Michigan Office of Administrative Hearings and Rules

Administrative Rules Division (ARD)

MOAHR-Rules@michigan.gov

REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

and COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS (RIS)

AGENCY INFORMATION:

Department name:

State

Bureau name:

Elections & Campaign Finance

Name of person filling out RIS:

Alessa Boes

Phone number of person filling out RIS:

517-599-3410

Email of person filling out RIS:

BoesA@michigan.gov

RULE SET INFORMATION:

ARD assigned rule set number:

2024-35 ST

Title of proposed rule set:

Board of State Canvassers Procedures

COMPARISON OF RULE(S) TO FEDERAL/STATE/ASSOCIATION STANDARDS

1. Compare the proposed rules to parallel federal rules or standards set by a state or national licensing agency

or accreditation association, if any exist.

There are no parallel federal rules or standards.

A. Are these rules required by state law or federal mandate?

Yes. MCL 24.233(1) states in relevant part: “An agency shall promulgate rules describing its organization and

stating the general course and method of its operations.”

B. If these rules exceed a federal standard, please identify the federal standard or citation, describe why it

is necessary that the proposed rules exceed the federal standard or law, and specify the costs and

benefits arising out of the deviation.

The rules do not exceed a federal standard or law.

2. Compare the proposed rules to standards in similarly situated states, based on geographic location,

topography, natural resources, commonalities, or economic similarities.

The agency did not compare the proposed rules to standards in other states given that the laws and regulations are

specifically tailored to the State of Michigan’s Board of State Canvassers and its operating procedures. Any

differences between the proposed rules and those in other states are not affected by geographic location, topography,

natural resources, commonalities, or economic similarities, as those are not relevant to the organization and operation

of the Board of State Canvassers.

A. If the rules exceed standards in those states, please explain why and specify the costs and benefits

arising out of the deviation.

The agency did not compare the proposed rules to standards in other states given that the laws and regulations

are specifically tailored to the State of Michigan’s Board of State Canvassers. The agency is not aware of a

similarly situated state that operates a Board of State Canvassers the same way Michigan does. Accordingly,

the rules do not exceed standards in any other state.

MCL 24.245(3)

RIS-Page 2

3. Identify any laws, rules, and other legal requirements that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the

proposed rules.

The proposed rules do not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any laws, rules, or other legal requirements.

A. Explain how the rules have been coordinated, to the extent practicable, with other federal, state, and

local laws applicable to the same activity or subject matter. This section should include a discussion of

the efforts undertaken by the agency to avoid or minimize duplication.

The rules have not been coordinated with other federal, state, and local laws as there are none applicable to the

same activity or subject matter.

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE RULE(S)

4. Identify the behavior and frequency of behavior that the proposed rules are designed to alter.

The proposed rules are intended to explain the organization and operating procedures of the Board of State

Canvassers. The only potential impact on behavior stemming from the proposed rules is that the rules specify a

deadline for submission of materials to the board. Application of a deadline is not designed to alter the frequency of

any behavior; however, it might alter behavior in that it is intended to alter the timing of when materials are submitted

to the board.

A. Estimate the change in the frequency of the targeted behavior expected from the proposed rules.

The department does not estimate that the frequency of material submission will be changed, but it does

estimate that materials will be submitted to the board no later than 48 hours before the relevant meeting in

response to the proposed rule’s addition of that deadline.

B. Describe the difference between current behavior/practice and desired behavior/practice.

Currently, there is no clear deadline for the submission of materials to the board and once the proposed rules

are adopted materials will be submitted no later than 48 hours before the relevant meeting.

C. What is the desired outcome?

The desired outcome is submission of materials on a timeline that allows for adequate review and consideration

of materials. Once the proposed rules are adopted, the rules will require materials to be submitted in a

timeframe that makes it possible for the board to adequately review any relevant material before meeting to

address it. This will ensure accurate and informed decisions by the board and provide clarity to individuals who

want to present material to the board for its consideration.

5. Identify the harm resulting from the behavior that the proposed rules are designed to alter and the likelihood

that the harm will occur in the absence of the rule.

The current rules do not include a deadline for submission of materials and the harm this causes is that sometimes

material will be presented to the board so close to the meeting at which the subject matter that is relevant to the

material is being discussed that the board is unable to adequately review and respond to the material. Without a clear

deadline for presentation of material, untimely material is likely to continue to be submitted. Further, the current rules

do not reflect current technology or accurate contact information for the board, and without amendment the rules will

continue to reflect old technology and inaccurate contact information.

A. What is the rationale for changing the rules instead of leaving them as currently written?

As described in number 5, the current rules reference old technology, inaccurate contact information, and lack a

necessary deadline for material submission.

6. Describe how the proposed rules protect the health, safety, and welfare of Michigan citizens while promoting

a regulatory environment in Michigan that is the least burdensome alternative for those required to comply.

The proposed rules would reflect current technology, contact information, and alleviate the possibility of confusion and

conflict by clearly explaining the board’s processes and material deadline. The rules do not address health and safety,

but it promotes citizens' welfare to have accurate rules and clear guidelines.

7. Describe any rules in the affected rule set that are obsolete or unnecessary and can be rescinded.

The proposed rules amend sections of the ruleset to reference current technology and accurate contact information

instead of rescinding them.

FISCAL IMPACT ON THE AGENCY

MCL 24.245(3)

RIS-Page 3

Fiscal impact is an increase or decrease in expenditures from the current level of expenditures, i.e., hiring

additional staff, higher contract costs, programming costs, changes in reimbursements rates, etc. over and

above what is currently expended for that function. It does not include more intangible costs for benefits, such

as opportunity costs, the value of time saved or lost, etc., unless those issues result in a measurable impact on

expenditures.

8. Please provide the fiscal impact on the agency (an estimate of the cost of rule imposition or potential savings

for the agency promulgating the rule).

It is not expected that the promulgation of rules will have a fiscal impact on the agency promulgating the rules or the

Department of State.

9. Describe whether or not an agency appropriation has been made or a funding source provided for any

expenditures associated with the proposed rules.

No agency appropriation has been made, and no funding source has been provided, as it is not anticipated that the

Department of State will have any expenditures associated with the proposed rules.

10. Describe how the proposed rules are necessary and suitable to accomplish their purpose, in relationship to

the burden(s) the rules place on individuals. Burdens may include fiscal or administrative burdens, or

duplicative acts.

The proposed rules are necessary to update technological references, contact information, and board procedures and

are not expected to place any additional fiscal or administrative burdens on individuals.

A. Despite the identified burden(s), identify how the requirements in the rules are still needed and

reasonable compared to the burdens.

There are no identified burdens.

IMPACT ON OTHER STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL UNITS

11. Estimate any increase or decrease in revenues to other state or local governmental units (i.e., cities,

counties, school districts) as a result of the rule. Estimate the cost increases or reductions for other state or

local governmental units (i.e., cities, counties, school districts) as a result of the rule. Include the cost of

equipment, supplies, labor, and increased administrative costs in both the initial imposition of the rule and

any ongoing monitoring.

There are no estimated increases or decreases in revenue to other state or local governmental units. There are no

estimated increases or reductions in cost to other state or local governmental units. The estimated cost of equipment,

supplies, labor, and administrative costs in either the initial imposition or any ongoing monitoring is zero – there are no

anticipated costs.

12. Discuss any program, service, duty, or responsibility imposed upon any city, county, town, village, or school

district by the rules.

The proposed rules do not change any program, service, duty or responsibility imposed upon any city, county, town,

village, or school district.

A. Describe any actions that governmental units must take to be in compliance with the rules. This section

should include items such as record keeping and reporting requirements or changing operational

practices.

It is not anticipated that governmental units would need to take any additional actions under the proposed rules.

13. Describe whether or not an appropriation to state or local governmental units has been made or a funding

source provided for any additional expenditures associated with the proposed rules.

An appropriation has not been made because additional expenditures associated with the rules are not anticipated.

RURAL IMPACT

14. In general, what impact will the rules have on rural areas?

The proposed rules are not expected to impact rural areas.

A. Describe the types of public or private interests in rural areas that will be affected by the rules.

MCL 24.245(3)

RIS-Page 4

The proposed rules should have no impact on public or private interests in rural areas.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

15. Do the proposed rules have any impact on the environment? If yes, please explain.

The proposed rules will not have an impact on the environment.

SMALL BUSINESS IMPACT STATEMENT

16. Describe whether and how the agency considered exempting small businesses from the proposed rules.

The proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.

17. If small businesses are not exempt, describe (a) the manner in which the agency reduced the economic

impact of the proposed rules on small businesses, including a detailed recitation of the efforts of the agency

to comply with the mandate to reduce the disproportionate impact of the rules upon small businesses as

described below (in accordance with MCL 24.240(1)(a-d)), or (b) the reasons such a reduction was not lawful

or feasible.

The proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.

A. Identify and estimate the number of small businesses affected by the proposed rules and the probable

effect on small businesses.

The proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.

B. Describe how the agency established differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables for

small businesses under the rules after projecting the required reporting, record-keeping, and other

administrative costs.

The proposed rules do not apply to small businesses and will not have an impact on their reporting

requirements.

C. Describe how the agency consolidated or simplified the compliance and reporting requirements for

small businesses and identify the skills necessary to comply with the reporting requirements.

The agency did not consolidate or simplify the compliance and reporting requirements for small businesses as

the proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.

D. Describe how the agency established performance standards to replace design or operation standards

required by the proposed rules.

The proposed rules do not apply to performance, design, or operation standards.

18. Identify any disproportionate impact the proposed rules may have on small businesses because of their size

or geographic location.

The proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.

19. Identify the nature of any report and the estimated cost of its preparation by small businesses required to

comply with the proposed rules.

There are no estimated costs for small businesses as the proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.

20. Analyze the costs of compliance for all small businesses affected by the proposed rules, including costs of

equipment, supplies, labor, and increased administrative costs.

There are no costs of compliance as the proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.

21. Identify the nature and estimated cost of any legal, consulting, or accounting services that small businesses

would incur in complying with the proposed rules.

There are no estimated costs for small businesses as the proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.

22. Estimate the ability of small businesses to absorb the costs without suffering economic harm and without

adversely affecting competition in the marketplace.

There are no estimated costs for small businesses as the proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.

23. Estimate the cost, if any, to the agency of administering or enforcing a rule that exempts or sets lesser

standards for compliance by small businesses.

MCL 24.245(3)

RIS-Page 5

There are no estimated costs to the agency for administration or enforcement against small businesses as the

proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.

24. Identify the impact on the public interest of exempting or setting lesser standards of compliance for small

businesses.

The proposed rules do not apply to small businesses so there should be no impact on the standards of compliance.

25. Describe whether and how the agency has involved small businesses in the development of the proposed

rules.

The agency has not involved small businesses in the development because the proposed rules do not apply to small

businesses.

A. If small businesses were involved in the development of the rules, please identify the business(es).

No small businesses were involved because the proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF RULES (INDEPENDENT OF STATUTORY IMPACT)

26. Estimate the actual statewide compliance costs of the rule amendments on businesses or groups.

It is not anticipated that there will be any statewide compliance costs on businesses or groups.

A. Identify the businesses or groups who will be directly affected by, bear the cost of, or directly benefit

from the proposed rules.

The Board of State Canvassers is directly affected by, bears the cost of, and directly benefits from the proposed

rules.

B. What additional costs will be imposed on businesses and other groups as a result of these proposed

rules (i.e., new equipment, supplies, labor, accounting, or recordkeeping)? Please identify the types and

number of businesses and groups. Be sure to quantify how each entity will be affected.

There will be no costs imposed as a result of the proposed rules. It is anticipated that the rules can be followed

with the current funding.

27. Estimate the actual statewide compliance costs of the proposed rules on individuals (regulated individuals or

the public). Include the costs of education, training, application fees, examination fees, license fees, new

equipment, supplies, labor, accounting, or recordkeeping.

It is not anticipated that there will be any actual compliance costs of the proposed rules on individuals or the public.

A. How many and what category of individuals will be affected by the rules?

Any individual who interacts with the Board of State Canvassers will be affected by the rules since they set out

that board’s operating procedures and contact information.

B. What qualitative and quantitative impact do the proposed changes in rules have on these individuals?

The qualitative impact is that the rules will accurately reflect the board’s contact information, reference current

technology, and provide greater clarity about the board’s operation. There will be no quantitative impact.

28. Quantify any cost reductions to businesses, individuals, groups of individuals, or governmental units as a

result of the proposed rules.

There are no cost reductions for businesses, individuals, groups of individuals, or governmental units as a result of the

proposed rules.

29. Estimate the primary and direct benefits and any secondary or indirect benefits of the proposed rules. Please

provide both quantitative and qualitative information, as well as any assumptions.

The direct benefits of the proposed rules are that the rules will accurately reflect the board’s contact information,

reference current technology, and provide greater clarity about the board’s operation. The agency assumes that

secondary or indirect benefits will be greater confidence in the board and greater understanding of the board’s

operations. All benefits are qualitative, the agency does not anticipate any quantitative benefits as the rules do not

affect the quantity of anything.

30. Explain how the proposed rules will impact business growth and job creation (or elimination) in Michigan.

The proposed rules will not impact business growth and job creation or elimination in Michigan.

31. Identify any individuals or businesses who will be disproportionately affected by the rules as a result of their

industrial sector, segment of the public, business size, or geographic location.

MCL 24.245(3)

RIS-Page 6

It is not anticipated that any individuals or businesses will be disproportionately affected by the rules as a result of

their industrial sector, segment of the public, business size, or geographic location.

32. Identify the sources the agency relied upon in compiling the regulatory impact statement, including the

methodology utilized in determining the existence and extent of the impact of the proposed rules and a cost-

benefit analysis of the proposed rules.

The agency relied upon the current practices of the Board of State Canvassers, as well as comments provided by the

board members and members of the public at board meetings. The agency relied upon agency staff and its regulatory

experience to formulate estimates and assumptions and determine the need for the proposed rules.

A. How were estimates made, and what assumptions were made? Include internal and external sources,

published reports, information provided by associations or organizations, etc., that demonstrate a need

for the proposed rules.

The agency relied upon agency staff and its regulatory and administrative experience to determine the impact of

the proposed rules. The proposed rules mainly update objective items that did not require assumptions such as

new technology that is available and new contact information for the board. The agency relied on its experience

with material submission to determine the appropriate material submission deadline. No reports or other specific

information from outside associations or organizations were utilized.

ALTERNATIVE TO REGULATION

33. Identify any reasonable alternatives to the proposed rules that would achieve the same or similar goals.

In order to accurately convey the board’s operations and current contact information, there is no reasonable

alternative to achieve the same or similar goals.

A. Please include any statutory amendments that may be necessary to achieve such alternatives.

No statutory amendments may be necessary. The only way to achieve the same or similar goals of accurately

conveying the board's operations and contact information is to amend its procedural rules.

34. Discuss the feasibility of establishing a regulatory program similar to that proposed in the rules that would

operate through private market-based mechanisms. Please include a discussion of private market-based

systems utilized by other states.

A regulatory program established by a private third-party is not feasible because the subject of the rules concerns the

Board of State Canvassers and its administration of elections. The agency is not aware of a private market-based

system, as opposed to a state regulatory body for these purposes, utilized in other states.

35. Discuss all significant alternatives the agency considered during rule development and why they were not

incorporated into the rules. This section should include ideas considered both during internal discussions

and discussions with stakeholders, affected parties, or advisory groups.

Due to the nature of regulating the manner of elections and the operation of the Board of State Canvassers, no

significant alternatives to reasonable regulation were considered during the development of the proposed rules.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

36. As required by MCL 24.245b(1)(c), please describe any instructions regarding the method of complying with

the rules, if applicable.

The rules explicitly inform persons of requirements and methods of compliance.

MCL 24.245(3)