Opinion Editorial- Is Your
Local Government a Champion for its Citizens?
By: Karen Budd Falen
Budd Falen Law Office, LLC
One of the
greatest dangers to our rural way of life is allowing people on the coasts
(people who often have never visited, much less lived in, our communities)
make decisions in an ideological “vacuum” regarding our local natural
resources, economies, customs and culture, and property rights. The Trump Administration fully understood
that local governments have the expertise to advocate for our economic,
environmental and social well-being because we elect those officials from
our communities and counties. Local
governments can and should be a champion for their local citizens.
While
federal statutes have long recognized that local governments should have a
voice in federal decisions impacting their constituents through consistency
review with local land use plans, cooperating agency status or
coordination, President Trump championed that notion. For example, Trump’s regulatory reform
addressed long overdue updates to the regulations implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The intent of NEPA was to create a process
for the federal government and the public to consider potential effects of
major federal actions on the human environment. However, before the Trump reform, NEPA
had been abused by radical groups to advance their agenda often to the
detriment of the citizens who live with the impact of these federal
decisions. To many, NEPA had become
a tool to manipulate the federal government to bow to their whims or face
years of lawsuits.
In an attempt
to de-weaponize NEPA, the Trump regulations clarify that NEPA is not only
supposed to analyze the effects that a decision may have on the
environment, but also must analyze how it will affect a local community’s
economy, customs, and culture.
Additionally, the Trump rules gave local governments the ability to
participate in the federal decision-making process, not only when state law
allows, but also by defining “special expertise” in areas within the local
government’s mission or experience.
For local governments that are not “home rule,” this change gives
you a voice.
The updated regulations mandate greater
up-front participation in NEPA’s process rather than providing
environmental groups a way to sandbag agency decision-making with lawsuits.
For example, the notice of intent to complete an environmental impact
statement (EIS) must be much more detailed than required under prior
regulations and must also include a request for comments. An extra comment period was also added at
the end of the process that mandates inclusion of local governments. Another recognition of the importance of
local government participation was the revamping of the requirement to
write an EIS’s environmental consequences section to include a discussion
of possible conflicts (consistency review) between the proposed action and
its alternatives with the objectives of local governments’ land use plans,
policies and controls.
The NEPA
regulations additionally clarified what constitutes a “major federal action
significantly affecting the human environment.” Following the commands of the U.S.
Supreme Court, an environmental impact must be “proximately caused” by the
proposed federal decision. If there
is an environmental impact (either positively or negatively), economic impacts
must be considered.
The
regulations included a two-year time period to complete an EIS. NEPA is a process-not a substantive
mandate. The public and agency
decision makers should understand the environmental and economic impacts of
decisions and make informed choices within this two-year timeframe. NEPA was not enacted by Congress to
simply create reams of paper with no end in sight.
Now, the
Biden Administration seeks to revise the Trump NEPA rules. Although Biden cannot just simply undo these
changes with the stroke of a pen, the current rhetoric is concerning. So called “fly-over country” can’t afford
to go back to NEPA documents that take 5 or 10 years to complete and never
consider local impacts. We don’t
know when these Biden changes will be proposed, but we will have the
ability to analyze and combat them if necessary. In the meantime, local governments have
the regulatory authority to be involved in decisions that impact our rural
way of life. Are your local
governments ready and willing to take on this responsibility? Karen Budd-Falen is an Attorney with Budd-Falen Law Offices, LLC with a primary focus on property rights, environmental, and natural resources law. This article is informational and is not legal advice.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment