Opinion
Docket No. 146563. COA No. 289724.
2013-06-5
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY and Director of the Department of Environmental Quality, Plaintiffs–Appellees, v. TOWNSHIP OF WORTH, Defendant–Appellant.
Prior report: 299 Mich.App. 1, 829 N.W.2d 31.
Order
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 11, 2012 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE the language bolded in the following passages of the Court of Appeals opinion, because it can be read to suggest that in a case such as this one, in which the question is whether imposing a duty to remediate on the township violates the prohibition against unfunded mandates contained in the second sentence of Const 1963, art 9, § 29, it is also necessary to show that the state has shifted to a local unit of government a cost formerly borne or funded by the state, contrary to the first sentence of § 29. See Durant v. State Bd. of Ed., 424 Mich. 364, 378–379, 381 N.W.2d 662 (1985) (“The first sentence ... is aimed at existing services or activities already required of local government. The second sentence addresses future services or activities.”); Schmidt v. Dep't of Education, 441 Mich. 236, 254, 490 N.W.2d 584 (1992).
In sum, Headlee applies whenever legislation enacted on or after December 23, 1978 (the date the Headlee Amendmentwent into effect) requires a unit of local government to increase its level of activity or service. [Livingston Co. v. Dep't of Mgt. & Budget, 430 Mich. 635] at 648, 425 N.W.2d 65 [ (1988) ] (Art 9 § 29 refers only to required, not optional, services or activities). Furthermore, Headlee applies only when a statutory requirement lessens the state's burden by shifting to units of local government the responsibility of providing services once provided or funded by the state. Id. at 645,430 Mich. 635, 425 N.W.2d 65. [299 Mich.App. at 3, 829 N.W.2d 31 (emphasis added).]
* * *
In sum, we hold that requiring defendant's compliance with MCL 324.3109(2) does not violate the Headlee Amendment because, although it may financially burden the defendant, it does not shift the financial burden from the state to a unit of local government. [Id. at 5, 441 Mich. 236, 490 N.W.2d 584 (emphasis added).]
In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.