An Ordinance for Local Coordination on Federal Regulations

Policy Status

  • Type: Model Ordinance
  • Status: Final
  • Date Introduced: June 22, 2016
  • Date Finalized: September 12, 2016

Issues

  • Regulatory Reform

    • Task Forces

  • American City County Exchange

    • Related Articles

    Tags

  • 2016 Annual Meeting
  • ACCE

    • Summary

    Coordination involves federal laws that require the federal government to meet local government to resolve differences in their plans. An executive order enhanced Coordination by allowing numerous entities, including non-governmental organizations, to engage the federal government. Any local government — from a city or county to a school or water district, and any NGO — may invoke Coordination, thus forcing the federal government to meet with them on an equal basis to reach consistency in their plans. Congress has defined “coordination” as a government-to-government communication process, seeking consistency, in which local government has an equal negotiating position with the federal agencies. This government-to-government communication negotiating process allows local government to participate on an equal basis in all phases of planning and management of land, water and wildlife resources. Such consistency will allow local governments to once again protect the local tax base, sustain a viable and stable local economy, and protect the public health and safety. Clear direction exists for local governments to use coordination to fairly represent citizens in bringing back local control from runaway big governments. This will not create bureaucratic burdens on local government as some have suggested. On the contrary, experience has shown that the proper use of the coordination process relieves burdens imposed by special interest groups and their constant harassment by lawsuits which result in getting citizens off the land, away from any productive use of natural resources, and which promote risks to life and property.
    Draft

    An Ordinance for Local Coordination on Federal Regulations

    (A) Definitions.

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

    (2) “Coordination” means the process by which an agency of the federal government brings its regulations, whether proposed or established, into consistency with the public policy of [Insert Jurisdiction].  This process includes a series of regular meetings in [Insert Jurisdiction] between the federal agency’s representatives and [Insert Jurisdiction]’s representatives on a government-to-government basis.

    (3) “Consistency” means a federal agency’s plans or proposals for regulations must be harmonized with the local government’s plans per the Congressional authority found in NEPA and FLPMA.  The mandated direction for the flow of harmonizing these regulations is from the federal agency to the local government, not the other way around.

    (4) “Jurisdiction” means any local unit of government as defined by the state.  This may include any district of duly elected officials such as a city, county, school board district, irrigation district, mining district, soil and water conservation district, fire district, cemetery district, etc.

    (5) “In good faith,” in this ordinance, means that the federal agency with which [Insert Jurisdiction] is attempting to coordinate shall have begun the coordination process with [Insert Jurisdiction] within the request of two letters from [Insert Jurisdiction] seeking a first meeting.

    (6) “NEPA” means the federal government’s National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, which created the Environmental Protection Agency and established coordination as “the continuing policy of the Federal Government.”

    (7) “FLPMA” means the federal government’s Federal Land Policy & Management Act of 1976, which provided five criteria for implementing coordination

     

    {Title, enacting clause, etc.}

     

    Section 1. {Title} This ordinance shall be known as Local Coordination on Federal Regulations Ordinance

    Section 2. {Declaration of public policy.} It is hereby declared to be the public policy of [Insert Jurisdiction] coordination is a legal definition as defined by NEPA & FLPMA, which allows any local government & NGO to invoke coordination with the Federal Regulations

    Section 3. Demand. [Insert Jurisdiction] shall demand by any lawful means that the federal government coordinate in good faith with [Insert Jurisdiction] before the federal government implements, enforces, expands or extends the federal regulation, rule, plan or policy within the [Insert Jurisdiction]’s jurisdictional boundaries.  If necessary, no more than sixty (60) days shall have passed between the first and second letter being sent by [Insert Jurisdiction] requesting the first meeting to begin coordination.  This subsection is mandatory unless [Insert Jurisdiction]’s elected public body shall vote not to demand coordination at a duly noticed public hearing.

    Section 4. {Litigation} If the federal government fails to coordinate in good faith with [Insert Jurisdiction] after demand has been made, [Insert Jurisdiction] shall authorize appropriate litigation to enforce its coordination rights and powers.  This subsection is mandatory unless [Insert Jurisdiction]’s elected public body shall vote not to authorize such litigation at a duly noticed public hearing.

    Section 5. {Taxpayer Standing} Taxpayer Standing. Any taxpayer residing or doing business within [Insert Jurisdiction] shall have standing to enforce the obligations created by this ordinance.  If [Insert Jurisdiction] fails to discharge its obligations under this ordinance within sixty (60) days, the taxpayer must serve each member of [Insert Jurisdiction] with a written demand that [Insert Jurisdiction] comply with this ordinance.  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 [Insert Jurisdiction].  If [Insert Jurisdiction] does not comply with the taxpayer’s written demand, the taxpayer may file a special action in state court against [Insert Jurisdiction], after first exhausting any administrative remedy.