Rep. Soboleski Seeks Greater Legislative Oversight of Agency Rulemaking in Maine

A Maine GOP lawmaker is looking to establish a new special committee tasked with reviewing routine technical rulemaking by state agencies in the name of ensuring “transparency, accountability, and alignment with the public interest.”

Under the Maine Administrative Procedures Act, agency rulemaking falls into one of two categories: routine technical or major substantive.

While routine technical rulemaking occurs entirely within a department, major substantive rules are subject to the legislative review process, as described under 5 M.R.S. §8072.

Agency rule changes are only categorized as major substantive if lawmakers have passed legislation explicitly deeming them to be.

LD 1372, introduced by Rep. Michael Soboleski (R-Phillips), would give the Legislature a limited degree of oversight for routine technical rules as well.

Instead of going before the full Legislature, this bill would see any routine technical rules go before the new committee Rep. Soboleski is proposing for final approval, either with or without amendment.

The proposed language directs the newly formed committee to establish a process for reviewing routine technical rules for “necessity, efficiency, and the benefit of the rule to the public.

This committee would be comprised of six members of the House and six members of the Senate, evenly divided between the two major political parties.

Click Here for More Information on LD 1372

During Monday’s public hearing, Rep. Soboleski asserted that the creation of this committee would be necessary to “ensure that the process for adopting routine technical rules adheres to the principle of transparency, accountability and alignment with the public interest.”

According to Soboleski, introducing legislative review for routine technical rules “upholds the Legislature’s commitment to good governance by promoting a transparent and deliberative process of rulemaking.”

“It strengthens public trust and ensure that regulations serve their intended purpose and reflect the interest of our citizens,” said Soboleski.

Testifying in support this bill was the Maine Policy Institute (MPI), a Maine-based free market think tank.

“As rules increasingly dictate the practical application of laws passed by this body, oversight of those rules becomes essential to preserving legislative authority and public accountability,” MPI argued.

“Importantly, this bill does not create unnecessary bureaucracy or delay,” the think tank explained. “Instead, it ensures that rules—especially those that may have been misclassified—receive a bare minimum level of potential legislative review.”

“It mirrors the structure and limited meeting schedule of the Government Oversight Committee and the administrative review committees in many other states, which have proven successful in different areas of state accountability,” said MPI.

The Maine Human Rights Commission submitted written testimony in opposition to this proposal, arguing that the bill is “fundamentally flawed.”

The Commission also argues that the bill “appears to overreach the reasonable scope of the Legislature’s duties.”

“The Legislature is charged with adopting and enacting Maine’s statutes, while interpreting and enforcing those statutes falls to other branches of government,” the Commission said.

The testimony goes on to explain how the Commission believes legislative oversight of their routine technical rulemaking would “substantially undermine [their] effectiveness.”

“It is of vital importance for the Commission to be truly apolitical and independent, so that discrimination claims by Mainers, and claims against Maine businesses, are adjudicated without outside influence,” the Commission argued. “This cannot happen if the Commission cannot act with independence when processing and deciding claims.”

[RELATED: Maine Lawmakers Will Now Have the Final Say Over Agency Rulemaking Related to Potential EV Mandates]

This is not the first time that Soboleski has been involved recently in an effort to increase legislative oversight of agency rulemaking.

In 2024, Soboleski introduced a bill to designate all rulemaking by the Board of Environmental Protection (BEP) related to vehicle emissions standards as major substantive, thereby subjecting it to legislative review.

The year prior, a citizen petition initiated by the Natural Resources Council of Maine (NRCM) was submitted to Maine’s BEP asking for “the requirements of the California Advanced Clean Cars II” to be incorporated into Maine’s existing regulatory code.

Adoption of those new regulations would have essentially resulted in the state phasing out the sale of traditional gas-powered cars and trucks in favor of EVs over the course of the next few years had the majority of members not ultimately rejected the proposal.

Although Maine law used to require under 38 M.R.S. § 585-D that rule changes related to vehicle emissions standards — such as this EV mandate — be categorized as major substantive, lawmakers repealed that provision in 2005.

With this portion of the law no longer on the books, the controversial EV mandate was automatically categorized as routine technical when it was first taken up by the BEP, preventing legislative oversight despite the consequential nature of the proposal.

In April of last year, Gov. Janet Mills (D) signed Soboleski’s bill into law, officially guaranteeing that legislators will have the final say over the adoption of vehicle emissions rules by state agencies going forward.

The State and Local Government Committee will now hold a work session for Soboleski’s new bill, LD 1372, where they will give this proposal more in-depth consideration before issuing their recommendations on it to the full Legislature.

Disclaimer: The Maine Wire is a project of the Maine Policy Institute.