NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used in any other situation.
Only the most recent FIR version, excluding attachments, is available on the Intranet. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC office in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.
| SPONSOR: | Garcia, M.H. | DATE TYPED: | 02/27/01 | HB | 612 | ||
| SHORT TITLE: | County Commissioners to Administer Refuse | SB | |||||
| ANALYST: | Padilla | ||||||
| Recurring
or Non-Rec |
Fund
Affected | ||||
| FY01 | FY02 | FY01 | FY02 | ||
| NFI | NFI | ||||
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
LFC Files
Attorney General
Department of Environment
Department of Finance and Administration (DFA)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
House Bill 612 amends existing statute on the powers of county commissioners to allow them to compel the taking of solid waste generated in their jurisdictions to designated facilities for processing and disposal.
Significant Issues
Current statute provides only that county commissioners can "regulate" the collection and disposal of refuse.
DFA believes this bill address a problem in Dona Ana county, where local government funds have been used to construct and operate regional solid waste facilities that are dependent upon the collection and disposal of refuse in that region. The repayment of the bonds that were issued for the construction demands that a certain level and volume of refuse be generated. If the refuse is directed to another facility, adequate revenues may not be generated, perhaps leaving the local governments to repay the bonds with other revenues.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
This bill does not contain an appropriation and has no fiscal implications for state government.
Fiscal implications for local governments are discussed above under "significant issues."
OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
The Department of Environment notes that this bill would give county commissioners what is known as "flow control." Flow control, the department reports, has been the subject of several lawsuits in recent years. The U.S. Supreme Court, in C&A Carbone, Inc. V. Town of Clarkstown, New York, ruled that a local government's flow control ordinance violated the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution because it regulated interstate commerce. The syllabus of the decision states, "While [the ordinance's] immediate effect is to direct local transport of solid waste to a designated site within the local jurisdiction, its economic effects are interstate in reach." The department asks whether House Bill 612 might raise similar legal questions.
It should be noted that the Attorney General's office noted "no significant legal issues" in its review of this bill.
LP/njw