View source for State Sovereignty through Local Coordination Act Exposed

The '''[[:media:3H15-State_Sovereignty_through_Local_Coordination_Act_Exposed.pdf|State Sovereignty through Local Coordination Act]]''' was adopted by the [https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/ALEC_Energy,_Environment_and_Agriculture_Task_Force ALEC Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force] at the Annual Meeting on August 7, 2010. The Act was approved by the ALEC Board of Directors on September 19, 2010.

==CMD's Bill Summary==

This "model" Act attempts to undermine traditional constitutional understandings of the relationship between localities and the federal or state government. It essentially allows local governments (city, town, county, or special districts) to establish regulatory "ceilings," and demand that any state or federal regulation that is more restrictive be "coordinated" to avoid conflict. Any taxpayer is given standing to bring a lawsuit to enforce the law. This bill reverses notions of federal or state preemption of local laws. It also does not provide a means for how conflict with local law can be resolved through "coordination" and would likely be unworkable. While local democracy can be an empowering force for citizens the idea that a particular locality should be able to basically nullify federal regulatory law passed pursuant to the powers granted by the Constitution is contrary to the enumeration of powers in our system of government.

==ALEC Bill Text==

Legislation

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of {insert state}:

<u>Section 1.</u>

Title __, chapter ___, article ___, ________ Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section ________, to read:

Federal Regulations; Local Coordination for Cities, Towns, Counties, and Special Districts

(A) Definitions.

:(1) “Coordinate” means the action necessary to achieve coordination.

:(2) “Coordination” means the process by which the federal or state government seeks in good faith to reach consistency between a federal or state regulation, rule, plan or policy and a city, town, county, or special district law, regulation, plan or policy that is less restrictive than the federal or state regulation, rule, plan or policy.

:(3) “Less restrictive” means a city, town, county, or special district law, regulation, plan or policy imposes or would impose less of a burden on the exercise of rights, privileges or immunities enjoyed by individuals, organizations and businesses within the city’s or town’s jurisdictional boundaries.

(B) Demand. If a city, town, county, or special district has laws, regulations, plans or policies that are less restrictive than a federal or state regulation, rule, plan or policy, the city, town, county or special district shall demand by any lawful means that the federal or state government coordinate with the city, town, county, or special district before the federal or state government implements, enforces, expands or extends the federal or state regulation, rule, plan or policy within the city's, town's, county’s, or special district’s jurisdictional boundaries. This subsection is mandatory unless the city, town, county, or special district specifically votes to not demand coordination at a duly noticed public
hearing.

(C) Litigation. Unless its elected public body shall vote against authorizing such litigation at a duly noticed public hearing, if the federal government fails to coordinate in good faith with the city, town, county, or special district after demand has been made, the city, town, county, or special district shall authorize appropriate litigation to enforce its coordination rights and powers.

(D) Taxpayer Standing. Any taxpayer residing or doing business within the jurisdiction of the relevant city or town shall have standing to enforce the obligations created by this statute by way of special action filed in state court against the relevant city or town, without first exhausting any administrative remedy, if the relevant city, town, county, or special district fails to discharge its obligations under this statute within sixty (60) days after the taxpayer serves each member of the relevant elected local public body with a written demand that the city or town comply with this statute. To be effective, the written demand must specify the federal and local laws, regulations, plans or policies, with which coordination ought to be sought by the city, town, county, or special district.


Adopted by the Energy, Environment, and Agriculture Task Force at the Annual Meeting, August 7, 2010. 

Approved by the ALEC Board of Directors, September 19, 2010.