Podcasts & RSS Feeds
Most Active Stories
- This ballot proposal is critical to Michigan's economy, but most people won't bother to vote on it
- Don't like the water shut-offs in Detroit? Now you can pay someone's overdue water bill
- Approaching construction on the highway? Experts say the "zipper merge" can help
- Some think their immigrant ancestors were the last that should be allowed in the U.S.
- Michigan Republican Party's tactics remind me of Watergate, because both were unnecessary
Tue May 10, 2011
Unfunded state mandates, local governments & the Headlee Amendment
Tomorrow, the Michigan Supreme Court will consider a rule change that could put local governments in a stronger position to challenge unfunded state mandates.
The Headlee Amendment is a state constitutional amendment meant to reduce unfunded state mandates on local governments, like requiring but not necessarily providing extra money for special education programs.
But to challenge a state mandate, local governments must present all their evidence to a judge just to get a court to consider their case.
Attorney Bill Mathewson is with the Michigan Municipal League. He says the Supreme Court should consider scrapping the current rule and instead requiring a ‘Special Master’ to review evidence in Headlee cases.
“Someone who could go through the fact finding procedure. Which would help solve the case more efficiently.”
Michigan’s Attorney General opposes changing the rule, arguing that more Headlee cases could glut state courts. Joy Yearout is with Michigan’s Attorney General’s office.
“Without that level of detail, at the beginning, it’s very difficult for judges to issue rulings in these cases.”
The rule change might help local governments avoid spending money on state mandated programs and cutting their budgets elsewhere.