1501:41-2-18 Hocking Hills lodge and pool fee.

 

 

 

Rule Summary and Fiscal Analysis (Part A)

 

Department of Natural Resources

Agency Name

 

Division of Parks and Recreation                      Brock Miskimen

Division                                                                  Contact

 

2045 Morse Road Bldg. D-3 Columbus OH 43229-6693

614-265-6885

Agency Mailing Address (Plus Zip)                                       Phone                     Fax

[e-mail]

Email

1501:41-2-18

Rule Number

AMENDMENT

TYPE of rule filing

Rule Title/Tag Line              Hocking Hills lodge and pool fee.

RULE SUMMARY

1.  Is the rule being filed for five year review (FYR)? Yes

2.  Are you proposing this rule as a result of recent legislation? No

3.  Statute prescribing the procedure in accordance with the agency is required to adopt the rule: 119.03

4.  Statute(s) authorizing agency to adopt the rule: 1546.04

5.  Statute(s) the rule, as filed, amplifies or implements: 1546.04, 1546.15

6.  State the reason(s) for proposing (i.e., why are you filing,) this rule:

The rule is being proposed to raise the maximum fee that may be charged for use of specific state park facilities. The chief of the division may set fees based upon the park, facilities offered, location, season, and occupancy, provided that the fees do not exceed the maximum amount listed in the rule.

7.  If the rule is an AMENDMENT, then summarize the changes and the content of the proposed rule; If the rule type is RESCISSION, NEW or NO CHANGE,

then summarize the content of the rule:

The rule removes definitive fees for use of the Hocking Hills lodge swimming pool and implements maximum fees which may be adjusted based upon facility conditions (renovations / updates), season and anticipated facility utilization, provided that the fees do not exceed the maximum amount listed in the rule.

8.  If the rule incorporates a text or other material by reference and the agency claims the incorporation by reference is exempt from compliance with sections

121.71 to 121.74 of the Revised Code because the text or other material is generally available to persons who reasonably can be expected to be affected by the rule, provide an explanation of how the text or other material is generally available to those persons:

This response left blank because filer specified online that the rule does not incorporate a text or other material by reference.

9.  If the rule incorporates a text or other material by reference, and it was infeasible for the agency to file the text or other material electronically, provide an explanation of why filing the text or other material electronically was infeasible:

This response left blank because filer specified online that the rule does not incorporate a text or other material by reference.

10.  If the rule is being rescinded and incorporates a text or other material by reference, and it was infeasible for the agency to file the text or other material, provide an explanation of why filing the text or other material was infeasible:

Not Applicable.

11.  If revising or refiling this rule, identify changes made from the previously filed version of this rule; if none, please state so. If applicable, indicate each specific paragraph of the rule that has been modified:

The rule summary is being revised to reflect renumbered sections of the Revised Code that provide rule adoption authority or are amplified by the rule.

12.  Five Year Review (FYR) Date: 8/29/2016

(If the rule is not exempt and you answered NO to question No. 1, provide the scheduled review date. If you answered YES to No. 1, the review date for this

rule is the filing date.)

NOTE: If the rule is not exempt at the time of final filing, two dates are required: the current review date plus a date not to exceed 5 years from the effective date for Amended rules or a date not to exceed 5 years from the review date for No Change rules.

FISCAL ANALYSIS

13.  Estimate the total amount by which this proposed rule would increase/ decrease either revenues/ expenditures for the agency during the current biennium (in dollars): Explain the net impact of the proposed changes to the budget of your agency/department.

This will increase revenues.

$1,800.00

The collection of an additional $1,800.00 in the current biennium resulting from the newly revised fee structure would represent approximately a 0.16% increase over current revenues collected from the Hocking Hills lodge pool fees and approximately 0.006% increase in overall state park revenues per fiscal year.

14.  Identify the appropriation (by line item etc.) that authorizes each expenditure necessitated by the proposed rule:

n/a

15.  Provide a summary of the estimated cost of compliance with the rule to all directly affected persons. When appropriate, please include the source for your information/estimated costs, e.g. industry, CFR, internal/agency:

The restructure of the rule proposal sets a maximum fee (cap) which will allow fees for daily and season passes to be increased incrementally; the Hocking Hills lodge pool has not increased any fees for approximately 10 years.

The average increase in fees, if the maximum allowable rates are implemented, would increase user costs by approximately $1.00 per day.

16.  Does this rule have a fiscal effect on school districts, counties, townships, or municipal corporations? No

17.  Does this rule deal with environmental protection or contain a component

dealing with environmental protection as defined in R. C. 121.39? No

S.B. 2 (129th General Assembly) Questions

18.  Has this rule been filed with the Common Sense Initiative Office pursuant to

R.C. 121.82? No

19.  Specific to this rule, answer the following:

A.) Does this rule require a license, permit, or any other prior authorization to engage in or operate a line of business? No

B.) Does this rule impose a criminal penalty, a civil penalty, or another sanction, or create a cause of action, for failure to comply with its terms? No

C.) Does this rule require specific expenditures or the report of information as a condition of compliance? No