New Book Offers an Unprecedented 20 Year Study

and Perspective on the

Utah Administrative Procedures Act

Addressing the “pass it and forget it” mentality of law reform.

Two members of the original Utah Administrative Law Advisory Committee (UALAC) share their journey through the UtahAPA’s citizen grass roots law reform process in a new book, “Utah’s Administrative Procedures Act: A 20-Year Perspective,” (Xlibris Publishing). Together, BYU Law Professor Stephen G. Wood and Alvin Robert Thorup, now Deputy City Attorney for the City of West Jordan, provide a path-breaking statistical and legal analysis of the “before and after” of the UtahAPA law reform effort.

“We wanted to share the historical record of how the UtahAPA happened, why it happened, and take some time to look at what has happened since,” Thorup said. “It is like the question Dr. Suess has the Lorax ask, ‘Who speaks for the trees?’ We ask, ‘Who has spoken for the UtahAPA over the past 20 years?’”

According to the book, the statistical analysis indicates that yes, the UtahAPA was effective in reaching many of its objectives including reducing the overall case load of appellate courts. However, it did not have the same demonstrable effect on the workload of the District Courts. In addition, Wood and Thorup identify challenges encountered due to the lack of institutional memory in the legislature as well as how ill-equipped the legislature is to keep sacrosanct a commitment to uniformity; and other challenges with courts failing to understand the workings and scope of the UtahAPA.

It was important for the authors to look back and evaluate the effectiveness of the UtahAPA.

“Too often in our system we see a problem, we make an attempt to solve the problem, and then we move on. We forget to ask why it worked, why it didn’t work and identify lessons learned,” Wood said. “We want citizens who are interested in embarking on law reform to learn from us, to see some of what they’ll encounter in the process of enacting law reform; and once in place, how is their law reform effort likely to fare in the time after that. You can pass it and forget it, but you make a mistake if you do because there are people who are interested in undoing what has been done after the fact if they were unsuccessful in undoing it before it was passed.”

Wood and Thorup hope their research and candid evaluation of the process and results has an impact on legislative staff, the courts, and most importantly on citizen groups that seek to impact public interest legislative reform.

“Bob and I as well as other members of UALAC experienced the story,” Wood said. “We wanted to give a first-hand account and share, ‘If you get involved in law reform, here’s what the journey looks like.’”

Lessons Learned (The following lessons learned are discussed in the book):

1.      There are formidable obstacles to law reform.

2.      Law reform requires ongoing leadership and focus.

3.      Political Leadership Changes.

4.      Negotiating the Legislative Process is Challenging.

5.      Power Politics Erodes Legislative Idealism and Resolve.

6.      A part-time legislature has a short institutional memory.

7.      The courts do amazing damage to law reform efforts.

8.      Drafters of law reform legislation must leave little to future interpretation.

Posted: October 20, 2009