-in-abbreviated-rule-notices-allows-optional-QR-code","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6360106-1058aa5d91240ce3f910513d17d255e2/orig.mp4?Expires=1771220009&Signature=dr8Snp9hnRzADGOGT7Qp4jeZrLcGNRJ4dyzVGbS0oSJQsecfX9NnrRmgqsFohfAsltkvN-lom4eK8U6Kfsqv7BBCyFY2NUaotsLwdRndNYlRWw6UTp46vcYy9VlTYwXuwtkP~iwXWEG84T5Dzz3Ceh5VbyVbihlvdogjJL4r-7bwwKwGK78pSYYpEB0ULgBB5GnTfEH8dhi0DOfVo1xOImw8pp1Ao6tyaGb4klQdnndHwOhxfGhU3QXeH~8MOzeBBxP1Y4AePq-j0iR7WSnQgW8tGjhWr4WvjzlsBJvrhgl2lY76sAoPVpAQypjERND3hhhHgMbLPGTg3owhruisUg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Political Subdivisions Committee considered House Bill 1355, which would add a short explanatory sentence to abbreviated notices for upcoming administrative rule‑making hearings published in newspapers and would allow agencies to include a QR (quick response) code linking to more information.

Representative Vicki Steiner, the bill sponsor, told the committee the change is meant to increase transparency and public understanding of rule hearings; she said agencies report the same advertising cost and that the abbreviated notices often list only a North Dakota Century Code citation and not the substance of a hearing. \"This bill simply adds a sentence of information on the topic of an upcoming public rule change hearing that's being printed in our newspapers,\" Steiner told the committee.

The committee debated how specific the sentence should be and whether the notice language should refer only to \"significant\" changes or to simply a \"short statement of the rule change.\" Representative Steiner said she favored a concise sentence and accepted an amendment that replaced \"short and simplified summary of each rule change deemed significant by the agency or commission\" with the narrower phrase \"a short statement of the rule change.\" The committee also adopted an amendment to clarify that the QR code is optional and that the information may be provided in writing or via the code.

Cecile Berman, representing the North Dakota Newspaper Association, said she now supports the sponsor's intent so long as current notice content is not removed; \"We think that's a good addition,\" she testified, and she noted printing costs are set by line rates. Committee discussion referenced line rates (a cited example was 78¢ per line) and an illustrative cost estimate that adding three lines across 53 newspapers would add roughly $159 for a single notice; a QR code printed as a graphic could change the classified rate to a display rate and cost more in some papers.

After adopting the amendments (including the language change to require a short statement) the committee voted to pass House Bill 1355 as amended, 11 yeas, 0 nays, 2 absent (not voting). Representative Moschenbacher agreed to carry the bill to the floor and committee members asked Legislative Counsel to prepare final form‑and‑style language and any required fiscal note.

Ending: The committee passed HB1355 as amended and recorded a unanimous favorable vote in committee; sponsors and the Newspaper Association said the change should improve public notice clarity while keeping the QR code optional.","House Bill 1355 was amended to require a short statement of the proposed rule change in abbreviated newspaper notices and to permit an optional QR code or written link; the committee passed the bill after discussing publication costs and how the summary should read.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6360107,"Committee expands tools to void \"unnecessary\" rules; Administrative Rules Committee bill passes",3651,1859000,5510000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175411-fbe25acee7953ae8fb954004c198dfbe&start=1859&end=5510","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175411-fbe25acee7953ae8fb954004c198dfbe/thumbnail_1859000.jpg","/articles/6360107/North-Dakota/Committee-expands-tools-to-void-unnecessary-rules-Administrative-Rules-Committee-bill-passes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6360107-122d8773defa79707fd189002d55db58/orig.mp4?Expires=1771220009&Signature=VyjqkdTjhq6OkEFh1Xja959JZ4klGqpLTQDzJE4al31e9H3sw-NoSldAq1-juyfPa3Psufk3CGegdtug8vKtEoSi4DziL4ArS33HwfaUWFSKEbz2nvYq3dG-Nq5u1-lSXFulbwuQb5PKd26R~ri0njHzTZtEqEH19MeyJVpseRpp1drMeXCD5LSp0BW6j~XgmNU6-6Yf4lOKRvvEZgvb1NsKbx1c-gQTr3ZyGravITxd4mToXMyekhi9pBd80XrfFJVjEX2j2yOZFxmiZjl44vP9vE3PYR6vlF~PfguSxXNiXyDfSez4WRWbaapufKNz1l7O7-KMLC0jNUFmH~0CIg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Ben Koppelman presented House Bill 1368 to the House Political Subdivisions Committee as a measure to provide clearer standards the Administrative Rules Committee can use to void rules that exceed legislative intent or are \"overly burdensome.\"

Koppelman said the bill would add \"absence of necessity\" and \"absence of reasonableness\" to the statutory grounds a committee may cite when voiding a rule and would change an \"and\" to an \"or\" in the list of defects the committee may rely on. He told colleagues the change aims to give the Administrative Rules Committee a clearer, more usable standard than the existing \"arbitrary and capricious\" language, which some members and staff have found difficult to apply.

Sponsor testimony emphasized judicial practice: courts reviewing administrative action will typically overturn agency action only when it is \"arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable or illegal,\" and the sponsor said the bill aligns the committee’s statutory tools with commonly used legal standards.

Committee members discussed practical examples, including prior Human Services rules that drew concern from rural ambulance services and other licensing boards. Representative Koppelman said the intent is not to turn the committee into a \"mini legislature\" but to enable it to carve away overly burdensome rule provisions and require agencies to justify their choices.

Committee discussion also addressed procedural language and committee practice; Representative Koppelman and Legislative Counsel worked on cleanup wording to address how the committee amends or voids rule portions, and members adjusted one section in committee form and style. After discussion, Representative Maschmacher moved and Representative Polinski seconded a motion to give the bill a \"do pass\" recommendation as amended. The committee voted to pass House Bill 1368 as amended, with the roll call recorded as 11 yeas, 0 nays, 2 absent (not voting).

Ending: The committee reported House Bill 1368 as amended with a do‑pass recommendation; Representative Balinski agreed to carry the bill to the floor.","House Bill 1368, which would add 'absence of necessity' and 'absence of reasonableness' as grounds to void administrative rules and change the test language, passed the Political Subdivisions Committee after sponsor and members argued it clarifies the committee's oversight authority.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6360108,"State agencies urge changes as committee hears bill to time-limit administrative rules",2576,308000,2884000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175411-fbe25acee7953ae8fb954004c198dfbe&start=308&end=2884","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175411-fbe25acee7953ae8fb954004c198dfbe/thumbnail_308000.jpg","/articles/6360108/North-Dakota/State-agencies-urge-changes-as-committee-hears-bill-to-time-limit-administrative-rules","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6360108-7468ea9a134d755b000b6141d2daa3fc/orig.mp4?Expires=1771220009&Signature=Q-8abB1vl5sWGiVtICGjFBtRNS0pV-EoNvttvlkd44YuzjWUeQplSGTXHdWN4nNlYkwmrnzACDwrA9oimOJZCU5Kbg-gaUVisp1qXVYZgk~EnvEd0m8UR8QTYd4eVo7wiV8GQGqJxDNg~fTA0AkypEiWdi3bdA0rbK3uyamVhXBWf8OAUJV1bK1QNH3fkp2rqbJHT4jzMRwQyi84H8t7s69x~Y865H0L4tOC-OB1rYTTG51sYCgCQ3ocb8dPrLJf~ek80m~eJnmoTK~JmqP9DIzoRAKF0GwG-pokgOkkYu3-TpnKh-yNbI0hlR7ibqDAZ1-7Uw6V~NSsH17stzVrgw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Chairman Longyear convened the House Political Subdivisions Committee to hear House Bill 1434, a bill that would impose expirations on administrative rules and direct a review process tied to the governor's office.

Representative Emily O’Brien, who introduced the measure, said the bill is intended \"to improve independent regulatory reviews\" and to reduce burdens she described as \"layers of red tape\" that fall on businesses, workers and citizens. The bill would generally set a 10‑year expiration for a rule after its effective date and require the governor to notify agencies one year before a rule's expiration; the governor could exempt a rule or grant an extension, and agencies would submit reports to facilitate review.

Proponents framed the proposal as a way to remove dated or unused rules, move consistently used rules into statute where appropriate, and reduce internal agency policies that add bureaucracy. O’Brien told the committee she planned to work with the bill’s prime sponsor and with Legislative Counsel to refine process details and address concerns raised by agencies.

Multiple state officials testified in opposition or raised concerns about the bill’s workload and risks. Dustin Oso, boards and commissions manager in the Governor’s Office, said the governor’s office currently has 17 authorized FTEs and \"everyone in the governor's office currently has full time duties and responsibilities\"; he said his office does not now track administrative rules and that adding the bill’s duties would require additional staffing and funding. Oso said the office currently manages appointment processes for roughly 150 boards and that there are more than 100 state agencies; adding rule review and expiration tracking for that many entities would be a \"relatively heavy lift\" requiring additional FTEs and budget.

Jonathan Emmer, director of Reclamation and Abandoned Mine Lands at the Public Service Commission, urged an exemption for PSC reclamation rules tied to federal requirements. Emmer noted that North Dakota's coal mining and reclamation primacy under the federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act requires state laws and rules to remain as stringent as federal standards and that proposed rule changes must be reviewed and approved by the federal Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE). He said North Dakota has submitted 37 program amendments to OSMRE since 1982 and that federal review times have ranged from months to years; he warned that allowing state rules to lapse as written could place North Dakota’s primacy — and regulatory oversight of lignite mining — at risk.

Mark Borer, assistant director for the Oil and Gas Division, described operational challenges and costs. He said the Oil and Gas Division administers hundreds of rule sections (he cited 271 sections) and the Geological Survey administers hundreds more (he cited 374 sections); rulemaking is a multi‑step process that can take months and entails staff time and publication costs. Borer gave examples of long inactive regulatory provisions in mineral development (potash, uranium) and said letting rules expire and then recreating them later could \"stifle\" intermittent industries.

Logan Carpenter, general counsel for the North Dakota Ethics Commission, said the commission is included in the bill as written and \"must oppose this bill\" in its current form; Carpenter said the commission is working with Representative O’Brien on an amendment to remove the commission or otherwise address the commission’s concerns.

Representative O’Brien and several committee members acknowledged the concerns and discussed alternatives, including housing the review authority outside the governor's office, using Legislative Counsel, or creating a legislative efficiency committee (House Bill 1442 was cited as a possible sister bill). Several lawmakers suggested shortening the 10‑year review interval or providing more targeted exemptions for entities that operate under federal program primacy.

The hearing closed with no final action recorded on House Bill 1434 in the committee transcript. The bill drew significant operational questions about staffing, federal program dependencies (notably SMCRA/30 CFR for mining), and whether the governor's office is the appropriate place to house the review function.

Ending: Committee members asked the sponsor to work with Legislative Counsel, the governor’s office and affected agencies to refine exemptions, staffing needs and the governance of any review process before the measure is brought back for committee action.","Lawmakers heard House Bill 1434, which would set expirations and a review process for administrative rules; multiple state agencies and the governor's office testified they lack staff, resources or federal flexibility to implement the bill as written.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee rejects bill that would bar political subdivisions from adopting hate‑crime ordinances or other speech limits

Committee requires short statement in abbreviated rule notices; allows optional QR code

Committee expands tools to void "unnecessary" rules; Administrative Rules Committee bill passes

State agencies urge changes as committee hears bill to time-limit administrative rules