The American County Platform and Resolutions cover page · American County Platform and Resolutions...

The American County Platform and Resolutions

American County Platform and Resolutions 2011‐2012 I

CONTENTS

NACO POLICY PROCESS … … … … … … 1

AGRICULTURE & RURAL AFFAIRS

Statement of Basic Philosophy … … … … … … 1 Rural Development … … … … … … 1 Rural Infrastructure … … … … … … 2 Agriculture … … … … … … 3 Extension Service … … … … … … 6 Food Safety … … … … … … 7 Methamphetamine Epidemic … … … … … … 7 Statement of Committee Purpose … … … … … … 8 Resolutions— Opposing Cuts to USDA Rural Development Programs in FY 2012 and FY 2013 … … 9 Support of the Regional Innovation Initiative … … … … … … 9 Supporting Reauthorization of the 2012 Farm Bill and Priority for Rural Development Programs … … … … … … 10 Supporting the White House Rural Council … … … … … … 11 Opposing Efforts to Move Rural Housing Programs from USDA to HUD … … … 11 Supporting Foreign Aid Reform … … … … … … 12

COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Statement of Basic Philosophy … … … … … … … … 1 Community Development … … … … … … … … 1 Housing … … … … … … … … 3 County Role in Housing … … … … … … … … 8 Economic Development … … … … … … … … 10 Resolutions— FY 2012 Appropriations for the Department of Housing and Urban Development … … 17 Supporting Retention of the Administration’s Foreclosure and Neighborhood

Stabilization Programs … … … … … … … … 17 Supporting the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program … … … … 18 Strongly Supporting the Community Development Block Grant and HOME

Investment Partnership Programs … … … … … … 20

ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY AND LAND USE

Statement of Basic Philosophy … … … … … … … … 1 Unfunded Mandates and Preemptions … … … … … … … 1 Intergovernmental Cooperation … … … … … … … … 1 Prioritization and Performance Based Standard Setting … … … … … 1 Incentive-Based Solutions … … … … … … … … 2 Sound Science and Technical Assistance … … … … … … … 2 Public Education and Communication … … … … … … … 2 Water Quality … … … … … … … … … 2 Air Quality … … … … … … … … … 6 Solid and Hazardous Waste Management … … … … … … 10 Energy … … … … … … … … … 14 Land Use … … … … … … … … … 17

American County Platform and Resolutions 2011‐2012 II

Resolutions— Exempting Renewable Biomass Emissions from the EPA’s Tailoring Rule … … … 21 EPA’s Boiler MACT Rule … … … … … … … … 21 Carbon Cap and Trade and Carbon Tax … … … … … … 22 Stormwater Runoff from Logging Roads … … … … … … 23 Federal Agencies Pay their Fair Share of Local Wastewater Fees … … … … 24 Supporting Ratification of the United Nations’ Convention on the Law of the Sea … 26 Responsible Military Maritime Sonar Practices … … … … … 27 Ocean Acidification … … … … … … … … 27 Changes to the Oil Pollution Act … … … … … … … 28 Pesticide Use … … … … … … … … … 28 Support Advanced Cleaner Coal Technologies … … … … … … 29 Community Renewable Energy Projects … … … … … … … 30 Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Programs … … … … … 31 Request Stakeholder Involvement in Developing USFWS Wind Siting Guidelines Under the Bald and Golden Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act … … 32 Conservation Easement Tax Incentives … … … … … … 33 Support of Special Redevelopment and Smart Growth Zones … … … … 34

FINANCE & INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

Statement of Basic Philosophy … … … … … … … … 1 Tenth Amendment … … … … … … … … … 1 Partnership and the Need for Strong County Government … … … … … 1 Intergovernmental Issues … … … … … … … … 1 Assessment and Tax Administration … … … … … … … 1 Categories of Tax-Exempt Bonds … … … … … … … 2 501(C) (3) Non Profit Organization Bonds … … … … … … 3 Exemption from the Alternative Minimum Tax … … … … … … 3 Refunding … … … … … … … … … … 3 Access to the Tax-Exempt Market … … … … … … … 3 Disclosure of Information by Municipal Bond Issues … … … … … 3 Arbitrage Rates … … … … … … … … … 4 Simplification of Tax-Exempt Bond Statutes … … … … … … 4 Credit Assistance … … … … … … … … … 4 Equalization in Federal Grants … … … … … … … … 4 Block Grants … … … … … … … … … 5 General Services Administration Schedule Contracts … … … … … 5 Consultation in Federal Decision-Making … … … … … … 5 Recognition of Fiscal Impacts … … … … … … … 6 Mandate Funding … … … … … … … … … 6 Preemption … … … … … … … … … 6 Deductibility of State and Local Taxes … … … … … … 6 Quasi-Government Instrumentalities … … … … … … … 6 Valuation And Assessment Decisions … … … … … … … 6 Ad Valorem Taxes … … … … … … … … 6 Reform of Property Taxes … … … … … … … … 6 Intercept of Federal Tax Refunds … …. … … … … … 7 Federal Tax Reform … … … … … … … … 7 County and Tribal Government Relations … … … … … … 7 Lands in Trust … … … … … … … … … 7 Gaming … … … … … … … … … … 8 Elections … … … … … … … … … … 8 Tools for Minority Language Outreach Under the Voting Rights Act … … … 8 Discounted Postage Rate … … … … … … … … 8 Repeal of the Real ID Act … … … … … … … … 9 American Community Survey … … … … … … … … 9

American County Platform and Resolutions 2011‐2012 III

Resolutions— Supporting Renewal of the Build America Bonds and Recovery Zone Bonds Programs … 10 Control the Rising Budget Deficit … … … … … … … 10 Dissolution of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) … … … … 12 Opposing Legislative Mandates Regarding the Conduct of Elections at the County Level … 13 Access Federal GSA Schedules for the Purchase of Environmentally Preferable "Green" Commodities and Services . … … … … … … 14 Supporting Federal Assistance to the Municipal Bond Market … … … … 14 Opposing Federal Preemption of State and Local Taxing Authority over Online Travel Companies … … … … … … … … 15 Opposing Property Tax Deductibility Reporting Requirement … … … 15 Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement … … … … … … 16 Urging Repeal of Unfunded Three Percent Withholding Mandate for County Procurement 16 Increased Reporting Requirements in the Use of Federal Funds … … … … 17 Supporting Uniform Rating System for All Securities … … … … … 18

HEALTH

Statement of Basic Philosophy … … … … … … … … 1 Health System Reform … … … … … … … … 1 Medical Liability Reform … … … … … … … … 1 Health Care Financing … … … … … … … … 2 Public Health … … … … … … … … 3 Rural Health … … … … … … … … 5 Indian Health Service … … … … … … … … 6 Long Term Care … … … … … … … … 6 Behavioral Health … … … … … … … … 6 Medicaid and Indigent Care … … … … … … … … 8 Health Facilities Construction and Capital Financing … … … … … 9 Federal Role … … … … … … … … 10

Resolutions— Support of Charity Care Requirements for Non-Profit Health Care Facilities … … 12 Support of Provisions of the Affordable Care Act that Help County Safety Net and Behavioral Health Programs … … … … … … … 12 Support of Reducing the 24-Month Waiting Period for Participants in Social Security Disability Insurance … … … … … … … 13 Support of the Healthy Food Financing Initiative … … … … … 14 Adapting to Aging Population … … … … … … … 15 Changing Nursing Home Oversight to Support and Promote Culture Change … … 15 County Organized Health Systems … … … … … … … 16 Creation of a New Oversight System for Nursing Homes … … … … 17 Essential Support Services for Persons with Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities 17 Health System Reform … … … … … … … … 18 Nurse Home Visitation Programs … … … … … … … 21 Persistent Health Disparities … … … … … … … … 22 V.A. Health Benefits for Veterans in Custody Pending Disposition of Charges … … 22 Supporting County Preparedness for Pandemic Influenza … … … … 23 Supporting Efforts in the Prevention and Treatment of Obesity and Overweight … … 24 Endorsing the Vision and Goals of the National Prevention Strategy … … … 25

American County Platform and Resolutions 2011‐2012 IV

HUMAN SERVICES AND EDUCATION Statement of Basic Philosophy … … … … … … … 1 Public Assistance … … … … … … … … 2 Children’s Services … … … … … … … … 6 Services to Older Americans … … … … … … … 11 Social Services … … … … … … … … … 12 Education … … … … … … … … … 14 Legal Immigrants, Migrants, Refugees and Undocumented Immigrants … … 16 Resolutions— TANF and CCDBG Reauthorization … … … … … … … 18 Comprehensive Immigration Reform … … … … … … … 19 The DREAM Act … … … … … … … … … 19 Elder Justice Act … … … … … … … … … 20 Reauthorization and Funding of the Older Americans Act … … … … … 20 Community Services Block Grant … … … … … … … 21 Indian Child Welfare Notices … … … … … … … 21 Supporting the Establishment of an Office of Rural Education Policy in the Dept. of Education 22 Social Services Block Grant … … … … … … … … 22

JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY

Statement of Basic Philosophy … … … … … … … … 1 Criminal Justice System … … … … … … … … 1 Community Crime Prevention … … … … … … … … 11 Control of Firearms … … … … … … … … … 11 Federal Support for Forensic Sciences … … … … … … … 12 Federal Reimbursement Programs … … … … … … … 13 Organized Crime … … … … … … … … … 13 Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention … … … … … … 13 Alcohol and Drug Abuse … … … … … … … … 20 Methamphetamine Epidemic … … … … … … … … 22 Comprehensive Emergency Management … … … … … … 22 County Coordination of Private Agency Programs … … … … … 32 Role of the County Coroner/Medical Examiner … … … … … … 32 Victim/Witness Assistance … … … … … … … … 33 Restorative Justice … … … … … … … … … 33 Victims of Domestic Violence … … … … … … … … 33 National Weather Service … … … … … … … … 34 Emergency Medical Services … … … … … … … … 34 Critical Infrastructure … … … … … … … … … 34 Public Health … … … … … … … … … 35 Pandemic Influenza … … … … … … … … … 35 Public Safety Telecommunications … … … … … … … 36 Interoperability … … … … … … … … … 36

Resolutions— Support of Legislation to Establish a Nationwide 2-1-1 Dialing System … … … 38 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program (42 U.S.C. 3750) … … 38 Support of Strengthened FEMA Outreach and Technical Assistance for Flood Hazard Mapping 39 Support for the National Initiative on Cyber Education (NICE) … … … … 40 Support of Maintaining Funding for FEMA Grant Programs … … … … 40 Support of Revising FEMA’s HMGP Program … … … … … … 41

American County Platform and Resolutions 2011‐2012 V

Support of the Reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 as Amended … … … … … … … … 42

Supporting Funding for the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Reauthorization and Improvement Act … … … … … … 43 National Criminal Justice Commission Act … … … … … … 44 Lowering Jail Recidivism and Reinvesting the Savings … … … … … 45 Youth Promise Act and Gang Abatement Act of 2011 … … … … … 46

LABOR & EMPLOYMENT

Statement of Basic Philosophy … … … … … … … … 1 Local Authority … … … … … … … … … 1 Workforce Development … … … … … … … … 1 Employment Standards … … … … … … … … 4 Employee Benefits … … … … … … … … … 5

Resolutions— Support of Allocating Maximum Funding to Local Workforce Areas … … … 7 Support for Public Health Workforce Programs … … … … … … 7 Support of Streamlining the Department of Labor’s National Emergency Grant Process … 8 Funding for Workforce Development Programs … … … … … 8 Reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act … … … … … 9 State WIA Plans … … … … … … … … … 11 Support of Improving the Department of Labor’s Response to Local Workforce Reporting Standards 11 Supporting the Goals of NACo’S Veterans and Military Service Task Force with

Respect to Job Training and Access to Employment Services … … … … 12 Infrastructure Funding for Local One-Stop Centers … … … … … 13

PUBLIC LANDS

Statement of Basic Philosophy … … … … … … … … 1 Federal Land Management … … … … … … … … 1 Federal Land Payments … … … … … … … … 3 Federal Land Use Planning … … … … … … … … 3 Resolutions— Opposing Delay in Issuance of Oil and Gas Drilling Permits … … … … 5 Calling for the Membership of the Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board to be

Expanded to Include a County Elected Official … … … … … 5 Federal Forest Carbon Sequestration Revenues … … … … … … 6 Support of Changing Forest Service Employee Supervision … … … … 7 Support of Ongoing Sage Grouse Management Efforts and in Opposition to Listing of the Sage Grouse at this Time … … … … … … … 8 Distribution of Federal Royalty Payments for Renewable Energy Projects on Public Lands 8 Hazardous Fuels Emergency … … … … … … … … 9 Federal Definition of Woody Biomass … … … … … … … 10 Opposing Proposed Forest Service Planning Rule … … … … … 10 Rescind Bureau of Land Management’s “Master Leasing Plan” Oil and Gas Reform Leasing Reform 11 Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Historic and Recognized Land Uses from Renewable

Energy Development Projects Occurring on Federal Lands … … … … 12 Supporting S.1061 & H.R.1996 “The Government Litigation Savings Act” … … 13 Oppose Executive Branch Efforts to Create New “Defacto” Wilderness Areas … … 14 Promote Healthy Forest Ecosystems and Reduce the Release of Green House Gases through

Active Management of the Nation’s Forests … … … … … … 15

American County Platform and Resolutions 2011‐2012 VI

Revise Contract Cancellation Policy for FS Stewardship Contracts … … … 16 Urging Congress to Expedite a Commercial Oil Shale Leasing Program … … … 17 Japan Reconstruction Aid to Include Manufactured Wood Products Generated from Federal

Forests in Accordance with the Northwest Forest Plan … … … … 18 Utilization of Federal Timber after Domestic Declaration of Disaster … … … 19 Supporting Uranium Activities … … … … … … … 20 Support Increased Domestic Oil and Gas on Public Lands … … … … 21 Calling for Membership on Landscape Conservation Cooperatives Steering Committees to

Include County Elected Official(s) … … … … … … 22 Acquisition of Private Land for Wildlife Mitigation, Associated with Renewable

Energy Development, with Subsequent Transfer to Federal Agencies … … … 23

TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY

Statement of Basic Philosophy … … … … … … … 1 Policies And Practices … … … … … … … … 3 Resolutions— Confidential Data Sharing … … … … … … … … 7 Use of Spectrum for Interoperable IP-Based Public Safety Communication … … 7

TRANSPORTATION

Statement of Basic Philosophy … … … … … … … 1 Comprehensive Planning … … … … … … … … 1 National Highway Program … … … … … … … … 2 Highway Safety … … … … … … … … … 3 Public Transportation … … … … … … … … … 4 Airport Development … … … … … … … … … 5 Railroads … … … … … … … … … … 6 Waterways … … … … … … … … … … 7 Research and Development … … … … … … … … 8 Metropolitan Congestion … … … … … … … … 8

Resolutions— High-Speed Intercity Transit … … … … … … … … 9 Railroad Relations … … … … … … … … … 9 Safe Highways and Infrastructure Preservation Act (SHIPA, H.R. 1618) … … … 10 Commuter Rail Trackage and Operating Rights … … … … … … 11 Mitigation of Impact of Rail Mergers and Buyouts on Local Communities … … … 11 Rulemaking Establishing Minimum Levels of Retroflectivity for Pavement Markings … 12 Transportation Trust Fund … … … … … … … … 12 Highway Trust Fund … … … … … … … … … 13 Support of the Railroad Competition Act … … … … … … 13 Supporting Customs Fees Being Used for Port Infrastructure Development … … … 14 Support of Short Sea Shipping Initiative … … … … … … … 14 Reauthorization of the Federal Airport and Aviation Program … … … 15 Create a National Indemnity Liability Fund for Public Transit Agencies … … … 17 Timely Passage of the Airport and Aviation Legislation … … … … … 17 Future of the Federal Surface Transportation Program … … … … … 18 Federal Highway Bridge Program … … … … … … … 24 Flexible Transit Funding … … … … … … … … 24 Maintaining Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Designation Threshold Levels … 25 Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) … … … … 25

AmericanCountyPlatformandResolutions2011‐2012 1

AGRICULTURE & RURAL AFFAIRS STATEMENT OF BASIC PHILOSOPHY

The National Association of Counties (NACo) is concerned about the impact of national, state and local policies and decisions affecting rural counties. Approximately 17 percent of the nation’s population lives in 2,051 counties deemed ‘non-metropolitan,’ or rural, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. There has been a serious loss of human and financial resources in many counties as a result of economic trends and governmental policies. Deterioration of infrastructure facilities and institutions, such as roads, health care and education systems, is prevalent in many rural counties. American agriculture and its related agribusiness remain a vital part of the U.S. economy as well as a major contributor to economic activity throughout the world. Simultaneously, there are other rural industries that also are becoming an important part of the rural landscape.

Long-term economic trends in rural communities show growth in the service and retail trade industries and a variety of other industries in recreation, food service, education, and health care.

Employment in the relatively high paying natural resources jobs, including farm proprietors, miners, and forest products workers have continued their downward trend. Companies requiring complex skills have often preferred to locate in urban areas where they can find a larger pool of trained workers and a higher concentration of services. Nevertheless, manufacturing accounts for more than 15 percent of rural jobs.

The spread of advanced technology in rural areas especially in communications may make rural areas more attractive in the future to companies offering higher wage jobs.

Counties need to recognize the critical importance of technology and the need for an advanced telecommunications infrastructure.

Many rural counties are experiencing eroding tax bases, population loss and declining support from federal and state governments. Rural elected officials must recognize these challenges and provide an atmosphere conducive to rural economic development.

The United States federal government should enforce laws as written in a uniform manner nationwide. Further, the federal government should develop a comprehensive national rural policy that recognizes the challenges rural county governments are facing and increases the coordination between local, regional and state governments. In addition, the government should look to ways to streamline and simplify federal regulations and grants to rural counties.

RURAL DEVELOPMENT

Included as part of the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform (FAIR Act of 1996), Congress consolidated a number of rural development programs into the Rural Community Advancement Program (RCAP).

RCAP was comprised of three funding accounts - housing, utilities and business. RCAP provided the flexibility to develop innovative approaches to rural development problems locally. By permitting the transfer of up to 25 percent of the RCAP funds allocated to other programs within RCAP, local officials could direct more assistance towards the enhancement of jobs through education, infrastructure investment and economic development. In recent years, funds for RCAP programs are appropriated under new and separate accounts within the Rural Housing, Rural Business Cooperative and Rural Utility Services. RCAP no longer exists in name, however program operations and implementation, including the flexibility to transfer funds within each account is not changed.

NACo supports this flexibility and urges Congress to adequately fund Rural Housing, Rural Business Cooperative and Rural Utility Services during the annual appropriations process.


Furthermore, NACo supports the Congressional Rural Caucus on issues of mutual interest and believes that the caucus is critically important to articulating the strengths and challenges of rural America.

Rural Housing: There is a great need across America for affordable housing for rural families and transient and permanent farm workers. Federal regulations often are inflexible and too restrictive in providing adequate quality housing for farm workers.

Studies have shown that housing stock in rural areas has grown at a slower rate than in urban areas. Additionally, six percent of rural houses have severe physical problem, including inadequate heating, plumbing, and space.

Rural Poverty: According to the United States Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Census Bureau, there are 340 rural persistently poor counties throughout the nation, - roughly 11 percent of our counties. These areas are defined as persistently poor since 20 percent or more of the population has lived in poverty for a forty year time period (1960-2000). Several characteristics bound these persistently poor counties together including, lower education rates and higher levels of unemployment. Congress, the USDA and the Administration should redirect more funds to build economic capacity in these financially distressed counties.

Outmigration: Outmigration poses a significant threat to rural counties across the United States. This problem is particularly acute in the nation’s heartland—from the Dakotas to North Texas, and from the Rocky Mountains to the mouth of the Missouri River—where 72 percent of rural counties on the Great Plains have seen their population shrink by an average of one third.

Consequently, NACo supports legislation to combat the effects of outmigration, including the New Homestead Act, which would provide tax credits and incentives to encourage young people and skilled workers to move back to rural America.

RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE

Water and Wastewater: Critical infrastructure, such as water and wastewater, remain a priority for many rural communities. The cost of building, maintaining, and upgrading local water system is a challenge for many small towns and rural counties. Beyond the public health interests, clean and reliable water is a necessity to spur economic growth. Studies have concluded that water and sewer projects can save or create jobs in rural communities by attracting and retaining businesses.

Transportation: Additionally, many counties have to close bridges when they become unsafe and cannot afford to rebuild them. The quality of roads and bridges is declining in many rural areas due to lack of funding. Federal funding for rural roads, bridges, local transit service and air service needs to increase substantially.

Technology: Advanced telecommunications are critical to the economic vitality of rural America. According to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), a lack of broadband infrastructure could limit the potential of rural communities to attract and retain businesses and jobs, especially businesses that are dependent on electronic commerce. The lack of broadband infrastructure in rural communities has severely impaired the potential of rural communities to attract and retain new businesses. Increased deployment of advanced technology has major implications for rural counties including improved healthcare services through telemedicine, long distance education, attraction of quality economic development, and improved wages and employment.

The USDA estimates that more than 65 percent of all cities with populations over 250,000 have cable modem service, while less than five percent of cities with populations less than 10,000 had such service. This is an example of the ‘digital divide’ which is the gap between the ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’ during this information age. Advanced technology is a major key to closing the information gap between rural and urban areas. NACo supports congressional and administrative action that hastens the


deployment of high-speed broadband technology. One such program is the Rural Broadband Access program that was revamped in the 2008 farm bill.

In addition, NACo supports the universal service provisions of the 1996 Telecommunications Act that requires equal and affordable access to advanced telecommunications for rural schools, libraries and medical facilities. Also, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 endorses the concept that all consumers, including low- income consumers and those in rural, insular and high cost areas should have equal access to telecommunications and information services.

NACo also supports tax credits to companies that deploy broadband communications into rural areas to hasten the closure of the digital divide throughout rural America.

Economic Development: Rural economic development is generally thought of in terms of improving the employment opportunities, incomes, and well-being of the nation's people by strengthening the capacity of rural America to compete in a global economy.

The reauthorization of the farm bill in 2008 offered several new programs that could overcome the current "stove piping" effect of many USDA programs. NACo supports holistic approaches to rural development, such as the Rural Collaborative Investment Program (RCIP). By incorporating elected county and municipal officials, businesses and non-profits in a multi-county region, the program would allow multiple sectors a chance to chart the future of their community. Additionally, NACo urges Congress to provide increased funding for local capacity and technical assistance.

NACo also supports improved coordination of the USDA's economic development programs at the state, regional and local levels. Federal agencies should be required to recognize and follow county and regional development plans developed by local and elected officials.

Rural Healthcare: NACo recognizes the vital role that healthcare plays in rural America. The healthcare industry is an economic development engine and access to affordable healthcare is essential to spur new businesses. NACo supports strengthening the healthcare delivery system in rural America, including ambulatory services.

AGRICULTURE

Farm Bill Reauthorization: The Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform (FAIR) Act of 1996, Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, and the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 have had substantial impacts on county governments. The 2008 law affects the economy and the tax base of many of our counties. The ability of county governments to provide services financed by property and other local taxes is dependent on farm income and rural business. Agriculture is a key component of economic development and should be included in any comprehensive rural development program.

NACo supports expansion of the crop insurance program to include additional crops, livestock and poultry. Additionally, NACo encourages Congress to provide a subsidy for hay production to assist agriculture communities, prevent soil erosion and improve water quality.

NACo supports agricultural reforms that will improve health and protect the environment of all Americans through significantly strengthening federal nutrition programs, improving access to healthy food, promoting environmental stewardship and conservation, protecting our food supply and robustly funding rural development initiatives. All titles of the 2008 farm bill are important to the vitality of our nation, therefore NACo supports full funding of all titles of this important legislation.

NACo supports investments in infrastructure, entrepreneurship programs and facilities that process, distribute and develop value-added products using locally-grown commodities purchased from local farmers to meet the demand for local, healthy food.

Family Farm: Once prominent across the landscape of rural America, family farms are disappearing at an alarming rate. NACo supports the concept of family farms in producing agricultural


goods. Federal policies should support the maintenance and continued existence of family farms. NACo supports an examination by Congress and the Administration into the declining revenue to agriculture producers from food sales while there has been no reduction in the cost of food.

To keep the integrity of the family farm in place and in turn the fiscal solvency of many counties dependent upon agriculture, NACo supports the beginning farmer loan program. NACo also supports incentives, such as low-interest loans and tax credits, to be provided to young people entering farming and agribusiness in rural areas.

NACo supports ‘agribility’ programs within USDA that help physically challenged farmers in their agricultural duties.

Environment: NACo recognizes the need to protect our nation's most environmentally sensitive lands and waters. The 2008 Farm Bill re-affirmed the nation's commitment to good land stewardship by providing billions of dollars to conservation programs. Programs such as the Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP), Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP), Conservation Security Program (CSP), and others are important sources for technical assistance and are needed to help communities implement many important conservation measures.

NACo supports USDA's Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) and the valuable technical assistance their field offices provide. The NRCS plays a critical role for counties by addressing local conservation issues pertinent to county governments as well as Soil & Water Conservation Districts.

NACo urges Congress to fund and expand backlogged farm conservation programs such as the Conservation and Wetlands Reserve, Buffer, and Farmland Protection Programs. Flexibility should be allowed in the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program to permanently protect locally identified critical habitat areas. The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) should be the sole federal agency with jurisdictional authority over agricultural wetlands areas.

NACo also supports USDA's National Conservation Buffer Initiative and its attempt to encourage the establishment of long-term conservation practices such as the creation of buffer strips, planting of trees for windbreaks, wildlife and other conservation enhancement purposes. This initiative will help landowners make good use of their best cropland and maintain their marginal area lands.

NACo is concerned about the loss of productive farmland to nonagricultural uses because of increasing development. NACo urges Congress, and the USDA to support measures to retain, protect, and improve agricultural land, and conserve topsoil, consistent with local land use policies and controls. An important aspect of the conservation process is the maintenance of financial and technical assistance to establish practical methods to protect farmlands for American farm families and retain farmland to maintain stable production of farm commodities.

The role of states and counties should be a partnership enhanced by a common goal in identifying and implementing conservation management programs. This would include the targeting of priority protection areas in developing sound agricultural conservation management programs.

NACo urges EPA to use the best scientific data on pesticide use, residues on crops, and toxicity, so that important pesticide uses are preserved; and to work closely with the USDA to improve consultation with all stakeholders. NACo supports federal incentives which reward American agriculture for the implementation of best management practices which protect the environment and opposes any attempts to impose a federal greenhouse gas tax on livestock.

Pest Management: Wildlife can cause significant damage to private and public property, including agricultural crops, livestock, forests, pastures, and urban & rural structures. Wildlife Services (WS) is an agency responsible to curtail and/or minimize such wildlife conflicts through cooperation with other federal agencies, states, counties, and private entities to establish wildlife damage management programs. NACo supports USDA Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service (APHIS),


Wildlife Services (WS) programs and encourages Congress and the Administration to provide necessary resources to strengthen these programs. NACo also opposes efforts to weaken WS programs, including efforts to decrease funding and change authorized abilities to cooperate with counties and other entities needing assistance.

Farmworkers: According to USDA's Economic Research Service the total U.S. agricultural labor force has declined over the past century and hired farm workers have become the largest proportion of all farm workers. An estimated half of hired farm workers lack the legal status to work in the U.S. These workers are a major presence in rural communities across our country and are vital for the economic health of our agricultural sector, from large producers to family farms and ranches. The H-2A visa program-the nation's only legally sanctioned guestworker program-does not have the capacity to handle the nation's demand for hired farm workers. NACo supports a sensible and orderly guestworker program for farm workers that significantly simplifies administrative requirements for employers, provides temporary legal status and protections for migrant farm workers and the possibility of obtaining permanent legal residence in the United States.

In addition NACo supports the following principles: 1) The Future Flow of Agricultural Jobs: The continuous flow of a legal, reliable and stable

workforce is necessary to ensure the future of agricultural production in the U.S. 2) Wages: The wage must be an economically viable rate for agriculture, representing the local

area. 3) Private Right of Protection: There must be protections in place to ensure that agricultural

employers are not at risk from class action litigation. Property Rights of Horse Owners: NACo calls for the humane treatment of horses in the

ownership, raising, transporting, and processing that is carried out under the supervision of USDA. NACo opposes efforts to curtail the property rights of horse owners and specifically opposes S. 727 and its House companion, H.R. 503, which propose to "amend the Horse Protection Act to prohibit the shipping, transporting, moving, delivering, receiving, possessing, purchasing, selling, or donation of horses and other equines to be slaughtered for human consumption, and for other purposes". The only three remaining horse processing plants in the United States were shut down in 2007 by state laws. This federal legislation will make it illegal to transport horses to a packing plant or to release any horses to any Canadian or Mexican packing plants, there by totally shutting down the "harvest" market for used and unwanted horses.

There are currently 60,000 to 90,000 horses originating from the Unites States that are slaughtered annually in Mexico and Canada. The meat is shipped to Italy, France, Belgium, Holland, and Japan. In addition, only about 6,000 spaces are available nationwide for horse rescue facilities and the vast majority are already full. Unwanted horses are detrimental to county governments. Horse owners release their unwanted horses into the wild, thus making it the county's responsibility to collect and dispose of them. Not only is this a public health issue, but it will also be quite costly. This is also a property rights issue. Horse owners who wish to seek an additional value for their spent horses by sending them to slaughter should have the right to do so. Those who wish to retain them to die of old age, or euthanize and bury them on the farm or ranch should have that right as well.

Renewable Energy: NACo supports comprehensive legislation to encourage and enable

American Agriculture to provide at least 25 percent of the total energy, including wind and solar, consumed in the United States by 2025 while continuing to produce abundant, safe and affordable food and fiber.

Biomass fuels (ethanol, bio-diesel) are paramount not only to the reduction of pollution in counties throughout the nation, but also serve as revenue generators for many farmers that are struggling


with low prices for their crops and increased costs of production. Their use and development should be encouraged and enhanced by the United States Congress. Bio-diesel should continue to receive tax incentives for production.

In addition, NACo supports the increased use and promotion of wind energy. Wind energy represents a clean and renewable source of electric power and it has great potential and should receive tax credits for production.

Drought and Natural Disasters: The results of droughts and other natural disasters cause great economic loss, high unemployment, and other long-range problems. The National Association of Counties is concerned about the adverse impact these weather related disasters have upon counties and other local governments.

NACo urges the Administration and Congress to adopt a national drought policy consistent with the recommendations of The National Drought Policy Commission’s report: Preparing For Drought in the 21st Century.

These programs should provide for long-range solutions to minimize the effects of future droughts and disasters as well as the economic revitalization of the community.

NACo urges Congress and the administration to pass disaster assistance aimed at farmers during times of drought and abnormal precipitation.

International Trade: NACo believes that the competitive position of U.S. agriculture in world markets would be enhanced by the removal of certain barriers to trade in some foreign markets and by the termination of subsidies by foreign competitors.

NACo supports legislation that provides for uniformity in product grade, quality and inspections standards for all imports and exports.

NACo is opposed to the use of agricultural commodities as an embargo tool for U. S. foreign policy. The use of commodity embargoes has an adverse effect on long-term market demand and thus on the rural economy.

EXTENSION SERVICE

Across the country, counties partner with state and federal governments to fund the Extension Service. Extension works with a wide range of issues of importance to counties including agriculture, community development, families, 4-H and youth. They make timely, research-based information readily available to counties. NACo reaffirms the importance of the work of the Extension Service and calls upon the state and federal partners to maintain their support.

NACo supports the enhancement of competitiveness through the Export Enhancement Program and through agricultural research and education programs provided by the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES). Emphasis should be given to research that would enhance the competitive position of U. S. agricultural products.

Research and extension activities that address the constantly changing economic and technical changes in agriculture are strongly supported by NACo. That includes placing a higher priority on research regarding alternative uses of agricultural products and identification of potential new uses including specialty markets.

NACo calls on Congress to provide needed support to the Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES) to explore innovative approaches for building community capacity and introduce additional economic enhancement opportunities to rural businesses.

A new emerging threat to our nation’s security is agroterrorism. As a result, NACo supports directing federal resources to the cooperative extension service and land grant colleges for the purpose of educating the public on the dangers of a potential agroterrorism event.


FOOD SAFETY NACo supports the food safety inspection system for meat processing plants. This new system

replaces a sight and smell technique with scientific methods and should help other processing plants better target and reduce harmful bacteria on their products. Protecting the welfare of all American consumers, especially our children, is the responsibility of public officials. Maintaining confidence in our nation’s food supply benefits agricultural producers and food manufacturers located throughout our nation. NACo urges USDA to not exempt any particular type of processing method from rigorous inspection.

NACo urges expanded funding for research on the uses of biotechnology. The United States Department of Health and Human Services, the United States Environmental

Protection Agency and other federal organizations place controls on the legal use of certain pesticides and chemicals in the United States, however in many countries the use of pesticides and other chemicals which have not been approved or have been banned in the United States is a common practice.

Unfortunately many of these same foodstuffs are routinely shipped to the United States. Congress included mandatory country-of-origin labeling (COOL) provisions in the 2002 and 2008 farm bills. NACo urges the Administration to implement this important provision.

NACo feels the consumer has a right to know the country of origin of the fruit and vegetables they eat if such foodstuffs are not grown in the United States. NACo strongly urges the federal government to require that all fruits, vegetables, meats and other foodstuffs entering the United States be legibly, indelibly labeled in such manner as to indicate to the consumer the country of origin.

Additionally, NACo supports the establishment of a national animal identification system that provides financial assistance to producers to comply with the system. Furthermore, NACo urges the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to mandate that all countries that wish to import livestock to the United States must meet or exceed U.S. standards of care regarding Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) and foot and mouth disease.

NACo urges the U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to continue the ban on importation of livestock from countries with confirmed cases of BSE and/or foot and mouth disease and strengthen enforcement standards in order to guarantee safe food for our nation. USDA should conduct inspections at the site of production of all food products that are exported to the United States financed by the producer.

NACo also supports the promotion of healthy diets for all residents, including strengthening incentives and infrastructure to encourage more fruit/vegetable production, better access to fresh foods and investment programs promoting healthy food, expansion of programs that help communities' invest in retail markets, food-based businesses and increasing access to farmers markets and farm-to-cafeteria programs that bring the freshest locally grown food into school lunch programs. METHAMPHETAMINE EPIDEMIC

NACo supports adequate funding for the fight against the devastating methamphetamine epidemic. NACo supports increased funding for methamphetamine research, enforcement, treatment and education of users and their families, and cleanup of contaminated sites.

Over the last decade, a devastating and highly-addictive drug has spread across the country, especially in rural counties. Methamphetamine, commonly called "meth", is a homemade amphetamine made from common, easily accessible materials: antifreeze, white gas, ether, starting fluids, freon, lye, paint thinner, acetone, and ephedrine or cold pills. Mixing these chemicals to make meth can occur in a variety of locations from homes to inside vehicles.

The harmful long-term effects of meth include bone loss, malnutrition, liver, kidney and lung damage and psychiatric problems. Yet, the effects of meth not only exist for users. Individuals,


especially children, who are exposed to the toxic chemicals can also develop severe respiratory, neural and other health problems.

Investigating and busting meth labs, corrections, court costs, treatment and clean-up are all direct costs to county governments as a result of the skyrocketing use and manufacturing of meth. However, there are many societal effects that also must be considered. National statistics suggest that in at least 70 percent of all meth arrests, there is a child living in the home. These children many times suffer from neglect and abuse.

Meth labs also pose a significant danger in the community as they contain highly flammable and explosive materials. Additionally, for each pound of meth produced, five to seven pounds of toxic waste remain, which is often introduced into the environment via streams, septic systems and surface water run-off. NACo urges Congress and the administration to commit more resources to fight this harmful epidemic.

Specifically, NACo supports implementation of H.R.365, the Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2007, which became public law 110-43 in December 2007 and provides a research program for remediation of closed methamphetamine production laboratories. NACo also supports grant programs to facilitate the creation of methamphetamine precursor electronic logbook systems.

STATEMENT OF COMMITTEE PURPOSE

In addition to studying agriculture and rural development issues and recommending NACo policy positions, the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Steering Committee has an oversight role with other policy committees on issues affecting rural counties. This committee will recommend issues to be studied, indicate the impact of policies on rural counties and seek input into policy Resolutions drafted by other policy committees.


AGRICULTURE AND RURAL AFFAIRS RESOLUTIONS

Resolution Opposing Cuts to USDA Rural Development Programs in FY 2012 and FY 2013 Issue: Proposed Cuts to USDA Rural Development Programs. Adopted Policy: NACo strongly supports USDA Rural Development programs and urges

Congress and the Administration to oppose further cuts to these programs in FY 2012 and FY 2013. Background: USDA Rural Development funds a broad range of programs that are critical to

rural counties. These programs include funding for water/wastewater infrastructure, community facilities, broadband, electric, telephone, housing, renewable energy and business development. USDA Rural Development programs are increasingly critical to rural communities due to the current fiscal situation.

At a minimum, these programs must be maintained at the FY 2010 enacted funding level; especially grant funding in order for rural communities to overcome impediments to economic development. The President’s FY 2012 Budget for USDA Rural Development programs provides $2.4 billion in budget authority to support a program level of $36 billion in loans, grants and other assistance. This represents a cut of over $568 million or 19 percent in budget authority from the FY 2010 enacted level. The House passed FY 2012 agriculture spending bill, H.R. 2112, provides $2.1 billion for rural development programs, a decrease of $338 million or 14 percent from last year’s level. This level of funding is $876 million or 30 percent less than the NACo supported FY 2010 enacted level of $2.968 billion.

NACo calls on Congress and the Administration to maintain USDA Rural Development program funding levels in FY 2012 and FY 2013 at the FY 2010 enacted level. This minimum level of funding is needed each year to bolster critical economic development opportunities in rural counties. NACo especially supports grant funding for USDA rural water infrastructure and community facilities programs, which are especially critical to economic development efforts in rural communities.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: USDA Rural Development programs are critical to the economic vitality of many rural communities.

Adopted July 19, 2011

Resolution in Support of the Regional Innovation Initiative Issue: Support growth and job creation in rural counties. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the U. S. Department of Agriculture’s Regional Innovation

Initiative. Background: The President’s Budget for FY 2012 supports the creation of the U.S. Department

of Agriculture’s Regional Innovation Initiative. The initiative is designed to provide a new framework for promoting economic development and job creation in rural communities. To support this innovative locally-driven approach, USDA requested a program level of $170 million that will be generated by better targeting 5 percent of several key community and economic development programs at USDA Rural Development.

The initiative will allocate these funds competitively among innovative regional economic development projects tailored to local needs and opportunities. Enactment of General Provision 718 of the Agriculture section of the President’s FY 2012 Budget will give USDA authority to begin the initiative.

While it does not provide new funding for these key county supported programs, the initiative does seek to reorient USDA towards a model of development that respects local priorities and plans, fosters regional cooperation and brings more cohesion and simplicity to many of USDA’s programs that are designed to revitalize rural communities.

The Administration’s proposal to create a Regional Innovation Initiative is an extremely promising development for rural counties. NACo has led the effort to call upon Congress and the


Administration to renew and reorient rural development efforts and the Regional Innovation Initiative represents an important step toward that goal.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: The proposed initiative supports private sector growth and job creation in rural counties.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Supporting Reauthorization of the 2012 Farm Bill and Priority for Rural Development Programs Issue: NACo Priorities for the 2012 Farm Bill Reauthorization.

Adopted Policy: NACo supports full funding of all titles in the 2012 reauthorization of the Farm Bill and calls on Congress and the Administration to place particular emphasis on crafting a Farm Bill that provides enhanced resources to rural development programs and strategies that promote rural prosperity.

NACo supports four key priorities in the Farm Bill reauthorization that will help rural counties revitalize their economies and quality of life.

1) NACo supports an enhanced commitment to USDA Rural Development programs in the next farm bill, especially key infrastructure and business development programs that support the agricultural sector and the retention and creation of businesses.

2) NACo supports rural development strategies which focus on making USDA’s investments more efficient and effective by rewarding strategic regional approaches to rural development that allow counties and their regional partners to focus on their local economic assets, priorities and goals.

3) NACo supports enhanced funding for renewable energy development, especially programs that assist local governments in their efforts to develop renewable energy and increase energy efficiency.

4) NACo recognizes the need to enhance opportunities for young people to be involved in agricultural enterprises and therefore supports a title in the next Farm Bill that assists in developing these opportunities.

Background: The 2008 Farm Bill does not expire until 2012, but the debate has already begun. The Farm Bill is a massive piece of legislation which authorizes a broad range of programs that are critical to rural counties. These programs include funding for rural water/wastewater infrastructure, community facilities, broadband expansion, housing, renewable energy, support for new farmers and business development initiatives. All titles of the 2012 Farm Bill are important to the vitality of our nation; therefore NACo supports full funding of all titles of this important legislation.

The Farm Bill ensures that all Americans have access to a safe, secure and inexpensive food supply and provides a safety net for farmers and ranchers. It also authorizes important nutrition programs, encourages environmentally friendly conservation programs, and supports the development of agriculturally based renewable energy, which will help to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

The law affects the economy and the tax base of many of the nation’s counties. The ability of county governments to provide services financed by property and other local taxes is dependent on farm income and rural businesses. Agriculture is a key component of economic development and should be included in any comprehensive rural development program.

NACo supports agricultural reforms that will improve health and protect the environment of all Americans through significantly strengthening federal nutrition programs, improving access to healthy food, promoting environmental stewardship and conservation, protecting our food supply and robustly funding rural development initiatives. NACo supports an enhanced Rural Development Title in the 2012 Farm Bill, and full funding for flexible rural development programs that allow counties to work regionally and locally to develop infrastructure improvements, community facilities, business development, broadband deployment,


entrepreneurship, healthcare and many other essential programs. NACo, in partnership with over 30 other national organizations, will continue the Campaign for a Renewed Rural Development to spread the message to Congress and the Administration that rural America is in need of support and funding in order to survive and thrive in the new global economy.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Farmers, ranchers, and rural communities will greatly benefit from a fully funded 2012 Farm Bill.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Supporting the White House Rural Council

Issue: Improvement of Rural Policy. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the President’s decision to create the White House Rural

Council and pledges to work with Council Chairman Tom Vilsack, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, to bring forward the perspectives of rural counties to the council.

Background: On June 9, the White House announced the establishment of the first White House Rural Council. The White House Rural Council will coordinate programs across the federal government to encourage public-private partnerships to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural communities.

Chaired by Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, the Council will be responsible for providing recommendations for investment in rural areas and will coordinate Federal engagement with a variety of rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, and state, local, and tribal governments.

The Council will focus on economic issues, including topics such as increasing the flow of capital to rural areas, promoting innovation, expanding digital and physical networks, and natural resources. NACo will work to ensure that rural county officials are included in the Council’s public input process.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Increased focus on rural economic development challenges and opportunities will spotlight impediments to economic growth in rural counties.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Opposing Efforts to Move Rural Housing Programs from USDA to HUD

Issue: Access to rural housing programs. Adopted Policy: NACo opposes efforts to move the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s housing

programs to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Background: On May 25, 2011 the House Financial Services Committee’s Subcommittee on

Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity held a hearing on a draft bill, entitled the “FHA-Rural Regulatory Improvement Act of 2011”, which would move the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) rural housing programs to a new office in the U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) headed by a new Deputy Assistant Secretary for Rural Housing.

This proposed reorganization would remove the largest mission area of USDA Rural Development. The agency would shrink and all rural development programs could suffer and face a similar threat. USDA Rural Development’s regional offices could face consolidation and access for rural counties seeking assistance would then deteriorate. Currently USDA Rural Development has politically appointed state directors with multiple regional offices in every state and it is unclear what structure service delivery would take under HUD. The rural housing reorganization is just one reform in the draft bill, which also seeks to reform FHA and Ginnie Mae. The administration has not taken a formal position on the rural housing reorganization, but it does not appear that HUD or USDA is interested in this change. Support for the draft bill is being led by subcommittee chair Judy Biggert (R-IL) and Financial Services Chairman Spencer Bachus (R-AL).


Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Decreased access to rural housing programs and a weakened commitment to USDA Rural Development will hamper rural economic development efforts.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Supporting Foreign Aid Reform

Issue: U.S. foreign aid. Adopted Policy: NACo supports legislation to reform foreign aid by eliminating waste and

promoting fair, free market programs that will benefit American farmers, ranchers and rural counties. Background: Over the past 50 years, the legislative foundation for U.S. foreign aid has evolved

largely by amending the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (P.L. 87-195), the primary statutory basis for U.S. foreign aid programs and enacting separate freestanding laws to reflect specific U.S. foreign policy interests. According to the Congressional Research Service, many organizations describe U.S. foreign aid programs as fragmented, cumbersome, and not finely tuned to address needs and national security interests. Lack of a comprehensive congressional reauthorization of foreign aid for half of those 50 years is a major cause of fragmented and weak programs.

In May 2010, President Obama launched the Feed the Future Initiative, which is intended to improve our nation’s response to global hunger and food insecurity. Foreign aid reform was also a key area of focus throughout the 111th Congress. H.R. 2139, the Initiating Foreign Assistance Reform Act of 2009 and S. 1524, the Foreign Assistance Revitalization and Accountability Act of 2009 were both serious efforts to provide a comprehensive update to foreign aid during the last Congress. However, neither bill was enacted.

Congressional and Administration reform efforts should seek to utilize the United States’ advantage in research, innovation and private sector-led growth to focus on creating sustainable economic growth in foreign countries by improving their agricultural sector through improved productivity, expanded markets, trade, and increased economic resilience.

Reform efforts should also ensure that aid is not distorting markets, which hurts U.S. farmers and ranchers. Some current USAID programs, such as the monetization of U.S. food commodities, undercut free market competition and damage the livelihood of farmers in the U.S. and farmers in developing nations. This monetization occurs through several USAID programs that sell U.S. commodities in foreign countries and use these profits to fund development projects in these same countries.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Farmers, ranchers and agriculture dependent counties will benefit from foreign aid reforms that eliminate market distortions.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution to Oppose More Stringent Regulation of Particulate Matter (PM or Dust)

Issue: Particulate Matter Regulation. Adopted Policy: NACo opposes any attempts by the Environmental Protection Agency to

impose regulation of Particulate Matter (PM) at levels more stringent than current standards. Background: In the latest step in its review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

(NAAQS), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established the foundation for unprecedented regulation of dust. According to EPA’s Second Draft Policy Assessment for Particulate Matter (PM), EPA may consider regulating coarse PM at levels as low as 65-85 µg/m3, twice as stringent as the current standard.

It would be virtually impossible for many critical U.S. industries to comply with this standard, even with use of best-management practices to control dust. All American want healthy air for our communities, but the EPA’s Draft Policy Assessment would include regulation of everyday dust kicked up by a car driving down a dirt road.

Because of the high dust levels found in arid climates, many critical western industries have a difficult time meeting the current standard of 150 µg/m3. In some of these areas, “no-till” days have


already been proposed for agriculture, severely hindering farmers’ ability to maintain productive operations.

Farmers could be fined for everyday activities like driving a tractor down a dirt road or tilling a field. It would effectively bring economic growth and development to a halt in many areas of the country.

If EPA regulates dust at the level of 65-85 µg/m3, areas across the country would be classified as “nonattainment,” forcing states to impose extreme dust-control requirements on businesses across the board.

The current PM standard was set conservatively low. EPA itself acknowledges the current standard was based on a desire to be cautious, and not on clear evidence that this very stringent level was necessary to protect against adverse public health effects. This is especially true for the type of rural dust predominantly found in agricultural and other resource-based operations.

The policy assessment is the latest step in EPA’s ongoing review of the PM NAAQS, as required every five years under the Clean Air Act. The document will serve as the basis of EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee’s (CASAC) consideration about whether to revise the current PM standard.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: More stringent regulation of Particulate Matter levels will increase costs for dust suppression for both urban and rural Counties.



COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

STATEMENT OF BASIC PHILOSOPHY

The National Association of Counties recognizes the critical role of county governments in the overall economic vitality of our nation through the development of viable urban, suburban and rural communities. To exercise this role, county officials must implement local policies and intergovernmental initiatives that comprehensively address such issues as affordable housing, economic development, land use planning, commercial development, employment centers and infrastructure capacity.

County governments should ensure that community and economic development resources are accessible to all socioeconomic groups. Moreover, a broad range of resources and responsibilities make county governments the natural political entity to provide leadership in administering programs and delivering services. Many federal and state programs emphasize regional approaches to community and economic development planning. As such, county governments play a vital role in coordination and planning efforts.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

1. The Federal Role in Community Development In order to address the community development social and economic needs in urban,

suburban and rural counties, federal programs must be funded at levels commensurate with national needs. Federal agencies such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Economic Development Administration, the Small Business Administration, the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Tennessee Valley Authority and the Department of Labor are critical for stimulating local economies and leveraging private sector resources.

2. Community Development Block Grants The National Association of Counties strongly supports the concept of federal block grant

funding for community development activities embodied in the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. The CDBG program provides increased opportunities for elected county officials to plan, implement, and evaluate local community development and housing assistance programs.

Under the Act, county officials, and particularly those whose counties receive urban county designation, are afforded additional resources to address long-range physical, social, housing and economic development needs in their jurisdictions in a comprehensive manner. Counties commit Community Development Block Grant funds to projects which are determined to meet local priorities in addressing development, housing, economic infrastructure and low income needs.

Recognizing that these funds are a limited resource, NACo supports the flexible use of CDBG funds to address certain immediate and unanticipated national priorities in line with the following principles:

That national priorities not diminish local priorities and commitments. That additional funding must be provided for any new initiatives or responsibilities to

be under-taken with Community Development Block Grant funds.


That any new initiatives that are proposed to be funded with Community Development Block Grant funds must further the original purposes of the act or be funded under a new title with separate funding.

NACo endorses the linkage provided in the Act between community development and housing assistance programs. Counties are required to submit consolidated plans. This provision gives counties increased leverage in addressing not only the housing needs of those residing, or expected to reside, in their jurisdictions, but also in determining housing location and evaluating the growth implications of such development.

In order for the potential of the CDBG program be fully realized, it must be fully funded and properly administered. NACo urges the Congress, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the Office of Management and Budget to comprehensively review the adequacy of present and future program levels, so that all counties, not just those which receive a direct entitlement, can participate in this important program area.

Finally, NACo recommends that Congress stop the proliferation of set-asides within the CDBG and HOME programs.

3. Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities The National Association of Counties supports federally designated empowerment zones

and enterprise communities that respect local regulations and local contributions to the success of the zone and are distributed equitably throughout the nation and between urban and rural counties. Local governments should undertake a voluntary review of local provisions which might impede economic development.

Federal waivers should not override state and local laws or regulations. Any local, state or federal incentives to establish zones should emphasize the retention and expansion of small businesses which create the majority of new jobs.

The program should provide for local government input in developing and implementing comprehensive plans, so that counties’ critical role in delivering and coordinating a vast array of social services is maintained. Where feasible, employment aspects of zones should be coordinated with job training services.

4. Tax-Exempt Industrial Bonds NACo urges Congress to increase from $10 million to $20 million, with an annual

adjustment based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI), the amount of tax-exempt industrial development bonds that can be issued on behalf of manufacturing facilities.

5. The Community Reinvestment Act The National Association of Counties strongly supports the Community Reinvestment

Act (CRA) and opposes any effort to weaken the Act, because continuing disparities in mortgage lending adversely impact low-income, distressed, and minority communities. Since its passage in 1977, the CRA has been responsible for many loans and investments to traditionally underserved inner-city and rural communities nationwide.

By assisting local governments expand private investment in these neighborhoods, the CRA has helped strengthen the tax base and thus improve the fiscal condition of many communities. Investment in housing and small business development made possible by the CRA has created jobs, expanded homeownership opportunities, and improved neighborhood stability.


HOUSING

A. The Need for Affordable, Workforce and Entry Level Housing—County governments have a responsibility to help assure decent housing for all segments of their population. Counties should continue to identify and meet the needs of very low- low- and moderate-income households, including those with special housing needs. whenever possible, counties should take steps to remove all discrimination in the housing market, including prohibiting exclusionary zoning practices. All levels of government should ensure enforcement of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 through expeditious resolution of allegations of fair housing violations.

Concentrations of assisted housing for very low-, low- and moderate-income families in one geographic area should be avoided and mixed-income housing encouraged. Federal and state governments as well as counties should be aware of the interrelationship of social issues and housing and provide appropriate supportive services and facilities.

Counties should encourage innovations in housing technology, design, approval, and construction in order to lower the cost of decent, safe, and sanitary shelter. National performance criteria and minimum standards for building materials and practices should be developed along with expanded research on building construction which take into account energy conservation. To the greatest extent possible, housing should be constructed with energy efficiency in mind to reduce increasing housing costs and resource consumption.

The federal government should prepare a model building code which includes separate building codes for modular, mobile and other forms of factory built housing.

Counties and states also should assess the impact of local land use policies on housing costs. Federal, state, and local agencies should periodically review their offsite and on-site development standards, as well as their methods and procedures as to zoning, subdivision controls, and environmental standards, to ensure that they reflect the state-of-the-art and that their standards are not excessive. When appropriate, housing should be planned to allow homeowners to live close to work in order to reduce commuting costs and use of energy. The federal government should not make housing and community development funding contingent upon HUD approval of a jurisdiction's local regulations affecting housing affordability and availability.

B. The Federal Role in Housing—The federal government should follow a national housing policy that embodies clear annual housing goals, provides adequate and predictable funding levels, offers incentives for energy efficient buildings and builds on partnerships with state and local governments and the private and nonprofit sectors in support of new construction and rehabilitation for rental and homeownership properties, particularly for low-and moderate income persons.

Federal policy should allow for voluntary adoption of fair share housing programs on a metropolitan area basis, address the housing needs of rural America, expand the federal government's role in credit enhancement, and preserve the Federal Housing Administration's single and multifamily housing insurance programs.

NACo supports legislation that makes funding available to state and local governments to address affordable and workforce housing needs.

The lack of affordable housing at the state and local level is a national crisis. over the years, housing has become more and more unaffordable. Homeowners are forced to either live


beyond their financial resources and/or live long distances from the communities in which they work. This commute creates transit and social issues that put demands on counties.

1. The HOME Investment Partnerships Program The Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act is landmark legislation which

reestablishes a major federal commitment to housing. The HOME Investment Partnerships program, which is the centerpiece of this Act, builds upon the significant capacity and experience of county and other local and state governments to design and implement affordable housing programs for low- and moderate-income persons. In order to maximize the program’s effectiveness, county governments must be allowed considerable flexibility in their use of HOME funds to address identified local needs.

NACo recommends that 60 percent of HOME funds be allocated to urban counties and metropolitan cities and the balance to the states. Awarding the bulk of funds to local governments reduces bureaucracies at the state level which impede local flexibility.

NACo urges Congress to pass legislation authorizing a federal housing production program within the HOME program. NACo urges Congress to fund HOME at $4.25 billion for basic HOME activities and an additional $2 billion for housing production.

The National Association of Counties supports authorization of the “American Dream Downpayment Assistance Act,” within HOME as long as it authorizes additional funding beyond basic formula grants and it preserves HOME’s existing targeting.

2. Federally Owned Residential Property The federal government, due to foreclosures and abandonment of federally insured

houses, owns thousands of residential properties throughout the country. These properties are not only a tax burden for local government, but also contribute to rapid neighborhood deterioration and decline. Most are vacant and subject to vandalism, becoming breeding grounds for crime and delinquent behavior.

NACo strongly believes that the federal government, in cooperation with local governments, should provide mechanisms for returning these homes to sound condition. All local efforts to rehabilitate and occupy these properties should be supported. Counties should cooperate with the federal government in rehabilitating and returning these properties to the housing market. In no case, however, should the federal government ignore its responsibility for the condition of these homes and shift the burden for reclaiming these properties to state, county, or city government.

3. Preservation of the Low-Income Housing Stock Many low-income rental housing units receive federal assistance, and many are insured

through the Federal Housing Administration (FHA). In the absence of a preservation strategy, many of these units are likely to be lost from the

low-income rental inventory through defaults on mortgages, and others could be lost if owners prepay mortgages and convert properties to market-rent. NACo supports strategies that preserve the supply of low-income rental housing stock.

NACo generally supports legislation that provides a tax credit to help offset the negative tax liability for owners of federally assisted housing to encourage transfer of their property to a preservation entity that agrees to keep it affordable for a period of at least 30 years.

Such efforts will minimize the risk of property deterioration and loss of economic value of affordable housing units.


4. Restructuring the FHA Portfolio The National Association of Counties supports refining the Federal Housing

Administration (FHA) portfolio. The FHA multifamily portfolio must address federal budgetary concerns and ease federal regulatory burdens which have increased the cost of operating Section 8 housing for owners and the cost of subsidizing such housing to HUD.

5. Preserving Section 8 Housing The National Association of Counties supports preserving Section 8 housing and

preventing the displacement of the tenants. NACo urges the administration and Congress to take the necessary steps to preserve local communities’ stock of affordable housing by adopting tax policies that encourage the transfer of properties outside of Community Development Block Grants, HOME, and other HUD programs.

NACo urges Congress to pass legislation amending the Housing Choice Voucher Program to improve its use in the development and preservation of housing for low and moderate income families. Specifically, NACo calls on Congress to (1) expand the limit for project-based vouchers from 20 percent to 35 percent of a locality’s allocation; (2) consistent with current performance standards, requiring HUD to reallocate unused vouchers to other jurisdictions in a specified time period annually; (3) modify the targeting requirements to allow 60 percent of the vouchers to be made available for households at or below 30 percent of median income and up to 40 to 50 percent of median income; and (4) restore the 50 percentile of the fair market rent standard to promote the deconcentration of families in poverty.

6. Use of Tax Code for Multifamily Rental Housing The National Association of Counties supports incentives in the tax code to stimulate

investment in affordable housing, including continuing the ability of counties to issue tax-exempt single and multifamily housing bonds and allocate Low-Income Housing Tax Credits. The National Association of Counties (NACo) supports legislation amending Section 149(b) of the Internal Revenue Code to permanently add Federal Home Loan Banks to the list of entities permitted to credit enhance tax exempt bonds.

NACo also supports removing the penalty which lowers the value of the tax credit from nine percent to four percent when used in conjunction with tax-exempt financing for multifamily housing.

7. The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit The National Association of Counties supports permanent status of the Low-Income

Housing Tax Credit. The credit accounts for many of the new apartments constructed in the United States, and virtually all of the apartments constructed or rehabilitated for low-income renters. Permanent status of this tax credit must be maintained so that potential investors will not be discouraged from making investments and housing providers can make appropriate planning and administrative decisions.

NACo is very concerned that any future proposal to eliminate the double taxation of corporate dividends through an “excludable dividend amount” (EDA) would have an adverse impact on tax-exempt bonds and Low-Income Housing Tax Credits. NACo urges the Administration to modify any future proposal to eliminate any potential jeopardy to these important affordable housing programs.

8. Commercial Revitalization Tax Credit NACo supports the Commercial Revitalization Tax Credit (CRTC) to provide business

growth in distressed areas. The CRTC can be an important and worthwhile incentive for business


investment in specially-designated revitalization areas to bring communities back to life. Private business investment in these revitalization areas will help boost the economic vitality of these communities, and provide opportunities for new job growth. New business construction and business rehabilitation can enhance the physical environment of distressed areas in communities around the nation, while improving their social and economic conditions.

9. Single-Family Homeownership Tax Credit NACo endorses the concept of a homeownership tax credit designed to provide

homeownership opportunities for low and moderate income families. Homeownership gives families a stake in their communities and increases the stability and vitality of neighborhoods. Local elected officials support legislative efforts towards the creation of an investor-based tax credit that would encourage the development of single-family affordable housing.

10. Government Sponsored Enterprises The National Association of Counties (NACo) strongly supports the continuation of Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s role of serving as the secondary market for the Nation’s mortgage system.

11. Lead-Based Paint NACo supports additional funding to offset the substantial increase in the cost to

rehabilitate housing units using CDBG and HOME funds due to the presence of lead-based paint hazards.

Many communities have experienced a substantial increase in the cost of their CDBG and HOME funded rehabilitation and homeownership programs to implement lead-based paint mitigation strategies, without a source of funds to pay for the increased cost.

NACo also requests that waivers be provided to communities where there is a lack of certified lead-based paint professionals.

This regulation was issued under sections 1012 and 1013 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, which is Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, and covers all housing assisted through CDBG and HOME, including housing where no children under the age of six are present. It has been documented that there is a lack of a sufficient number of trained and certified lead-based paint professionals, such as risk assessors, inspectors, abatement contractors, and laboratories to implement the regulation in all communities. In addition, this regulation will impact the timely expenditure of CDBG and HOME funds. NACo supports federal support of additional resources to help local governments implement the requirements of this federally mandated regulation.

NACo supports revision of the National Manufactured Housing and Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 to make and keep current; and address concerns with the construction and safety standard of manufactured homes. NACo supports the modernization of the Act by establishing a process for the development, revision and interpretation of federal construction and safety standards for manufactured homes.

12. Homeless Assistance The National Association of Counties supports full funding of federal homeless

assistance programs. The National Association of Counties supports efforts to convert categorical housing programs for the homeless into a block grant program. The programs should give localities sufficient flexibility to address identified local priorities and needs. Localities should be provided with sufficient funds for program administration and capacity building of local service providers. Caps should not apply to supportive services. Finally, urban, suburban,


and rural counties should be able to form consortia to effectively implement continuum of care plans.

NACo strongly recommends that Congress and the Administration enact legislation that provides dedicated full funding for existing Shelter Plus Care programs that are separate from the HUD McKinney Act Supportive Housing Program, while maintaining current Shelter Plus Care regulations and consistency with the successful Continuum of Care approach.

NACo urges Congress to support legislation that would help create and sustain at least 150,000 units within ten years of permanent supportive housing—with specific funding for supportive services—for people who are experiencing long term homelessness.

NACo also calls for an end to the practice of discharging large numbers of people into homelessness from hospitals, mental health and chemical dependency treatment facilities, jails and prisons without adequate community support systems. NACo commits to urging Congress to make investments in additional affordable and supportive housing alternatives from mainstream systems, so that supportive housing is available to those who are homeless or would be homeless without it.

NACo supports legislation to provide additional federal resources to develop housing with supportive services, including mental health services, to help the reintegration of “public safety” ex-offenders into the community and the housing market. These additional federal resources must not be at the expense of existing HUD programs, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, or any other federally funded domestic program.

NACo endorses the Bush Administration’s national goal of ending chronic homelessness in ten years. NACo supports the 10-year planning process of the Interagency Council on Homelessness, which recognizes that the abolition of chronic homelessness require collaboration and coordination of resources in performance-based strategies at all levels of government, together with community institutions, businesses, and faith-based organizations. NACo encourages counties to develop 10-Year Plans incorporating the latest research on effective engagement, housing, and services strategies to prevent and end chronic homelessness.

12. Special Needs Housing

A. Housing Options for an Aging Population: The National Association of Counties supports the development of local housing options which assist older persons to continue living in their dwellings. These options may include home equity conversion, home maintenance, accessory apartments or other secondary units and shared/group residences. When older persons are no longer able to live in their existing dwellings, their options should include congregate housing, continuing care retirement communities, assisted living and other appropriately designed multi-family or group living complexes.

In appropriate circumstances, family caregivers who wish to alter their homes to provide needed non-institutional support for older parents should not be penalized by zoning regulations and higher property taxes from adopting their residences for this purpose. Efforts should be made to support older persons living in their own dwellings or in congregate housing through the integrated delivery of social services in the community.

B. Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS—There is an urgent need for communities to provide appropriate and affordable housing for persons and families living with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome and human immunodeficiency virus (AIDS) who are at greater risk of illness and possible homelessness.

In order to better coordinate the delivery of health care and housing services, counties as well as cities should be eligible to be allocating agencies for metropolitan areas under


the Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS (HOPWA) program. Counties and cities throughout the country have demonstrated that they will develop fair allocation and implementation procedures that meet the needs of entire communities.

13. Refining the Mortgage Revenue Bond Program NACo supports legislation that would repeal the so-called “10-year” rule and provide an

alternative method for calculating purchase price limits under the Mortgage Revenue Bond (MRB) program.

NACo urges Congress to pass legislation to preserve Qualified Veterans Mortgage Bonds (QVMB), bonding authority for five states (Alaska, California, Oregon, Texas and Wisconsin) and remove the prohibition of lending QVMB monies to Post-76 Veterans.

14. Supporting the Report of the Millennial Housing Commission In general, NACo believes the Commission did an admirable job in making the case for

why housing matters. It is the single largest expenditure for most Americans, it is an indispensable building block of healthy neighborhoods shaping community life, and it provides a major stimulus to the nation’s economy, generating more than one-fifth of gross domestic product. It also provided a wealth of data on existing housing programs and policies. However, NACo believes the Commission erred in its overreliance on state housing agencies as the preferred delivery mechanism for new housing resources, overlooking the long and successful track record of local governments and their housing agencies in addressing their unique housing needs.

A. State and Local Roles in Housing—States and local governments should collaborate on their respective roles in reducing housing costs and increasing the supply of affordable units, including establishment of state and local housing finance agencies. This analysis might consider ways to seek uniformity in tax assessment practices.

State governments also should adopt legislation clarifying the respective rights of owners/occupants, and landlords/tenants. Moreover, NACo urges industry groups and government at all levels to implement programs and take legislative/regulatory action necessary to eliminate predatory lending practices.

15. Employer Assisted Housing The National Association of Counties supports legislation that would encourage

employers, counties, and municipalities to invest in employer-assisted housing programs by providing a tax credit to partially offset the costs of such programs.

COUNTY ROLE IN HOUSING

1. Planning Local elected officials, after appropriate citizen input, should develop guidelines for areas

of development opportunity (where growth should be encouraged and facilitated) based on explicit standards to protect critical areas. Any state and/or regional review of local plans should only be for consistency with these guidelines and standards. Local land use plans should be based, among other things, upon demographic and marketing trends and upon local capital improvement projects which provide the infrastructure for growth.

Natural resource inventories (as opposed to environmental impact statements) should be undertaken on a metropolitan area basis to identify hazardous areas where no development can take place, areas of critical concern, such as productive agricultural land, where limited


development can take place, and areas where no impediments exist. Federal standards for programs necessary for growth (such as water and sewer funding) should be based on the growth needs of each area.

NACo supports county planning and land use policy that contemplates growth and development patterns occurring within a county and the surrounding region. Recognizing that land use decisions are inherently local in nature, NACo strongly supports county government decision-making that appropriately reflects the county’s needs in accommodating growth, as well as the will of county residents.

2. Housing Element in the Local Plan Counties should prepare and adopt housing elements as part of their comprehensive

plans. This housing component should include projections of present and future housing needs, and take into account land zoned for different types of lot sizes, types of housing (including manufactured housing), and different income levels. In addition, it should set realistic annual goals for the number of units or persons to receive housing assistance and make provision for the public facilities. The housing element should be coordinated with all other related plans supportive to the housing element such as utilities, human services programs, open space, recreation, trails, schools, churches, commercial areas, agriculture, transportation, and other community services and facilities.

3. Local Land Use Policies and Procedures Zoning, subdivision regulations, timing of development, and permitting procedures have

a direct, although not the major, impact on the cost of housing. Recognizing, therefore, that county government can contribute, at least in part, to stemming increases in housing costs, the National Association of Counties recommends the following policies:

A. Inclusionary Zoning: Incentives such as inclusionary zoning and density bonuses should be enacted to expand affordable housing.

B. Permitting Processes: Legislation enacted by states or local governments involving zoning, subdivision regulation, or environmental protection, and their implementing regulations, should be reviewed regularly for consistency, to reduce duplication, achieve simplicity (including those areas where regional qualification and criteria are necessary) and clarity.

The number of permits required for development should be reduced through consolidation of overlapping regulations. Intra-governmental and intergovernmental consolidation of hearings and interchange ability of approvals (or at least interchangeability of information requirements) can reduce delay while maintaining opportunities for public involvement.

Local governments should require that on-site improvements exclusively benefiting the home buyer be included as part of development costs. On and off-site improvements benefiting a population larger than the development should be shared between the developer and the community.

Counties should prepare housing and building permit registries which describe requirements, procedures, and regulations in specific terms. Application forms should be consolidated and/or standardized. Criteria for determination of application completeness should be developed and published. Preliminary conferences should be held with developers (particularly small or inexperienced ones) to assure that requirements, procedures, and regulations are clearly understood, and an early determination of application completeness


should be made. Local governments should consider using a zoning hearing examiner as a way of reducing development processing time.

NACo commends the Department on its commitment to reducing regulatory barriers. However, it must be noted that zoning and land use decision making is an inherently local process, subject to a range of influences including market forces, citizen input and political realities. Moreover, there is a concern that some communities without the capacity to undertake technical or personnel changes necessary to implement practices that streamline permitting and zoning processes may lose important federal resources. Regardless, local governments are deeply committed to increasing the supply of affordable housing and agrees that steps can be taken to reduce regulatory barriers.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

A. The County Role in Economic Development County officials should exercise strong leadership in creating a supportive environment

for business investment by promoting diversified economies, providing quality education and training and involving the non-profit and private sectors. Economic development efforts benefit counties through the retention and creation of jobs, the broadening of county tax bases, and improvement of the overall quality of life. States should develop policies supporting business retention and expansion and implement coordinated processes which involve county governments in initial business relocation decisions and promote positive county competition in attracting firms.

1. Economic Development Planning and Resource Development: County governments should adopt economic development as a high priority. These efforts should support public education and vocational and on-the-job training; develop programs that focus on welfare recipients, displaced workers, the unemployed and underemployed, disadvantaged youth, minority populations; and appropriately involve neighborhood groups and other special purpose organizations.

Counties should design and implement comprehensive economic development plans that are responsive to local needs. These long-range plans should guide county growth, development, and redevelopment. Counties should encourage the participation of city governments, public agencies, utilities, and the private sector in the formulation of economic development plans. County economic development plans should generate innovative financial strategies that leverage private investment through public-private partnerships.

2. Land Use: Locally adopted land use and zoning plans should serve as the basis for determining the best locations for economic development and redevelopment activities. These policies and plans should be sensitive to the needs for balanced growth. Plans and policies should strive to maintain the variety and quality of residential, commercial and industrial uses, and preserve the environment and areas of historic significance.

3. Small and Medium Business Development: Counties must work with local financial institutions and other sources of capital to assure the availability of funds for small and medium size businesses. Whether the need be legal, financial, or marketing expertise, counties should disseminate information, and aggressively market services that are available and evaluate the effectiveness of these services. As a component of these efforts, counties should work with the private sector in facilitating the creation and expansion of minority-and women-owned business enterprises; and promote the development of small and medium size businesses.


To encourage the commercialization of technologies developed by small businesses, county governments should work closely with universities, business groups and the federal, state and city governments. Counties should strive to identify firms which export products and services to national and/or international markets.

4. Commemorative Projects: The National Association of Counties supports county projects such as the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center, which will foster an open, continuous dialogue on the subject of freedom and commemorate the cooperation, courage, and extraordinary heroism of enslaved Americans who sought freedom and those who assisted them during the pursuit of that goal. NACo encourages counties to recognize and commemorate the commitment of individuals whose acts exemplify the American spirit of liberty and justice for all.

B. The Federal Role in Economic Development 1. Clean Up and Redevelopment of Brownfields: The federal government should

remove barriers and provide incentives for counties to identify and remediate contaminated abandoned or substantially underutilized industrial and commercial land (brownfields) as a catalyst for redevelopment of economically distressed areas.

NACo supports legislation to authorize a federal brownfields program which includes enhanced funding for counties. NACo urges that a portion of EPA funds be used for revolving loans for cleanup activities as well as for site assessments. Funds out of HUD and the Economic Development Administration should be used for planning projected uses and redevelopment of sites. However, local governments should be given flexibility in determining appropriate uses. HUD money for brownfields should be freestanding, and not a set-aside out of Community Development Block Grants. NACo supports the use of Superfund Trust Fund monies by EPA, with funds - preferably grants rather than loans allocated directly to local governments for site assessments and cleanups of brownfield sites.

NACo supports voluntary cleanup programs operated by the states for brownfield sites, but urges that state programs be required to operate in conformity with existing minimum federal standards and guidelines. Counties should have the authority to request that EPA list a brownfield site on the Superfund national priorities list if, in the process of assessing a site, the county determines that it is more toxic than originally believed.

Brownfields are abandoned or under-utilized commercial/industrial sites that often have environmental contamination related to their previous use, but are potential resources for community economic revitalization. Counties must be protected from potential future environmental problems related to inadequately cleaned-up brownfields. Redevelopment of these sites, in rural as well as urban counties, is one component of county government’s broader interest in achieving sustainable development on a regional basis and reducing urban sprawl.

Many brownfield sites remain underutilized because funds are available neither to assess the presence and extent of contamination nor to clean up environmental hazards. Federal resources are essential for assessment and remediation, as well as to provide incentives for private investment. Flexibility in the types of federal assistance is critical because brownfield sites vary in their marketability, the magnitude of redevelopment activities necessary to attract investors, the type of private investment, and the projected rate of return to the investor.

Brownfields exist in rural as well and urban and suburban counties. Redevelopment of these abandoned or underutilized sites can stimulate economic revitalization in the


surrounding areas, and preserve green space by providing an alternative to unchecked urban sprawl.

2. Superfund Program The National Association of Counties opposes the reduction of funding to the

Superfund program, which provides for the assessment and cleanup of hazardous wastes at contaminated and abandoned industrial sites. NACo supports full funding of federal programs that provide for the assessment, cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields sites. The adaptive reuse of brownfields sites will help revitalize distressed areas in communities. NACo opposes a reduction of funding for Superfund program that would limit or diminish the effectiveness of federal, state or local efforts towards the revitalization of brownfields sites.

3. Sustainable Communities NACo supports legislation that would encourage agencies at the federal and regional

level to integrate housing, transportation, energy and environmental planning to support sustainable development that makes the most efficient use of existing transportation and other infrastructure. It would promote future transportation, and infrastructure, including water, sewer, and housing development to maximize economic growth and the quality of life in a region while minimizing traffic congestion, environmental impacts, and energy use in urban, suburban and rural areas.

4. Emerging Markets Congress has passed emerging markets/renewal communities legislation. NACo

supports efforts to open new markets in underserved areas where the economic boom has not reached, and supports promoting private sector investment in untapped markets. Investments should especially be focused on emerging minority businesses in order to address real growth in both the geographic and commercial potentials of underserved markets and the businesses serving those markets.

Certain sectors have not been targeted in promoting increased marketing and availability for business expansion despite having the necessary population and skilled workforce. Improving access to capital for low-income households including minorities and traditionally underserved borrowers by bringing private enterprise into underserved neighborhoods and communities should be encouraged.

5. Infrastructure and Public Works Counties must provide and support sufficient infrastructure and support services to

generate increased economic activity. To sustain and increase economic activity in counties, federal, state and city governments must assist in the rehabilitation and expansion of physical infrastructure and support services, including transportation, utility, water treatment and waste management systems, and other essential services. Changes in federal regulations have significantly affected the cost of providing infrastructure capacity. Counties must work to ensure balanced regulations that protect the environment, but do not increase costs unreasonably. The National Association of Counties strongly supports:

• a national commitment, shared by all levels of government and the private sector, to increase capital spending;

• more flexible administration of federal and state mandates to allow cost-effective methods of compliance;


• accelerated spending of the federal highway, transit, aviation, and waterways trust funds;

• removal of unwarranted limits on the ability of state and local governments to help themselves through tax-exempt financing; and

• a rational capital budgeting process at all levels of government. • Funding the Resource Conservation and Development Program (RC and D)

within the Agriculture Appropriations bill at $54 million.

6. The New Homestead Economic Opportunity Act NACo urges Congress to pass the New Homestead Act to strengthen rural counties

suffering from high rates of outmigration.

7. Challenges and Local Impacts of Base Closure The adverse economic impacts of military base closures and realignments are

devastating for small or rural communities and metropolitan areas. Immediate effects include a loss of civilian and military jobs, an erosion of the tax base, increased local government costs in providing services to the base, the presence of substandard buildings and infrastructure which may not meet local codes, a decline in real estate values which can trigger a drop in property tax revenue, and adverse impacts on banks when homeowners are unable to pay their mortgages.

A. Federal Oversight of Base Closures: Efficient conversion of closed bases to productive civilian uses requires the coordinated efforts of several departments of the federal government. Conflicting missions within DoD and among other federal departments and agencies have slowed the base reuse process and added to the difficulties communities face.

• Congress and DoD have made unrealistic estimates of the profits that the federal government will receive from reuse of closed installations. As a result, the conversion process is delayed, because base commanders are often forced to make economically unrealistic demands in the sale or lease of base facilities or commanders do not exercise their interim leasing authority, but instead turn this over to the disposal or leasing agencies.

• An Assistant Secretary of Defense should be appointed in DoD whose primary responsibilities are to ensure rapid conversion of facilities and economic development. This senior official must have the authority and responsibility to administer base closure activities for the three branches of the military and coordinate actions taken by federal departments and agencies which impact conversions. This official should engage in continuing dialogue with affected communities and provide a forum for communities to bring grievances, resolve disputes, and assure consistency in the interpretation and implementation of the same law.

This office also would serve as a vital clearinghouse of best practices in the event that more base closures are authorized in the future.

• The Secretary of Defense should provide clear orders through the service secretaries to all commanders of installations designated for closure that their primary mission is to facilitate swift civilian reuse of the installation while minimizing adverse impacts on the community. Base commanders should be encouraged to enter into leases as they are authorized to do.

B. Economic Adjustment Assistance—To maximize the fiscal benefit of base closure, the federal government must assist in the rehabilitation of substandard base facilities and


provide creative financing terms to purchasers or developers of closed bases. Economic Adjustment Assistance, from the Office of Economic Adjustment or the President’s Economic Adjustment Committee, is absolutely necessary. Such funding should not be limited to reuse planning, but should also be available for special projects on a discretionary basis and for preparing strategic marketing plans, including development, printing and distribution of marketing materials.

“Bridge funding” to enable communities to assume responsibility for large airfields and other military facilities with civilian uses should continue for several years after closure, until the facilities can begin to generate revenue. To preserve taxpayers’ investment in these assets, facilities should be maintained, and equipment that is essential for their functioning should remain intact for long-term economic development following conversion.

To assist with economic stimulus, the federal government (and state governments) should enter into joint marketing agreements with local governments to promote development of these properties.

Continued support for projects related to base closure through the Economic Development Administration remains important. Affected local governments should be eligible for federal dollars which can be used for local priorities, including making loans or grants to businesses that utilize former bases. Any loan repayments should go into a revolving loan fund for use by local governments in financing additional conversion activities.

DoD must explore alternative methods to finance the transfer of bases out of federal ownership and the development of new, productive uses on the property. Financing often can be provided without expense to the federal government merely by extending the time period during which an installment purchase of a facility must be paid.

Coordinating the disposition and reuse plans with funding available through other federal departments, such as Labor and Transportation, will allow the federal government to obtain a greater overall, long term value for closed bases while mitigating adverse local impacts.

The introduction of Economic Development Conveyances (EDCs) in recent years has been an innovative and important step in facilitating quicker redevelopment. No-cost EDCs have been of particular importance to rural communities that do not have the resources to buy base property for redevelopment. The further step in 1999 to both expand no-cost EDCs to all communities and to allow communities experiencing changed economic circumstances to renegotiate earlier EDC agreements has been integral in many reuse projects moving forward. The Department of Defense must continue to develop creative strategies such as this to help communities cope with base closure.

• Allow local reuse authorities to issue tax-exempt industrial development bonds, to serve as business incentives and provide financial support to local closure authorities during the conversion phase.

• Closing military bases should be made foreign trade zones and federal empowerment zones with the associated tax advantages and investment credits to enable them to attract private investment.

a. Any national infrastructure financing program, such as TEA-21, should set aside funds for infrastructure improvements on former military installations.

C. Property Transfer—It is imperative to design and implement a review and

transfer process that is consistent among the operating branches within DoD. This needs to be


responsive to community reuse objectives and provide prompt transfer of property to accomplish early economic recovery.

• Interim leases should be longer than one year so that the local governing entity is better positioned to recruit private businesses and should be processed within sixty days as the law requires.

• DoD should act swiftly to implement P.L. 102-426. This bill requires prompt identification, parcelization and transfer of uncontaminated parcels of base property.

• Negotiated sales of base property should require congressional review only if valued at $1 million or more. Current law requires congressional review for sales worth $100,000 or more.

• In developing reuse plans, communities should take into consideration the needs of all citizens, including the homeless residing in the vicinity, in deciding the most appropriate use of the property. However, initiation of planning should not be delayed by a federal preference for use of the base by homeless providers. Instead, local redevelopment authorities should assist interested groups in evaluating property at the base, consult with representatives of homeless people, and take their proposed uses into account in developing a reuse plan.

• Key “personal property” items such as machinery, equipment, and rolling stock should also be made available to assist in local economic recovery.

• DoD should reexamine the policy which precludes the demolition of buildings prior to transferring bases. Many buildings are unusable because, for example, they contain asbestos, or do not comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and state and local building codes.

• Interim agreements should give local governments preference in exercising police powers and rendering caretaker services. The federal government should reimburse local governments for maintenance costs.

D. Environmental Cleanup—Environmental contamination on bases must be cleaned to a standard that not only protects human health, but also permits reuse of the facility in accordance with locally generated, legally defensible land use plans without the local agencies or private sector having to incur additional cleanup costs in order to reuse the facility.

Local jurisdictions must have the opportunity to be active participants in all phases of environmental cleanup, including evaluation of site conditions and selection and implementation of remediation programs. The timetable for environmental impact statements, parcelization, and prioritization should be coordinated with civilian reuse plans.

• A federal finance bank could be authorized to purchase federally guaranteed bonds to be issued by communities for local acquisition of closing base facilities and upgrade the property with minimal down payments and at low interest rates.

E. Job Retraining—The Economic Dislocation and Worker Adjustment Act (EDWAA) administered under Workforce Investment Act (WIA) currently serves displaced workers including those displaced due to defense downsizing.

WIA programs should continue to be utilized as the framework of any new comprehensive retraining program for dislocated workers.


F. Support for Non-Base Federal Installations—Appropriate support should be made available to communities impacted by the closure or significant downsizing of other non-base federal installations such as national laboratories, enrichment facilities and other DoD and Department of Energy facilities.

8. Trade Agreements NACo is a strong supporter of free trade activities that enhance the economic base of

local governments and promote county participation in the global economy. However, NACo opposes the adjudication of disputes arising out of trade agreements in a manner that preempts local government authority, circumvents domestic judicial processes, and grants greater rights to foreign investors than those guaranteed to U.S. citizens by federal, state and local law.

NACo urges Congress to review and create a report card immediately on existing and new Free Trade Agreements to determine their effect on U.S. manufacturing industries, workers, and agriculture, and send the report back to NACo.

9. State Role in Economic Growth The states are urged to involve counties and other local governments as full partners in

planning and implementing statewide economic development strategies. Where authorized by law, states should work with county governments in the allocation of tax exempt bond authority and Low Income Housing Tax Credits in order to achieve equitable distribution of these tools throughout the state. States should consider appropriate legislation which would provide a sound method for acquiring land for future public urban, suburban and rural development uses.

10. Regional Economic Development Commissions NACo supports the concept of regional economic development commissions, which

would facilitate comprehensive approaches to economic and infrastructure development in severely distressed counties, provided that funding for such commissions is not at the expense of funding for traditional economic development programs.

11. Southwest Regional Border Authority The National Association of Counties supports legislation creating a Southwest Regional

Border Authority. This Authority would help distressed southwest border communities implement regional economic development plans that would reduce chronic poverty and improve the quality of life for residents of border counties. NACo supports efforts towards regional economic development that will enhance local government planning capacity for infrastructure and community development.

12. Trade Assistance NACo supports the concept of trade adjustment assistance for local governments. Many

communities may experience a negative change in the local economy as the U.S. marketplace becomes more global. NACo believes that federal resources should be allocated to help alleviate the negative impacts of expanded trade practices, and help communities devise strategies for future economic viability.


COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RESOLUTIONS

Resolution on FY 2012 Appropriations for the Department of Housing and Urban Development

Issue: Support for FY 2012 Appropriations for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties (NACo) urges Congress to support the following levels of funding for core Department of Housing and Urban Development: $3.948 billion in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) formula funding; $1.825 billion in formula funding for the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME); $1.865 billion for Homeless Housing Assistance grants, plus an additional amount to fully fund expiring supportive housing and Shelter Plus Care rent subsidy contracts; full funding for existing Section 8 project-based and tenant-based contracts; and $275 million in Section 108 Loan Guarantee authority; and $150 million for Sustainable Communities Initiative grants.

Background: The President’s FY2012 HUD budget proposes to reduce funding for the CDBG program from $3.948 billion to $3.648 billion (7.5 percent). It also proposes to reduce funding for the HOME program from $1.825 billion to $1.65 billion (9.6 percent). It proposes to eliminate funding for Brownfields Redevelopment Program, Rural Housing and Economic Development Program and Empowerment Zones. It would convert CDBG’s Section 108 Loan Guarantee program to a fee based program and increase borrowing authority from the current $275 million to $500 million. It includes $150 million for the Administration’s Sustainable Communities Initiative and $250 million for the Choice Neighborhood Initiative. The CR for the FY 2011 HUD Appropriations reduced CDBG funding by over 16 percent to $3.3 billion, and HOME funding was cut to $1.6 billion.

It is important for the federal government to restore funding levels for affordable housing and economic development programs in FY 2012. Local governments have used CDBG funds for thousands of activities such as expanding homeownership opportunities; eliminating slum and blight; infrastructure improvements such as roads, water and sewer systems; services at libraries, community centers, adult day care and child after school care facilities; homeless housing assistance; employment training; transportation services; crime awareness; and business and job creation. HOME has an impressive track record, too, in expanding the supply of affordable ownership and rental housing. HOME recently reached the completion of one million affordable housing units.

Congressional support of CDBG, HOME, Section 8 and homeless housing programs will sustain the programs' viability and improve local government flexibility in maintaining vibrant communities. The CDBG and HOME programs have been model federal block grants program for expanding affordable housing opportunities and undertaking neighborhood revitalization.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Funding of HUD's core programs is crucial to state and local governments that provide services to communities at the grassroots level.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Supporting Retention of the Administration’s Foreclosure and Neighborhood Stabilization Programs

Issue: Support federal programs that are intended to prevent and address the foreclosure crisis that has been proposed for elimination in Congress.


Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties (NACo) urges Congress to support three foreclosure programs – Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), the FHA Refinancing Program and the Emergency Mortgage Relief Program; as well as supports the Neighborhood Stabilization Program 3.

Background: The House recently passed legislation to terminate three Administration programs that address foreclosure prevention—the Home Affordable Modification Program, which has helped 521,630 homeowners modify their subprime mortgages, the FHA Refinancing program and the Emergency Mortgages Relief program that provides funding for up to 12 months for homeowners facing foreclosure. It also terminates the $1billion included in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 that provided $1 billion for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program 3. That program provides funding by formula to counties, cities, and states for acquisition, rehabilitation and disposition of abandoned and foreclosed homes to prevent and address blight. These programs are a critical part of a comprehensive approach to addressing the current housing crisis.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Continued implementation of these programs is needed as part of a national effort to prevent or address foreclosure.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Supporting the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Issue: Support changes to the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties (NACo) supports full funding for, and changes to, the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. Background: NACo recommends the following:

• Congress and stakeholders need to know accurately what it will cost to fully fund the program on an annual basis. Annual renewals should be based on the weighted average cost for the most recent 12 month period, adjusted by an inflation factor for the area and multiplied by the agencies' base allocation of units. The program should also provide for a reallocation of unused funds among administering agencies;

• Full funding of all authorized vouchers at a level that provides affordability (the difference between the cost of decent housing in the market and an affordable percentage of household income to all households currently authorized);

• Program administrators need a system of reserves in order to deal with unforeseeable changes in market conditions, family incomes, appropriations and administration and additional authorized vouchers;

• Maintain the program's current targeting, i.e. 75 percent of the funds to be utilized by households at or below 30 percent of area median income;

• Provide more flexibility in initial and annual inspections of units to be occupied by voucher holders. Accept inspections from other agencies and reduce the frequency of annual inspections for projects with good track records;

• Increase the number of vouchers that can be project-based from 20 percent to 25 percent, with a waiver to use an additional five percent for projects meeting the needs of the homeless;

• Current policy on Enhanced Vouchers should be maintained. They are essential for reconciling the reality of an owner's right to terminate affordability with the prevention of displacement; and


• Remove regulatory disincentives to forming consortia to administer voucher programs. In addition, NACo does not support block-granting of the Section 8 Program because it will result in a reduction of funding sold on the basis of providing more flexibility.

• Ask HUD to do an analysis of the goals and objectives of the Housing Choice Voucher Program and other HUD programs, particularly with regard to concentrations of poverty.

The Housing Choice Voucher program has been the centerpiece of the nation's housing

policy for more than 30 years. The program helps the elderly, disabled, and low income working families achieve affordable housing in the private market in an area of their choosing. Under the program, voucher holders generally pay 30 percent of their adjusted income for rent. The voucher pays the difference up to a payment standard, which is anywhere between 90 percent and 110 percent of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) determined Fair Market Rent (FMR). HUD sets the FMR annually in each metropolitan area and non-metropolitan county for units by number of bedrooms. Administering agencies receive an annual allocation of Section 8 funding using a budget-based, as opposed to a unit-based, approach. The current system of determining that amount is based on a three-month snapshot of costs adjusted by an inflation factor. For the past three years this has resulted in some agencies having a shortfall, while others have received a windfall. It is essential that Congress make changes to the program to improve efficiency. With the cost of housing what it is in most markets only the federal government can bring the resources needed to address this need. State and local governments cannot generate the needed revenues. The House passed H.R. 1851, the “Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007,” on July 12, 2007. The legislation was proposed by the House on a 333-83 vote after lengthy, mostly partisan, debate. Introduced by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), the bill sought to amend and update the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. At issue was the best way of achieving this outcome for this program, which now accounts for over 60 percent of the total budget for HUD. Critics of the Section 8 Housing Choice voucher program argue that the program has grown too large and is overwhelming the HUD budget.

Proponents of the program argue that the program is inefficiently administered and that it still does not meet the critical housing needs of low-income families and individuals, the majority of which are elderly or disabled. One important feature of H.R. 1851 is that data used in the formula to calculate allocations to public housing agencies (PHAs) must be from the most recent twelve month period. HUD currently uses a formula for allocations that utilizes data from 2004. The bill also authorizes up to 100,000 new vouchers over the next five years.

Comparable legislation was introduced in the Senate, S.2684, the “Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2008” in the 110th Congress. A hearing on the legislation was held, but no further action occurred. Similar legislation is expected to be introduced in the 112th Congress. Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: Enacting reforms to the Section 8 program would have a positive impact on other HUD housing and community development programs of which counties depend to improve the living conditions and neighborhoods of their citizens.



Resolution Strongly Supporting the Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership Programs Issue: Support the CDBG and HOME Investment Partnership Programs. Adopted Policy: NACo calls on Congress to restore funding for CDBG to $3.948 billion and HOME to $1.825 billion in the FY 2012 HUD appropriations bill. Background: The National Association of Counties has strongly supported since their inception the CDBG (1974) and HOME (1990) programs because they provide funding by formula directly to county governments to address their particular affordable housing and neighborhood revitalization needs. The FY 2011 appropriations law sharply reduced funding for CDBG by 16.3percent, from $3.9 billion in FY 2010 to $3.3 billion and HOME by 12percent, from $1.8215 billion to $1.6 billion. These cuts will result in the seriously reducing the ability of counties to meet the critical affordable housing needs of the low-and moderate-income citizens that they serve. The CDBG program was enacted in 1974 as the cornerstone of federal urban policy. The Act, signed by then-President Ford, stated that sustained action by all levels of government is necessary to maintain viable urban [and rural] communities.

The success of the CDBG program stems from its utility: providing cities, counties and states with the flexibility to address their unique affordable housing and neighborhood revitalization needs.

According to HUD data, over the past 6 years the program has: • assisted 865,847 low- and moderate-income households through single-family and

multifamily residential rehabilitation, homeownership assistance, energy efficient improvements and lead-based paint abatement;

• benefitted 22,998,047 low- and moderate income households through such public improvements as the development of senior centers, battered women’s shelters, centers for the disabled and handicapped, health and child care centers and parks and recreational facilities;

• benefitted 73,863,286 low- and moderate-income households through such public services as employment and training, youth services, crime prevention, fair housing activities, mental health services and services for abused and neglected children;

• created or retained 259,346 jobs for low – and moderate – income persons through a variety of economic development activities.

CDBG funds many partners at the local level including Habitat for Humanity, Goodwill, Head Start, Meals on Wheels, Salvation Army and the Red Cross. In addition, CDBG funds leverage an estimated $3.00 in non-CDBG funds across wide range of activities. One dollar of CDBG funds leverages an estimated $3.00 in non-CDBG funds across a wide range of activities. The FY 2011 funding level of $3.3 billion is the lowest funding level for the program since FY 1992, yet the number of city and urban county formula grant recipients has grown from 889 to 1,169, all now sharing in a vastly shrinking pie. Enacted in 1990 as the centerpiece of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, the HOME program is a complement to CDBG intended to respond to the overwhelming need to expand affordable housing opportunities. HOME funds are distributed on a needs-based formula to participating jurisdictions -- cities, counties and states to assist first-time homebuyers and renters.


A recent series of articles in the Washington Post seriously distorted HOME’s record by focusing on a small percentage of 700 “stalled” HOME-funded developments. A HUD investigation found, to the contrary, that over half of the projects labeled stalled were in fact completed and occupied by eligible tenants. Some were delayed because of the lingering effect of the nation’s economic crisis. The Post articles failed to report the positive side of the story that HOME has produced over one million units of affordable housing, including 381,883 rental units, assisted 428,373 homebuyers, completed 197,780 rehabilitations and helped 242,768 tenants with short-term rental assistance. More than 96 percent of the families who receive HOME-funded rental assistance and more than 80 percent of those in HOME-built rental units have incomes below 50 percent of the area median. In addition, participating jurisdictions leverage nearly $4 in additional dollars for every HOME dollar. Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Restoring funding for CDBG and HOME is critical in helping counties address their increasing need to expand affordable housing activities for their lower income citizens.


AmericanCountyPlatform&Resolutions2011‐2012 1

ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY AND LAND USE


The National Association of Counties believes protection of the environment and wise development of our nation's resources are obligations shared by citizens, private enterprise, and all levels of government.

The counties of this nation are highly diverse communities with immense variation in natural resources, social and political systems, cultural, economic and structural circumstances, and public health and environmental concerns. Counties are the primary service providers and have a responsibility to protect the health, welfare and safety of its citizens, and to maintain and improve their quality of life.

Encouraging responsible energy development, conserving existing energy resources, addressing environmental protection, and protecting our natural resources in an atmosphere of limited governmental resources will be achieved by building effective partnerships between all levels of government, citizens, and the private sector. UNFUNDED MANDATES AND PREEMPTIONS

NACo opposes any legislation, regulation, or policy proposal which mandates programs and responsibilities on states and local governments without full federal funding. To fully understand the impact of any mandate on local governments, a fiscal note or statement of estimated costs of implementation must be provided prior to formulation or passage of legislation or regulations.

NACo opposes any federal attempts to preempt state and local planning policies, processes and decisions. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION

Implementing environmentally sensitive and cost-efficient strategies can only be accomplished by planning for the appropriate use of natural resources. Therefore, counties must be involved as a significant partner in the formative stages of developing standards, policies and guidance and have the ability to develop specific standards, where appropriate.

State governments should act as coordinators, providers of technical and financial assistance, and developers of general standards, which recognize the need for flexibility and regional differences. The federal government should be responsible for conducting research, setting general standards, developing policies, and providing guidance and financial and technical assistance, which recognize the need for flexibility and regional differences. NACo believes the federal government should provide financial and other incentives to support the most cost effective planning and management programs to meet federal goals. PRIORITIZATION AND PERFORMANCE- BASED STANDARD SETTING

NACo supports national and state policies that are tailored to meet the needs of local communities with performance standards and goals being set to accomplish outcomes and give local governments the flexibility to select among alternative means to achieve them.

Flexibility should allow local governments to prioritize implementation of federal environmental laws and regulations based on actual needs and include the ability to weigh the


environmental, social, energy, and economic costs and benefits of alternative strategies with local plans and priorities.

Financial resources must be allocated to address environmental problems before they escalate to a cost-prohibitive level. INCENTIVE-BASED SOLUTIONS

NACo supports federal government incentives to protect the environment and natural resources. NACo supports the repeal of programs and policies that distort the pricing or development of products in a manner that encourages the exploitation of resources, discourages recycling and conservation, and provides inducements for greater pollution. SOUND SCIENCE AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

NACo calls upon the federal government to authorize, adequately fund, and require federal departments and agencies to provide fair, peer reviewed, scientifically sound and consistent assessments of health, safety or environmental risks, prior to requiring any actions by local governments.

NACo supports a coordinated and expanded environmental research effort which is open to input from state and local governments and private industry. Local governments need information to address environmental mandates and evaluate the success of compliance programs. Research should focus on all impacts of pollution and recognize and accommodate technology advancements.

PUBLIC EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION

NACo supports federal assistance and increased funding to assist local governments, schools, colleges, and technical and vocational institutions in developing curriculum, furnishing laboratories, training staff, teaching students in environmental educational programs, increasing public awareness, and facilitating and enhancing environmental air and water quality education within and among county governments. These programs help educate the public about the environmental, social, and financial impacts of implementing national and state environmental, energy, and land use policies.

I. WATER QUALITY

NACo recognizes that the availability of an adequate supply of clean water is vital to our nation. Water quality degradation can impose human health risks through contaminated drinking water supplies, diseased fish, and unsafe or polluted water bodies used for recreation, and can lead to the loss of valuable wildlife habitat.

NACo supports integrated and cooperative programs for protecting water quality which place responsibility on each level of government. Because the elimination of water pollution is a long-term process limited by economic and social costs, a reasonable relationship between costs and benefits should be a key consideration toward reaching the goal of improved water quality throughout the nation.

The use of loans or grants should be tailored to the specific needs and capacity of each county, including the county's ability to pay. More restrictive federal clean water requirements and new mandates should not be imposed on counties unless the federal government provides additional funding.


A. Clean Water Act NACo supports federal funding to meet all Clean Water Act (CWA) mandates imposed

on counties, as. NACo believes the CWA is instrumental in successfully managing water pollution from point and non-point sources by keeping toxic substances out of our nation's waterways, thus ensuring that surface waters are safe for sport and recreational purposes. NACo endorses enforcement measures for compliance with the CWA, which includes effective monitoring.

1) Research—NACo supports an increase to the federal governments’ research and development programs to aid the efforts of local and state governments in the control of non-point sources of water pollution and contaminated sediments. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should also support research on programs such as combined sewer overflows, land application of sewage sludge, and source reduction.

2) Stormwater Runoff—NACo supports revisions to the CWA and development of a federal stormwater program, which would achieve the following outcomes:

Flexibility for local governments to consider the site-specific nature of stormwater and determine the most cost-effective and technologically feasible means of reducing pollutants to meet CWA objectives;

Consolidation of Phase I (over 100,000 population) and Phase II (under 100,000 population) stormwater regulatory programs for local governments into a simplified, workable and effective program;

Development by local governments of local stormwater management programs consistent with state stormwater program goals and EPA guidance;

Federal funding of a comprehensive stormwater research program to determine the impact of stormwater on overall water quality; and

An exemption from regulation for local governments that do not contribute to stormwater pollution problems.

3) Sewer Overflows—NACo supports a Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) program which is based on cost-benefit analyses and allows for a variety of control techniques. EPA's CSO policy should accommodate water quality standards that encompass stormwater discharges and their impact in CSO systems.

NACo believes that a significant national environmental or public health problem requiring federal regulation from Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSO) has not been demonstrated. NACo calls on the EPA to review SSO regulations to ensure flexibility for local communities to adequately address this challenge.

B. Clean Water/Drinking Water NACo supports the goal of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) to provide safe

drinking water. NACo believes the federal government should adopt clear federal policies and

regulations that allow flexibility to state and local governments to implement programs that will protect public health balanced with environmental and economic impacts.

NACo supports federal funding for existing or new federal mandates. NACo supports the State Revolving Loan Fund (SRF) programs, the Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund (CWSRF), and the Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund, as supplements to, not a


substitute for, federal grants program. Grants and technical assistance should be made available to those small, rural, disadvantaged communities that are unable to meet their needs solely with loans. States should provide adequate funds to match federal grants to the SRF program, and assure flexibility in the administration of such loans.

Additionally, NACo urges Congress to establish a water trust fund that provides, on an annual basis, matching grants and other assistance to advance the achievement of national clean water goals at the local, statewide and national levels. Any water trust fund must be financed through a dedicated revenue stream that is long-term, reliable, sustainable, fair, equitable, and raised from the national economy based on low rate fees.

1) Standard Setting—NACo supports a federal policy that prescribes realistic maximum limits for contaminants, with standards tailored to the particular contaminants used in the watershed. Regulations should be based on a peer-reviewed scientific basis.

2) Monitoring—NACo supports minimum guidelines for monitoring, site selection, and construction of public water systems.

3) Research—NACo supports additional federal research into the effects of various pollutants and carcinogens in the drinking water supplies. Such research should have a special emphasis on the protection of sole source aquifers and other water supplies.

4) Small Water Systems—NACo supports effective and adequate federal funding to small, rural communities for drinking water treatment facilities. If consolidation of small water systems is required to receive federal loan or grant assistance, county governments should be federally authorized to participate in the planning, management and development of programs.

C. Watershed and Wetlands Management NACo believes management of watersheds, wetland areas, and coastal watersheds are

approaches used to address public health, environmental protection, and restoration issues within hydrologically-defined geographic areas. Local governments make critical front-line land use decisions to achieve sustainable economies and must be involved in all aspects of planning and management.

NACo supports expanded federal funding and increased flexibility for planning and implementation of watershed management at the local level and for the restoration of wetlands, repair of habitat, coordination of stormwater management programs with comprehensive watershed management efforts, and establishment of native vegetation on lands vital to water quality.

NACo urges continued federal funding of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) and the Coastal Impact Assistance Program, CWA programs such as the National Estuary Program Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans, State and Local Wetlands Grants and Wetlands Conservation Plans, the Non-Point Source Grants Program, and the Small Watershed Program for small agricultural watersheds under the Food Security Act.

NACo supports flexible and voluntary water quality trading policies that control and reduce watershed non-point pollution. Costly controls should not be required when less costly controls are appropriate and effective.

NACo supports federal government efforts to discourage residential, commercial, or industrial development in floodplain wetlands, when feasible, because wetlands are of great natural productivity, hydrological utility, and environmental diversity, and provide natural flood control, improved water quality, recharged aquifers, and flow stabilization of streams and rivers. Flood risk analysis should be performed for development activities in high flood watersheds.


D. Wetlands Permitting and Navigable Waters NACo supports the national policy goal of net gain/no net loss of wetlands and

encourages a management approach that 1) avoids wetlands, 2) minimizes wetland loss, and 3) mitigates as the final alternative. NACo supports additional federal funding for local governments to implement the national policy goal.

NACo supports a requirement to offset unavoidable wetland loss by mitigating, restoring through enhancement of existing wetlands, or creating new wetlands, when public need requires that public facilities, utilities, or improvements be developed over sensitive ecological areas.

NACo supports clarification of federal law to permit the proper maintenance of drainage systems according to the original intent and design of the law and to federal and state regulations established prior to 1985. Land designated as agricultural land prior to 1985 should not require restoration to conditions prior to agricultural use.

NACo supports keeping the terms navigable and/or navigable waters in the Clean Water Act to protect intrastate waters, including wetland habitats, rivers, and streams within the United States and to protect the basic, fundamental principles of local land use control in accordance with the goals of the CWA. NACo will oppose any effort to remove the term “navigable” from the CWA.

NACo calls on the federal government to clarify that local streets, gutters and human made ditches are excluded from the definition of "waters of the United States." Further, NACo urges the federal government to recognize that the flow volume of stormwater from development and regulation of impervious surfaces are local land use issues, and are not subject to federal regulation.

E. Funding & Security for Water Infrastructure NACo recognizes the threat posed to the health and safety of our nation as it faces a

crucial time of aging and crumbling water and wastewater infrastructure and an increased risk for both natural and human-made disasters.

NACo calls for a reliable, long-term, and substantially increased federal investment in water infrastructure, watershed protection, and the protection of water resources and facilities from physical and chemical security threats. The broad range of local needs to achieve national clean water goals and objectives which would be funded by this investment include the construction, repair and replacement of treatment works, collection and distribution systems, compliance with federal regulatory mandates, investments in decentralized wastewater systems, voluntary non-point source pollution abatement, source water protection, and improvements in the security of water resources and facilities, consistent with local land-use plans.

NACo recognizes the failure of unsafe or deficient dams and levees can lead to significant property destruction and immeasurable loss of human life. Like other critical infrastructure, these man-made structures deteriorate and ongoing investment is necessary to ensure the safety of such structures. NACo supports increased federal commitment to fund the repair and rehabilitation of America’s non-federal, publicly-owned dams and levees, with priority funding given to structures presenting the highest risk of failure. Federal funding should be made available through grants, loans, and federal cost-share programs designed to assure that unsafe or deficient dams and levees are brought into compliance with national minimum safety standards. Moreover, NACo urges federal and state governments to consult with, and include, counties in the decision-making process when undertaking the rehabilitation of unsafe or deficient dams and levees located within the jurisdiction of the county.


F. Water Resources Development Act NACo supports preserving and maintaining current federal law which provides for

federal participation through the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers in a long-standing partnership with state and local governments for funding, implementing, and maintaining essential and environmentally sound navigation, harbor, beach management, and flow control projects across this nation.

NACo supports federal matching funds for local governments to plan for reducing flood damage risks under the Water Resources Development Act. NACo asks that the federal share of water resource projects not be shifted to state and local governments because most state and local governments do not have the fiscal resources to assume the federal share.

NACo requests that counties be consulted before the federal or state government undertakes water resource projects within the jurisdiction of the county.

NACo supports the federal government providing state and local governments with a major voice in the decision-making process, which includes the authority to assume full responsibility for planning and implementing flood control projects and determining the necessity or advisability of flood control projects by the federal government.

G. Water Conservation NACo supports federal water conservation strategies that provide federal financial and

technical assistance to state and local governments to design, implement, and evaluate appropriate water conservation measures including the rehabilitation of water supply systems. Water conservation should be given priority in water projects planning and evaluation where there are limited sources of supply. Federal research and grant programs should focus on water reclamation, recycling, reuse, and desalination.

NACo supports qualification and adjudication of federal reserved water rights being determined in state courts and administered subject to local and state water conservation and development plans.

II. AIR QUALITY

NACo recognizes the need for on-going and sustained action regarding air quality involving all stakeholders at the international, federal, state, and local levels of government. The transport of air pollutants is a national and international problem and knows no political boundaries.

Air pollutants can have significant impacts on human health, the economic vitality of communities, natural resources and recreation areas, quality of life, and the ecological balance of the world.

A. Roles and Responsibilities 1) Federal Role: NACo supports the goals of the Clean Air Act Amendments of

1990 which balances the need to ensure the highest level of environmental protection with the need to maintain economically viable and sustainable communities.

NACo supports federal leadership that ensures open communication and an objective process when deciding on an acceptable level of risk to human health while still protecting the environment.

NACo recommends an increase in federal technical and financial assistance to states and local governments for the development and administration of local air pollution control programs which includes expansion of federal air pollution research programs for development and local implementation of strategies designed to reduce air pollutants.


NACo supports requiring the federal government to work cooperatively with state and local governments to help formulate guideline and technical assistance programs for the administration, implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of plans that affect local land use and resource allocation decisions.

2) State and Local Government Responsibility: NACo believes individual counties or groups of counties should have the right to control their air pollution problems within one state or on an interstate basis in accordance with their needs, while ensuring adequate representation of county governments in these entities.

B. National Ambient Air Quality Standards NACo believes that national air quality standards should be set using well-founded, peer-

reviewed scientific evidence. Public review of standards is essential and should include the range of health effects associated with the pollutant, the levels of pollution as they relate to the effects on health, the characteristics and number of people affected, and the compounded effects when multiple pollutants are present.

State and local governments must have the option of adopting secondary standards which are more stringent than the national goals in order to protect localized environmental, property, and human values. In addition, states and local governments should be allowed to select among alternative means to achieve air quality standards.

EPA standards should be flexible enough to consider regional conditions. NACo supports increased funding for the local Particulate Matter (PM) monitoring

program and asks the EPA to assist counties in determining the true source of particulate matter.

C. The State Implementation Plan (SIP) Process NACo believes that limited federal oversight of state and local air quality programs is

necessary when air quality management practices have been proven effective. NACo urges federal revision of the SIP review process, including:

Continuation by the EPA of timely guidance for developing state pollution control plans and programs, reviewing state plans and programs on a fixed periodic basis, and ensuring states do not undertake pollution control activities unless authorized by a joint determination of state and local elected officials;

Authority by the EPA to revoke a state's authority to administer federal clean air programs if, during a periodic audit, it determines the state has taken actions inconsistent with its own plan or that its programs and plans are no longer adequate and the state did not correct this inadequacy. This provision should apply to the local government, if authority is delegated by the state;

Allowing state and local governments to grant or alter Title V permits without the need for federal approval if consistent with EPA approved generic permit rules;

Ability of local governments to obtain EPA review of any state permitting decision or other minor SIP revision not otherwise needing EPA approval; and

Allowing counties to establish fees for operating permits to cover the cost of implementation and enforcement in counties that have the responsibility for issuing permits and enforcing the requirements of the Clean Air Act and state air quality laws.

NACo supports the goals of the Clean Air Act and any subsequent transportation reauthorization bill that aims to encourage environmentally sound transportation projects.


NACo also supports legislation that would codify the EPA's grandfathering provision of the 1997 transportation conformity regulation which keeps a project eligible for federal funding once it has satisfied environmental requirements and is consistent with the state approved clean air plan.

D. Clean Air Act Deadlines NACo supports changes to the Clean Air Act to establish a sensible, orderly long-range

strategy for air quality improvement and attainment of federal primary and secondary air quality standards.

NACo believes the EPA should vigorously enforce the Clean Air Act and that enforceable deadlines are necessary to promote progress toward cleaner air.

NACo supports providing EPA with flexible authority to grant case-by-case extensions where controls are as stringent as those in attainment areas and demonstrate progress toward attainment.

NACo believes that EPA should continue to have the power to levy funding sanctions and restrictions on new source permitting for areas not acting in good faith to comply with the Clean Air Act. Sanctions should not be imposed on funding that is aimed at alleviating air pollution problems. If an uncontrollable natural condition or occurrence causes air pollution, the federal and state governments are urged to work with the jurisdiction affected rather than subject the jurisdiction to sanctions.

E. Vehicle and Vessel Emissions Motor Vehicle Emissions—NACo urges the federal government to set stricter standards

to help reduce motor vehicle emission levels across the United States. NACo supports programs to enhance transportation alternatives, including, but not

limited to, low-pollutant emission vehicles, an increase in mass transit, rail, and carpools. NACo believes that improved vehicle certification and inspection maintenance programs

can reduce hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and other pollutant emissions from vehicles in use. Certification requirements should cover the full useful life of the vehicles and be based on real-life driving conditions, such as cold start temperatures.

NACo believes the EPA should establish guidance procedures for enhanced vehicle Inspection and Maintenance programs and work cooperatively with state and local governments for implementation.

NACo calls on Congress and the President to fully fund and reauthorize the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) to help counties reduce particulate matter pollution, which is a factor in nonattainment.

Air Quality Ocean Going Marine Vessel Emissions—NACo urges Congress to support legislation to reduce emissions from ocean-going marine vessels through economic incentives, including funding for research and development on retrofit emissions controls and new technology to reduce emissions from marine vessels.

F. Interstate/International Transport of Air Pollution NACo recognizes that air pollution is transitory in nature and does not respect state or

other geographic borders, particularly in the case of ozone. NACo supports the creation of multi-jurisdictional ozone transport regions and interstate

commissions to provide for regional planning, conflict resolution, and implementation of area-wide strategies, as ozone may contribute to or cause non-attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). When the EPA determines that state or local jurisdictions are in


compliance and do not significantly contribute to ozone transport problems, that area should be exempted from further regulatory requirements. Counties or air basins within a state should be allowed to subtract the effect of pollutants transported from other parts of a state, as well as from other states, when calculating their own area's clean air compliance attainment.

G. International Transport of Air Pollution NACo supports efforts by federal, state, and local governments in cooperation with U.S.

and Mexican officials to recognize that preserving, protecting, and improving the natural environment, as well as public health and safety, is a major priority. NACo urges these entities to work together with U.S. counties to develop strategies that are proactive, while protecting and improving both the public health and the environment.

NACo also urges, supports, and will assist the entities in efforts to formulate agreements in establishing common air, water, waste standards and requirements for the U.S. / Mexico Border region in order to preserve, protect, and improve the natural environment and public health of residents living in the region.

H. Prevention of Significant Deterioration NACo recognizes there are areas where special air quality is essential, such as wilderness

areas, national parks, watersheds, and viewsheds. Therefore, NACo supports the ability of all levels of government to implement control strategies consistent with the use, needs, and desires of the area.

I. Multi-Emissions/New Source Review NACo believes that any changes to address multi-emissions pollution sources should

support, not supplant, current Clean Air Act provisions and protect the ability of state and local governments to adopt more stringent regulations. Each state should be allowed to achieve the specified levels of emissions reductions through the most efficient, cost-effective and appropriate technology method.

NACo supports a reduction of emissions for sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury up to 70 percent or more from electrical power generators. NACo also supports significant reductions from other major sources.

NACo supports increased federal funding for research and development of new, less expensive technologies for reducing sulfur and nitrogen oxides.

NACo urges EPA review and, when appropriate, strengthening of its New Source Review program to ensure it fully protects public health and welfare.

NACo believes any required retrofitting, based on the new source review standards, should be limited to addressing significant pollution problems of the region. The EPA should work cooperatively with state and local governments and allow for site-specific variations for existing facilities. Reasonable timeframes for retrofitting and achievable emission control requirements should be established, based on federal, state, and local standards.

NACo believes states and sources should be allowed to trade emissions reductions as long as specific credited sources do not increase their emissions.

J. Greenhouse Gases NACo urges Congress to aggressively pursue national and international programs to

develop carbon-neutral energy sources and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Federal funding of sensible and cost-effective technologies to reduce greenhouse gases should be continued.

NACo urges Congress to address global warming, regardless of its source. NACo supports immediate and long-range efforts by the federal government to involve all levels of


stakeholders to mitigate possible sources of climate change now through a series of practical incentives and through more federal funding for all means of emissions reduction.

NACo urges Congress to provide financial and technical assistance to local governments to help develop and implement local climate change adaption and mitigation plans and projects, including smart growth initiatives, mass transit development, renewable energy deployment, acquisition of high efficiency fleet vehicles and protection of water supplies.

NACo supports active county participation in climate legislative initiatives. These initiatives must be balanced and equitable, that benefit counties by providing revenue to communities for creating economic growth, sustainable businesses, community development, energy efficiency, conserving parks and open spaces and develop natural resources that increase quality jobs, business productivity and competitiveness.

K. Indoor Air Quality NACo supports legislation to increase federal indoor air quality funding for research and

grants, and for technical assistance to county governments. Increased funding will be used to promote awareness of indoor air quality issues, testing, and mitigation of radon in homes to help reduce the concentration of indoor air pollution.

III. SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT

NACo recognizes that improper management of solid and hazardous waste is a national problem, which endangers public health by contributing to air, water, and land pollution. Local governments are integral to waste management, especially through establishing waste reduction and recycling programs.

NACo supports a national integrated waste management system incorporating the following elements:

1) Waste Reduction; 2) Recycling; 3) Waste Recycling; and 4) Waste Disposal.

NACo supports a waste management system that allows counties to select among a variety of options to protect the environment, cost-effectively meet local needs, and avoid undue financial hardship on counties. NACo supports favorable tax policies, including financing for solid waste management facilities.

A. Waste Reduction and Product Stewardship NACo encourages federal, state, and local governments to support public education

designed to promote participation in activities that reduce the volume and toxicity of municipal solid waste (MSW). NACo supports an Extended Producer Responsibility Framework Approach, which creates effective producer-led reduction, reuse and recycling programs, to address a product’s lifecycle impacts from design through end of life management, without relying solely on state and local governments.

NACo encourages federal legislation in support of environmentally preferable purchasing that takes into consideration environmental impacts, cost effectiveness and flexibility and eliminates disincentive for reusable products by government.

NACo supports federal research and incentive programs for product stewardship efforts that will work with manufacturers and packagers of retail and wholesale goods to minimize or


eliminate heavy metals or other toxic substances in household products and packaging and disposable or "throw-away" products.

B. Recycling NACo supports federal legislation that encourages businesses to minimize or reuse

packaging. NACo encourages federal, state, and local government support of voluntary programs that increase recycling of waste.

NACo also encourages federal, state, and local governments to create incentives for the development of strong, stable private markets for recyclable commodities. To support market development, specifications must be developed that favor purchasing products containing recycled materials. Any government requirements for recycling of specific products must include end market development of such products.

NACo supports maximizing the recycling and reuse of electronic waste - including computers, televisions, and other electronic devices - that has reached the end of its useful life through an internalized electronics industry financing mechanism that covers the cost of collection, transportation, and recycling, and does not rely on state and local government funding. This policy encompasses (but is not limited to) other waste materials, such as mercury-containing fluorescent lamps, paint recycling and reuse, and safe disposal of pharmaceuticals.

C. Waste Recovery NACo recognizes that resource recovery/waste-to-energy facilities remove recyclable

materials and substances potentially harmful to air quality from the waste stream. Therefore, NACo encourages federal financial and technical support of energy conservation efforts and county waste recovery programs, with incineration of waste being a domestic energy source and a form of recycling, including, but not limited to:

Construction grants; Incentives for resource recovery projects; Restoring tax incentives for greater private sector participation in resource recovery

projects and electricity generation facilities; Consistent permitting processes to avoid costly reconstruction or retrofitting of

previously approved projects; Incentives for innovative uses of ash and other resource recovery by-products; and Utilizing environmental monitoring techniques relevant to resource recovery

facilities. NACo supports legislation that provides direct grants to local governments and tax

incentives for the construction of methane-to-CNG production and fuel delivery systems, as well as conversion and production of CNG fleet vehicles.

D. Waste Disposal NACo recognizes that landfilling is the predominant method for managing MSW even

though costs have increased for transportation and substandard landfill sites have been closed under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle D.

NACo supports federal legislation to protect the environment and our natural resources, particularly water supplies, that includes, but is not limited to:

Uniform landfill standards that are performance-based, to the extent possible, and allow the establishment of regulatory programs by states to meet federal requirements;

Federal technical assistance to states and counties for the safe closure of landfills; and


Voluntary recovery of methane from landfills as an energy source.

NACo supports federal legislation or regulations for county solid waste arid landfills that allow for differential groundwater monitoring requirements. RCRA Subtitle D does not provide such discretion for states, even when conventional ground water monitoring methods at arid landfills are not effective and effective alternatives, such as monitoring of the vadose zone or low-cost moisture detection devices, are available.

E. Interstate/International Issues for Solid Waste NACo urges the development of a national policy on interstate transportation of MSW by

the federal government. NACo supports local governments' legal authority to control the flow of MSW generated

within their jurisdiction. NACo supports federal legislation that recognizes the decision-making role and

responsibilities of county and other local governments in land use and MSW disposal and empowers them to make decisions which will assure environmentally and fiscally sound, RCRA consistent, solid waste management practices. MSW management should be a primary responsibility of state, county and other local governments.

NACo urges Congress to support bi-national projects between private, state and federal, tribal and public organizations, which develop and implement programs to educate, prevent and clean up illegal dumping along the United States – Mexican border.

F. Hazardous Waste Management NACo supports a national hazardous waste management program that includes, but is not

limited to: Federal research, development and promotion of technologies and strategies, such as

encouraging changes in manufacturing processes and products, neutralization, recovery, or destruction, to prevent pollution and reduce landfilling of hazardous waste; and

Assistance regarding hazardous waste landfill regulations through:

o Federal financial and technical assistance to state and local governments to evaluate potential new sites for hazardous waste disposal facilities;

o Federal assurance that there is no degradation of the environment or danger to public health as a result of new hazardous waste disposal facilities. This can be accomplished by developing and implementing prompt and responsible emergency or long-term procedures in case of spills or leakage at the site or in transporting hazardous materials to and from the site;

o Requires permits, as if they were new facilities, for major expansion or additions beyond the previously permitted capacity or limitations for existing hazardous waste disposal facilities; and

o Federal financing through a tax on hazardous waste generators to establish and cover the costs of a continuing inspection process for hazardous waste disposal sites permitted under RCRA, which will assure owners and operators of hazardous waste facilities of the ability to obtain adequate insurance for emergency response and cover any liability.


G. Transportation of Hazardous Materials NACo generally supports the Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act of

1990 (HMTUSA) which responded to public concern about state or local ordinances or regulations on transporting hazardous materials and requiring the use of Department of Transportation (DOT) standards when designating highway routes for such materials.

NACo strongly opposes any efforts to further expand the preemptive powers of the federal government in the area of hazardous materials transportation.

H. Nuclear Waste Management NACo is concerned that the federal nuclear waste repository program through the

Department of Energy (DOE) is seriously behind schedule. NACo supports federal legislation to assure DOE meets its statutory responsibilities regarding present and future stockpiles of nuclear wastes which pose a serious threat to the natural environment and to the public's health and welfare.

NACo supports construction of a permanent nuclear waste repository and the use of an interim central storage facility until the permanent site is completed.

NACo supports federal development of a transportation system from nuclear power plants to the interim or permanent site which includes assessing community impacts, intensive consultation, participation, and control in siting and transportation decisions with affected states and local governments, and consulting with and providing appropriate benefits to counties directly affected by the interim or permanent nuclear waste facility.

NACo supports research and development of spent nuclear fuel storage technologies. NACo supports DOE oversight which includes participation by emergency management

officials, of state and regional plans to assure seamless responses to accidental or intentional discharge of nuclear waste.

NACo supports federal funding to fully cover emergency management and public safety costs associated with the transport of nuclear waste, including, but not limited to training for emergency personnel, technical assistance, equipment and communication needs, preparedness and response costs, and monitoring of radiation emissions along transportation routes.

NACo supports a funding mechanism that requires payments by ratepayers to the Nuclear Waste Fund which will only be used for management of spent nuclear fuel.

NACo supports the community right-to-know emergency planning, federal funding of state and local emergency programs, technical assistance, and training programs to local governments, provisions of the Superfund Amendments Reauthorization Act (SARA), Title III.

I. Disposal of Nerve Gas NACo supports regulation of the transportation and disposal of military nerve agents as a

hazardous substance by the EPA.

J. Superfund Sites NACo supports reauthorization of the Superfund program to continue identification,

evaluation and control of existing hazardous waste disposal sites with the primary source of cleanup funds continuing to be the parties responsible for the disposal of toxic wastes.

NACo supports the Superfund provisions for retroactive strict, joint, and several liability design which is used to finance most costs of cleaning up hazardous waste and acknowledges that a partial elimination of retroactive liability for some Superfund sites may be a reasonable alternative to the current liability arrangement.


NACo supports increased federal funding of the Hazardous Substance Response Trust Fund (HSRTF) to assure adequate funding to clean up current and new sites added to the National Priority List (NPL), even if federal changes are made to the funding mechanism for Superfund.

NACo supports federal HSRTF funding to cover at least half the costs of long-term operation and maintenance at federal cleanup sites, including those owned and operated by local governments.

NACo supports routine use of the administrative settlement tools in Superfund by EPA. NACo supports federal legislation that ensures counties will not assume full financial

responsibility for cleanup costs or be held legally responsible for such cleanup by limiting local government liability and prohibiting private parties from bringing contribution actions against local governments for the generation, transportation, regulation, or disposal of MSW and providing expedited settlements for local governments involved in Superfund sites.

NACo supports strengthening the role of local and state governments in Superfund activities by:

• Granting greater decision-making responsibility to local and state governments, including options to fully assume responsibility for planning and implementing Superfund response actions and flexibility in financing or providing matching funds for cleanup efforts;

• Having Superfund regulations and guidance focusing more on the desired results of cleanup actions and less on the process for determining such results; and

• Assuring the EPA works in close cooperation with state and local governments to develop criteria or guidelines for the level of remediation sufficient to protect the environment and public health.

IV. ENERGY

A. National Energy Policy NACo seeks a comprehensive and integrated approach to a national energy policy that: Balances increased domestic oil and gas production on public and privately-owned

lands; Provides states and counties, which support and encourage oil and gas production off

their shores, with a share of revenues proportionate to the royalties generated; Accelerates development, research and incentives for alternative and renewable

energy, clean energy, energy efficient programs, and clean coal technologies; Gives local governments a central role in formulating local environment, energy and

land use policies; Supports environmental equity issues; Continues energy conservation programs that reduce consumption, encourage

efficient energy use, and improve end use efficiencies; Preserves and protects ecologically unique areas; Provides a comprehensive approach to addressing the problems of communities

affected by new energy resource facility development, and direct participation by local governments in all strategy development for mitigating any adverse consequences of a new energy resource facility;

Provides federal funding through grants, payments, low-interest loans, and loan guarantees, to counties and other local governments to help fund the planning and


development of public facilities, and services, required as the result of new or expanded energy resource and facility development; and

Provides funding for Native American energy resource development.

B. Energy Research and Education NACo supports federal funding and other incentives to promote research, explore the

interrelationships among energy, capital, labor, and materials, and the technological problems of energy systems. Federal research efforts should be broad-based, unbiased, and equitable among the various energy technologies, with the results of the research being disseminated by all levels of government and the private sector through a variety of public education technologies.

C. Energy Conservation NACo supports federal funding and other incentives to promote nationwide energy

conservation efforts. To facilitate decentralized energy conservation activities, the federal government should seek input from local government on implementation and continue to adequately fund all conservation and fuel assistance programs, such as: the State Energy Conservation Program; Energy Extension Service; Institutional Conservation Program; Weatherization Assistance Program; Low Income Housing Energy Assistance Program; and the Energy STAR Program. NACo believes the federal government should work with local governments in the research, development, and implementation of energy efficient building standards.

NACo believes the federal government should encourage local governments to develop partnerships with utilities and private industry to develop energy efficiency and conservation programs which will result in cost savings for local businesses and a stronger local economy.

NACo supports full funding for the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) Program in FY 2010 and thereafter. Additionally, NACo supports including city populations in the overall county population numbers and urges the DOE to allow all “eligible” counties in all states to apply for the direct formula funding.

D. Nuclear Energy NACo supports nuclear power as a component of a comprehensive energy program.

NACo encourages the continued research, improvement and development of nuclear power and related technologies that add to its safety and efficiency.

E. Renewable/Alternative Energy NACo supports increased federal resources for researching and developing renewable

energy technologies, including wind, solar, geothermal, biomass, electricity from landfill gas, and other forms of waste-to-energy which will achieve the objective of clean and safe forms of energy.

NACo supports increased and multifaceted federal efforts to increase renewable energy sources and consumption, including consumption incentives to all levels of government to encourage purchase of renewable energy, industry tax incentives, such as R&D credits, encouragement to co-ops to replace wired electricity delivered to remote rural areas that are not cost effective, and further public and private partnerships.

NACo supports expanding the definition of governmental purpose in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) to include energy efficiency, renewable energy improvements, and water conservation and efficiency projects.


F. Energy Program Evaluation NACo believes all energy programs should be periodically reviewed and analyzed for

efficiency and effectiveness in achieving their goals. Programs that are found to be ineffective or inefficient should be reengineered in collaboration with county, state, and other local governments.

G. Alternative Fuel Vehicles NACo supports a national policy promoting lower pollution vehicles, such as Alternative

Fuel Vehicles (AFV's), Hybrids and High Efficiency Vehicles (HEV's), and Advanced Technology Vehicles.

NACo supports a national strategy, including tax incentives, rebates, and promotions, to increase the purchase of lower pollution vehicles by private businesses and all levels of government, including tax. However, federal policy must be established to ensure the availability of a refueling infrastructure and of competitively priced, reliable alternative fuel and alternative fuel vehicles, and should consider its impact on gas tax revenues and the highway trust fund before requiring conversion of motor vehicle fleets.

NACo supports an increase in fueling infrastructure stations to support the promotion of AFVs.

NACo supports the DOE's efforts to decrease reliance on oil by focusing on alternative fuels such as ethanol, methanol, compressed natural gas, electricity, and biodiesel, among other agents. The ethanol used in E-85 is a renewable fuel that provides benefits to American farmers and rural areas of the country.

NACo supports increased fuel economy standards for trucks and cars to reduce fuel costs and air pollution.

H. Electric Utility Restructuring NACo supports the following principles of reliability, equitable benefits, social and

environmental impacts, and stranded costs in any attempts to restructure the delivery of electricity:

• The federal government should work in partnership with state and local governments if it plans to restructure the nation's electric industry;

• Any transition to a competitive generation market should provide sufficient time, in line with the magnitude of the change, for counties to adapt to the new structure, avoid disruption of service to the public, and adjust to potential changes in tax revenues;

• Any restructuring must acknowledge and not abridge the existing power and authority of counties to operate county utilities or the ability of counties to form such utilities in the future, providing the utilities do not result in a cost-shifting to other counties;

• Under any restructuring, counties, either individually or on a regional basis, should have the opportunity to consider combining the electric loads of various users and negotiate the purchase of electricity on behalf of those consumers;

• Any restructuring should include a transition period during which legitimate stranded costs can be recovered in a just and reasonable manner as determined by state law;

• Counties should continue to have the authority to issue franchises and/or taxes and no federal or state action should preempt or interfere with county revenue authority;

• Counties should retain full authority over its own right-of-ways and recovery costs for their use;


• Customers should be allowed to choose their own electric power supplier as determined by state legislation, not federal law, and be given a written disclosure prior to selecting a provider on the overall cost of service;

• Recognition of electrical, geographic and institutional differences such as the western and eastern electrical grids having different features and challenges; and

• DOE and state utility commissions continuing their important role in ensuring that all consumers can count on the long-term integrity, safety, and reliability of their electricity service.

I. Pipeline Safety NACo supports efforts to strengthen federal pipeline safety legislation and regulations

which are necessary to improve the safety of natural gas and hazardous liquid pipeline operation, maintenance, and public reporting, including:

• Federal certification of operator training and qualification; • Flexibility for state and local governments to impose stringent requirements for

installation of effective leak and defect detection, and increased inspections for pipeline corrosion and defects as pipelines continue to age;

• Expanded public awareness and notification programs by pipeline operators and federal regulators to help prevent third-party damage;

• Required disclosure to state and local governments of all inspection results and corrective measures for pipelines in their jurisdictions;

• Enhanced federal funding for grants to state and local pipeline safety authorities for funds to federal pipeline regulatory agencies, and for pipeline safety research and development; and

• Achievement of these and other improvements should acknowledge the vital role that state and local governments have in protecting the public and environment from preventable pipeline accidents.

J. Underground Storage Tanks NACo supports full funding for the leaking underground storage tank (LUST) program

which should only be used for its intended purpose of remediating and preventing further contamination caused from underground storage tanks (UST).

K. Regulating Natural Gas Drilling NACo calls upon Bureau of Land Management (BLM), other Federal Land managers and

impacted states to encourage the use of state of the art technology for natural gas development as proper practices can lessen the surface impacts of roads, pads and pipelines. NACo encourages land managers to routinely monitor these drilling areas to ensure compliance with existing regulations and assist in determining the impacts to air, water, public health and wildlife.

V. LAND USE

NACo recognizes that comprehensive land use planning and growth management are central to our social and economic stability. How we use our land directly affects our ability to accommodate development, protect valuable natural resources, minimize pollution, preserve the cultural and historical character of our community, conserve energy, provide community facilities and services, and maintain a high quality of life for current and future residents.

Sustainable development principles should include providing protection for the integrity and health of our natural resources, enhancements for economic vitality of a region,


environmental protection for counties to protect open space, farmland, national landscapes, watersheds, and critical environmental areas, and social equity for all. These principles assume that the benefits derived from smart growth are available to all of its citizens. Counties must retain the authority to plan and manage growth with federal and state laws being respectful of local initiatives, and provide a variety of transportation choices that link transportation decision-making to sustainable land use planning to increase safety, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality.

A. Intergovernmental Roles and Relationships NACo urges federal, state and local coordination through the comprehensive planning

process. Because land use control should take place at the local level, federal and state objectives should reflect the needs and conditions of local governments.

NACo supports federal and state land use planning and management actions being consistent with local land use policies. Activities involving federal agencies under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) should not exclude local governments on interdisciplinary teams because of the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).

NACo encourages federal and state governments to allow local government authority for impact fees to help fund infrastructure costs for new development.

B. Federal Planning and Funding NACo calls for significant federal funding for research and demonstration projects to

encourage local governments to develop fiscally sensible, efficient land use planning and infrastructure design practices which will produce better physical activity and health outcomes. Federal grant programs earmarked for the development of community facilities, environmental protection programs, and transportation, should set aside a percentage of grant funds for local planning. Planning funds should supplement the basic grant and be utilized to maximize effectiveness and minimize undesirable impacts.

NACo supports federal policies, legislation, and funding that makes accurate land parcel data available to all levels of government.

NACo urges Congress to support the Digital Coast Initiative through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), consistent with NACo's support for other similar type federal initiatives that use data and technological tools to improve local land use decisions.

C. Resource Conservation NACo supports the option by local government to implement Historical Building tax

credits and conservation easement programs for historical preservation or to foster economic development, providing it is approved though local land use plans.

NACo supports all levels of government developing techniques to reduce water and air pollution, generation of solid waste, inefficient and non-sustainable consumption of natural resources, promotion of historic and cultural resource preservation, energy resource conservation, full utilization of human resources, and sustainable uses of natural resources and space.

D. Redevelopment of Abandoned Industrial Areas ("Brownfields") NACo encourages the federal support for economic revitalization and environmental

restoration programs in coordination with local governments. NACo supports redevelopment of abandoned or under-utilized industrial and commercial

sites, which are frequently contaminated due to past practices, through programs designed to


allow these sites to once again be economically viable. NACo also supports federal funding for environmental cleanup of these areas. Clean-up standards should be based on the level and type of contamination, and the intended reuse purpose.

NACo believes there is an appropriate and increasing role for county public health departments in brownfields clean-up. Federal funding for providing these services should increase as duties expand.

E. Cleanup of Federal Installations and Weapon Sites NACo urges federal recognition that funding to cleanup former and existing federal

military and other federal complexes is a federal responsibility. To protect human health and the environment, NACo believes the federal government should:

• Approve full federal funding for environmental cleanup activities at existing and former military, nuclear weapons, and other federal complexes;

• Make a commitment to complete environmental cleanup at its facilities within a reasonable and justifiable timeframe;

• Strive to not only comply with environmental laws, but also be a leader in the field of environmental cleanup to address public health concerns, ecological restoration, and waste management; and

• Consult with local governments regarding transportation and timing of cleanup materials.

F. Siting Issues (Eminent Domain) NACo supports federal efforts to ensure that counties are empowered and included in the

decision-making process when siting of infrastructure, including, but not limited to, power grids, pipelines, or energy related corridors, and facilities, such as liquefied natural gas terminals and refineries, are being considered.

NACo recognizes that land use controls, including the siting of facilities which may have an adverse effect on environmental quality, are traditionally a state and local prerogative.

NACo supports strengthening the role of counties in the process and opposes any federal effort to preempt state and local land use authorities.

G. Environmental Equity NACo supports federal funding of research to scientifically evaluate cumulative

environmental and health risks to all people, regardless of race or economic status, who live close to facilities that emit pollutants, and providing the results to local elected officials.

NACo urges federal and state financial assistance to local governments to implement and enforce environmental laws in a non-discriminatory manner to protect all citizens from environmental harm.

H. Parks and Recreation NACo believes the federal government has a role in the financing of local parks and

recreation programs, and an obligation to acquire, develop, and maintain national parks and similar facilities of historic value.

Counties NACo supports full funding for the U.S. Forest Service’s Urban and Community Forestry program (U&CF), at a level that will help counties become more sustainable and viable, as counties can aid in meeting the challenge of increased leisure time by providing well-planned parks, open space, and quality recreational opportunities, and public education about the use of these facilities.


NACo supports continued funding of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), with funding priority given to those areas in greatest need of open space protection. NACo supports establishing and funding of federal initiatives and programs to assist counties with preserving open space and farmlands, as deemed appropriate by the county.

NACo supports annual allocation of adequate “stateside” funding in the federal Land & Water Conservation Fund to provide matching grants to counties, special park, forest preserve and conservation districts, and other local governments for purchase of park lands and other open space and development of trails and other outdoor recreation amenities.

NACo supports federal programs which make surplus federal real and personal property available at no or reduced costs to local governments for parks and recreational purposes.

NACo opposes legislation to limit the ability of counties to utilize reasonable user fees, as long as they do not deny persons with modest incomes access, to help defray some of the operational and maintenance costs for public parks and recreation programs.

NACo encourages the creation of partnerships between the public and private sectors, such as the "adopt-a-park" program, to supplement government's ability to develop and deliver recreational services and facilities.

I. Noise Pollution NACo believes counties should have authority over noise regulations in their

communities. However, when federal jurisdiction supersedes local authority, there should be a fair, just, and meaningful appeals process.

NACo supports continued federal noise emission standards, periodic review of the standards for trucks, buses, and motorcycles, and reserving the authority of state and local governments to develop and enforce stricter standards.

NACo supports federal funding and support for public/private noise-related research and development.

NACo is opposed to shifting the burden from noise caused by federal facilities and federal actions to counties without adequate financial and technical resources.

NACo supports continued federal noise emission standards, periodic review of the standards for trucks, buses, and motorcycles, and reserving the authority of state and local governments to develop and enforce stricter standards.

NACo supports federal funding and support for public/private noise-related research and development.

NACo is opposed to shifting the burden from noise caused by federal facilities and federal actions to counties without adequate financial and technical resources.


ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY AND LAND USE RESOLUTIONS

Resolution on Exempting Renewable Biomass Emissions from the EPA’s Tailoring Rule Issue: Renewable Biomass Emissions and the Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the permanent exemption of emissions from renewable

biomass combustion from the Environmental Protection Agency’s "Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule" and supports policy that recognizes the full carbon benefits of biomass combustion for energy consistent with established and well-supported science.

Background: During the summer of 2010, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule that would essentially consider emissions from biomass combustion the same as emissions from fossil fuels.

Scientists and other experts have consistently labeled sustainable biomass energy as "carbon neutral" and “renewable” because forests that produce biomass energy recycle carbon from atmosphere when new trees grow. As the EPA continues the efforts on the Tailoring Rule, counties are concerned that the EPA may reverse a long-standing policy of labeling renewable biomass energy as "carbon neutral." Instead the new policy would wrongly treat renewable, carbon-neutral biomass like coal and other traditional fossil fuels. It is important that policy reflect the full benefits of biomass utilization for energy and is consistent with well-supported science.

In January 2011, the EPA decided to postpone rulemaking for three years so EPA can gather data and better reflect science on biomass emissions. While counties see the importance of postponing the rulemaking, we recognize that there is now prolonged uncertainty on how biomass emissions will be regulated. This uncertainty will likely deter developers and new investments from making long-term investments in the industry. Furthermore, the outcome of the rulemaking will have an impact on all aspects of the biomass industry (from biomass collection to energy production) which will impact economic growth and opportunity in counties throughout the country. The EPA must recognize the importance of the biomass industry and the critical role it plays in improving the environment, job creation, and allowing our country to reduce its dependence on fossil fuels.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The construction and operation of biomass plants will provide a means to address forest health. Over the long-term, thinning operations and reduction of combustible materials will reduce fire danger, lower firefighting costs, and help restore forests. New biomass facilities and an increase in biomass demand will boost both job creation and property tax revenues for counties. The size of the impact will depend upon the number and location of biomass facilities.


Resolution on EPA’s Boiler MACT Rule Issue: EPA’s upcoming Boiler MACT rule. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the Environmental Protection Agency’s

reconsideration of the Boiler Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rule in order to accurately depict boiler emissions technology and protect economic growth and forest health in counties by way of the biomass industry.

Background: In June of 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the Boiler Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rule in the Federal Register. At this time, the data on boiler emissions available was not sufficient to accurately


depict the capabilities of today’s emission controls on boilers. For example, data on biomass emissions was limited to the point that surrogate data (on carbon monoxide for example) was used to develop the rule. The EPA should use its ability under the Clean Air Act to subcategorize the different types of boilers.

The EPA should also consider the economic impacts of implementing the rule before making it final. Depending on the required annual cost of implementation, local economies will suffer due to businesses having to lay off employees or delaying important capital improvement projects because costs are too high.

The boiler rule as proposed will also have a significant impact on local governments that use boilers or process heaters to produce electricity or heat. It would affect boilers used in county buildings such as courthouses, jails, hospitals, clinics or other institutions that use natural gas, fuel oil, coal, or biomass. Non-county operations such as schools, churches, malls, apartment buildings, and businesses will be impacted.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: As proposed, the Clean Air Act Boiler MACT regulations impose billions of dollars in capital costs at facilities across the country. Furthermore, the onerous costs on U.S. manufacturers and small business owners will likely lead to the loss of thousands of manufacturing jobs and inhibit job creation in the biomass industry simply because the costs are too high. For counties across America this means a decrease in economic development in the biomass industry and the loss of jobs and tax revenue.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Carbon Cap and Trade and Carbon Tax

Issue: Economic impact to counties from proposed cap and trade and carbon tax legislation.

Adopted Policy: NACo supports an energy policy that provides economic incentives to reduce green house gas emissions through innovation and technology development without the imposition of new taxes.

NACo opposes any legislative or regulatory proposals pertaining to a cap and trade system or carbon tax that would pass new costs onto counties.

Background: There are a number of legislative proposals before Congress that would implement a federally mandated cap-and-trade system or tax to regulation greenhouse gases. A cap-and-trade mechanism sets up a series of winners and losers for both industry and state and local governments.

Because of the current economic environment, our constituents are facing severe economic hardship and state, county, and other local governments are facing severe funding shortfalls as a result of decreased revenue. The imposition of a carbon tax would be the single largest new source of revenue for the federal government since the imposition of income tax.

Proposals for carbon cap and trade or carbon tax range from $20/ton up to $50/ton. The impact on a national level would be calculated as follows:

• -1MWh=1,000 kWh=> 1 ton of CO2 if generated by coal and ½ ton CO2 if generated

by natural gas. If the carbon tax were set at the budgeted $50/ton, you would have $50 in taxes for every ton of coal and $25/ton for every MWh by natural gas. The U.S. generates 2 billion MWh with coal every year (since 2000). That would mean $100 billion in taxes from coal and $25 billion in taxes for natural gas to be paid in extra carbon taxes every year by the American taxpayer for electricity taxes. This


doesn’t take into account the jobs lost because of increased cost to industry. (For member/consumers of Rural Electric Cooperatives such as Dixie Escalante in Southern Utah and Northern Arizona, this would amount to an 85% increase in electric energy costs.)

• Gasoline is 87% carbon. 100 gallons => 1 ton of CO2. With a $50/ton carbon tax you would add an extra $0.50/gallon additional tax on gasoline. The USA averages around 60 million gallons of gas sold every day. That is $30 million of additional taxes a day, or about another $1 billion.

Carbon County, Montana has a carbon footprint of 4400 metric tons. This includes natural gas, electricity, gasoline, and diesel consumption. A $20/ ton CO2 tax would impact the Carbon County budget by $88,000. A $50/ton tax would have a $220,000 financial impact. The population of Carbon County is just under 10,000.

NACo urges counties to calculate their carbon footprint to understand the financial impact of a carbon tax.

NACo’s policy opposes any legislation, regulation, or policy proposal which mandates programs and responsibilities on states and local governments without full federal funding. To fully understand the impact of any mandate on local governments, a fiscal note or statement of estimated costs of implementation must be provided prior to formulation or passage of legislation or regulations. NACo also opposes any federal attempts to preempt state and local planning policies, processes and decisions.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: Potential costs to state and local government, employers, and households in a time of decreasing revenue and high unemployment.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Stormwater Runoff from Logging Roads

Issue: A statutory exemption for stormwater runoff from logging roads. Adopted Policy: NACo supports legislation that enacts into statute the Silvicultural

Rule. Background: On August 17, 2010 the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth

Circuit held that a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required for stormwater runoff from logging roads.

The Clean Water Act (CWA) requires a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the discharge of any pollutant to any navigable water (AKA “water of the U.S.”) from any point source. Since 1973, rules promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") have distinguished between point source and non-point source pollution in the CWA. Non-point source pollution, which is not defined in the CWA, includes any source of water pollution not characterized as a point source discharge. Included in the CWA rules is the so-called Silvicultural Rule found at 40 C.F.R. § 122.27(b)(1), which has remained substantially in its current form since 1976. The Silvicultural Rule specifically defines timber "harvesting operations, surface drainage, or road construction and maintenance from which there is natural runoff" to be "non point source silvicultural activities," and thus, excluded from NPDES permitting requirements.

The Ninth Circuit disagreed with the Silvicultural Rule, holding that stormwater runoff that is collected and channeled in a system of ditches and culverts before being discharged into streams and rivers constitutes a point source, and that EPA lacks authority to promulgate a rule


to the contrary. The Ninth Circuit stated that Congress has a history of providing specific statutory exemptions for certain categories of discharges. The court went on to say that federal courts have invalidated EPA regulations that provided similar regulatory exemptions.

A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit ruled May 17, 2011, to deny industry's request for a rehearing of the Brown decision by either the three-judge panel or by a majority of the judges on the 9th Circuit. The May 17 decision replaces an Aug. 17 ruling by the panel in the case but reaches the same conclusions: that stormwater runoff from logging roads are point-source discharges subject to NPDES permits. The revised ruling also addresses for the first time the court's subject matter jurisdiction, finding that because the so-called silviculture rule was ambiguous, and activists could bring forth citizen suits more than 120 days after EPA issued the rule.

The Court’s decision has potentially sweeping implications. If broadly read, this opinion would require NPDES permits for every road in the country that is served by ditches or culverts that eventually discharge to natural surface waters and that is not already regulated by the CWA.

The court's opinion also leaves many critical questions unanswered. Even if the opinion were limited to logging roads, what constitutes a logging road? Contrary to the court's assumptions of fact, many forest roads, including the roads at issue in this case, are not dedicated just to logging. They are used for a variety of purposes, both public and private, beyond just logging. If this is the case, who is responsible for obtaining these required permits? The court did not address whether the permit obligation rests with the owner of the roads or every entity that transports logs on the roads, or even those using the roads to access the forest for recreation. This adopted policy is consistent with current NACo policy that states that stormwater from all roads, gutters and ditches should not be considered a “water of the U.S.” under the CWA.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: If rural county owned roads, such as logging or forest roads, require federal NPDES permits, this will be an unfunded mandate and preemption on county governments.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution to Ensure that Federal Agencies Pay their Fair Share of Local Wastewater Fees

Issue: Federal government paying local wastewater fees. Adopted Policy: NACo urges Congress, the federal government and its agencies to

recognize their responsibility to pay fees for local wastewater management services provided to them.

Background: On January 4, 2011 the President signed into law, S. 3481. This legislation clarifies the Federal Government’s responsibility to pay reasonable service charges to a State or local government to address stormwater pollution from Federal properties. Previously, some federal agencies interpreted Section 313 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to mean that stormwater collection fees assessed by local governments are taxes that are subject to sovereign immunity claims and therefore do not have to be paid by agencies or departments of the federal government. S. 3481 clarified that federal agencies must pay reasonable stormwater charges. The legislation did not address wastewater fees. At the time, it was believed this issue would be clarified during the federal agencies internal guidance process.

On February 25, 2011, the Department of Justice (DOJ) released a memorandum opinion regarding S. 3481. According to the memo, local governments who operate municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4) are required to comply with costly federal requirements. This has


required the MS4 systems to recover the costs of the federal mandates from property owners, including federal agencies. However, the memorandum is silent on federal responsibility for local wastewater fees, leaving local governments who own/operate wastewater management facilities in limbo, and at risk of federal installations refusing to pay local wastewater fees.

Contrary to the DOJ memorandum on S. 3481, Department of Defense, in some states, continues to maintain property owned by the federal government is exempt from state and local taxation, such as local wastewater utility connection fees. This position ignores the plain language of the Clean Water Act and the basic obligations of property owners to be good citizens and to contribute their fair share to the cost of cleaning up nonpoint sources of water pollution.

More than 16,000 wastewater treatment facilities are in operation throughout the United States. Each of these facilities must secure adequate funding to address the Clean Water Act mandates. Most wastewater utilities are funded by a rate structure designed so that all property owners, including those that are tax exempt, pay a one-time connection fee that covers the capital cost of providing treatment capacity and, in addition, pay a recurring operation and maintenance fee based on the relative amount of wastewater put into a public sewer collection system.

It is our belief that everyone responsible for the capacity burden on collection and treatment wastewater facilities should pay a fair share for wastewater collection/treatment expansion and rehabilitation, including the federal government, and effective management of wastewater services stands in equal stead to the management of stormwater in assuring that the nation’s communities are afforded the opportunity to fully enjoy a safe, prosperous, and satisfying lifestyle.

State appellate courts have ruled that charges by local governments to manage the wastewater systems are fees rather than taxes. The courts have clearly recognized that, unlike taxes which are levied to raise general revenue without regard to direct benefit, fees are charged for a particular service and are typically based on the degree of contribution to the problem or benefits provided.

We believe that the Clean Water Act and decisions of the federal and state courts clearly compel federal agencies to pay wastewater utility fees under S. 3481. It left no uncertainty as to stormwater utility fees’ applicability to federally-owned property. The reiteration of legislative intent needs to be extended to wastewater utility fees. Allowing any major generator of wastewater to be exempted from sharing in its proportionate cost of wastewater management services is inequitable to other customers. This also unfairly burdens counties which must carry out federally-mandated wastewater management practices.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: It is imperative to either clarify that S. 3481 is intrinsic to wastewater fees, in additional to stormwater fees. In lieu of that clarification, the need for federal legislation is extremely important to local governments who struggle to provide needed services at a reasonable cost in tight budget times. If federal installations refuse to pay reasonable wastewater costs resulting from capacity and operational costs incurred by local governments in providing service to their federal installations, the unpaid costs are passed onto the residents of the communities. This creates an additional burden both for the local governments and residents in those counties.



Resolution Supporting Ratification of the United Nations’ Convention on the Law of the Sea

Issue: The United States is NOT allowed to participate in deliberations which affect the national security, environmental concerns relating to the use of the seas, and to economic development for U.S. coastal communities.

Adopted Policy: NACo strongly supports the ratification of the United Nation’s Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Background: Most of the oceans of the world have long been subject to the freedom-of-the-seas doctrine set forth in the 17th century, which essentially limits national rights and jurisdiction over the oceans to a narrow belt of sea surrounding a nation’s coastline. A tangle of claims, spreading pollution, competing demands for lucrative fish stocks in coastal waters, growing tension between coastal nations rights to resources, the increased presence of maritime powers, the pressures of long-distance navigation, and a seemingly outdated, if not inherently conflicting freedom-of-the-seas doctrine, has made ratification a necessary tool.

In November of 1967, Malta’s Ambassador to the United Nations, asked the nations of the world to update the freedom-of-the-seas doctrine to take into account the technological changes that had altered man’s relationship to the oceans. Thus, the United Nation’s Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) was adopted in 1982 and covered setting limits, navigation, archipelagic status, transit regimes, exclusive economic zones (EEZs), continental shelf jurisdiction, deep seabed mining, exploitation, protection of the environment, scientific research and settlement disputes. In 1990, consultations were begun between signatories (including the U.S.) over the possibility of modifying the Convention to allow the industrialized countries to join the Convention. The resulting agreement was adopted in 1994, at which time the U.S. signed the agreement and now recognizes the Convention of general international law, but has not yet ratified it at this time.

In 2004, the U.S. United Nation’s Ambassador argued against ratification of the treaty. In 2007, President George W. Bush urged the Senate to approve the Convention of the Law of the Sea. In 2007, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to send the treaty to the full US Senate for a vote. In 2009, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton said that ratification of the Law of the Sea would be a priority for her.

There has been vigorous debate over ratification of the treaty, with criticism coming from those who feel that involvement in some international organizations and treaties are detrimental to U.S. national interests and that it would impinge on sovereignty. However, the pros for ratification are:

1. The environment: Oceans cover over 70 percent of the earth and UNCLOS sets a

legally binding international standard which aims to protect the marine wildlife and environment;

2. National security: The Pentagon claims that countries often make unreasonable and irresponsible claims on marine territory that frustrate military action;

3. International diplomacy: The Convention offers a peaceful way to resolve territorial and natural resource disputes throughout the world; and

4. Business: The U.S. EEZ zone if 3.36 million square miles under the UNCLOS, giving the U.S. the ability to exercise sovereign rights over natural resources within the extended continental shelf area.


Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Ratification of the Convention of the Law of the Sea will allow the U.S. to participate in deliberations which affect all coastal counties in the U.S.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Responsible Military Maritime Sonar Practices

Issue: Military sonar use in marine waters. Adopted Policy: NACo supports focused dialog and collaboration between counties and

the U.S. Military to continue to improve maritime practices and to mitigate sonar impacts to marine mammals, fisheries, local economies, and natural resources.

Background: The military plays a critical role in our national security. However, certain over and on water military operations include deployment of sonar and detonation devices which are known to cause internal ear damage to marine mammals such as whales and pinnpeds. These animals are then disoriented and unable to properly navigate or feed, often beaching on shore. Due to the biological behavior of whales these animals remain together even in perilous conditions, resulting in devastating outcomes to entire pods. Effective measures to locate marine mammal populations before deployment of equipment should be required as well as retrieval of spent chemical and radiation laden materials where and when possible.

Many United States counties have military installations in their demographics which support maritime platforms. These bases are often a boon to local businesses and are an integrated part of their communities; however there are also impacts with regard to noise, accident potential zones, toxic clean-up and land and marine impacts that cause local citizens to approach county officials for assistance in working out collaborative agreements. It is in NACo’s best interest to support counties by providing supportive language as guidance for intergovernmental land and water use policy. This resolution seeks to address maritime military training range complexes in relevant states.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Fiscal impact to counties is negligible and may actually create a cost savings by providing policy language to guide intergovernmental agreements for environment and land use planning thereby preventing costly law suits. Maintaining healthy marine, shoreline and beach environments are economic fishing and tourism drivers.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Ocean Acidification

Issue: Addressing rising carbon dioxide levels. Adopted Policy: NACo supports federal funding for continued education and scientific

study of ocean acidification. Background: Ocean acidification is an alarming condition that threatens the health and

balance of oceans globally. As carbon dioxide (CO2) levels continue to increase, the resultant effect on calcium based organisms and oxygen producing plankton in the marine environment is to dissolve them, leaving the entire food chain in peril. The anticipated impacts to the fishing and tourism industries are catastrophic.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: For counties that depend on marine fishing and tourism related industry for their economic base, ocean acidification has devastating financial impacts. Counties nationwide will be affected by the obvious consequences of non-functioning oceans for both economic, environmental and public health reasons.



Resolution on Changes to the Oil Pollution Act

Issue: Updating federal oil spill and emergency response policy. Adopted Policy: NACo supports federal legislation and policies to strengthen local

government involvement under the Oil Pollution Act (OPA). NACo supports requiring federal agencies who oversee OPA to consult and coordinate with local governments in environmental protection, oil spill contingency planning, training and implementation of OPA processes.

Background: The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990 is instrumental in helping the nation prevent and respond to oil spills, while providing the money and resources necessary to respond to oil spills. A number of federal agencies oversee the Act including, but not limited to, the U.S. Coast Guard, Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Since 1990, there have been a number of OPA overseen spills both inland and offshore. For the most part, the emergency management partnerships among the federal, state and local governments have worked under this model. Since thousands of small spills occur both inland and offshore every year, small spill emergency response under OPA has been refined.

During the three months in 2010 when the Deepwater Horizon oil spill gushed oil over a multistate area, significant flaws in the national OPA response model arose. According to an U.S. Coast Guard memo dated March 18, 2011, the Gulf Coast spill was “the nation’s first declared Spill of National Significance (SONS) and the first time in history where a National Incident Commander (NIC) was designated.”

County governments experienced massive confusion under the SONS OPA response. During the Gulf Coast disaster, it became apparent that coordination and communication among the federal, state and local government agencies was lacking under the OPA model. While all levels of government had contingency and incident management strategy plans, implementation of said plans was erratic. Each level of government had different priorities that, in some cases, conflicted with the local plan. The protection of local environmental resources and economies were threatened because the federal government did not adequately involve counties in the planning and decision making processes.

Many lessons were learned from the spill, that if implemented before another SONS spill, will improve emergency response under OPA. These lessons also have implications for other areas of the nation that may be impacted by oil spills. That is why it is important that all levels of government consult with each other in crafting contingency and incident management strategy plans, training, and processes.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: If another oil spill occurs either on land or offshore, the environmental and economic toll to local communities is staggering for decades to come.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Pesticide Use

Issue: National permit program for pesticides. Adopted Policy: NACo supports H.R. 872, the “Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of

2011.” NACo opposes any legislation that expands EPA’s jurisdiction in regard to pesticide use in (and around) county streets, gutters, and ditches.

NACo supports using pesticides in accordance with the instructions on the label and supports strong penalties for those who misuse pesticides in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).


Background: In March 2011, the House passed legislation that would countermand a court order and prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from moving forward on plans to regulate pesticides use. The Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act (H.R. 872) was introduced as a bipartisan response to a court ruling on National Cotton Council v. EPA (6th Circuit 2009). H.R. 872 was referred to the Senate for consideration.

In National Cotton Council v. EPA, the 6th Circuit ruled that EPA must regulate pesticides as a pollutant under the Clean Water Act’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. In June 2009, the EPA rolled out their draft permit program, which will be finalized in the Fall of 2011. The upcoming pesticide regulations would have a significant impact on county government activities association with public health and safety. Prior to that decision, EPA used Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA to regulate pesticide use — as long as pesticides are used in accordance to FIFRA, the applicator was covered under federal law. The proposed EPA pesticide permit program adds additional reporting and monitoring requirements. No funding was attached to the new requirements to help state and local governments comply with the new regulations.

Under the proposed regulations, NPDES pesticide permits would be required for all pesticide discharges near “waters of the U.S.” As originally proposed, the pesticide regulations would have a huge impact on state and local government activities associated with public health, land use, forest and park management, flood control, transportation projects, air and water programs, invasive species control, and endangered species protection. The EPA also intended to include monitoring and reporting requirements for applications impacting a specific number of acres. The draft proposal would also allow citizen suits to move forward. This permit will have devastating effects on county programs, particularly mosquito abatement and noxious weed control efforts, creating huge unfunded mandates for both urban and rural counties.

While this is a federal program, 44 states would be required to implement their own program, based on the finalized regulations. Six states’ pesticide program would be directly overseen by the EPA. The tight timeframe is concerning for a number of states who must pass the state regulations through their state legislatures. The responsibility for overseeing the permit falls upon the unit of local government which manages the program. This can be a mosquito abatement district, a cooperative weed management area, or other such district, but is most commonly an extension of county government.

The FIFRA is the principal law that authorizes EPA to regulate the manufacture, distribution, sale, and use of pesticides in the United States. Under FIFRA, the EPA is specifically authorized to: strengthen the registration process by shifting the burden of proof to the chemical manufacturer; enforce compliance against banned and unregistered products; and promulgate the regulatory framework missing from the original law. FIFRA has been extremely effective in regulating the use and sale of pesticides to protect human health and preserve the environment. More importantly, FIFRA does not fully preempt state or local law, allowing state and local governments to also regulate pesticide use. The proposed pesticides NPDES program will create unfunded mandates for local governments and preemptions of local authorities.

This Adopted Policy is consistent with existing NACo policy that states that local streets, gutters and human made ditches should not be considered “waters of the U.S.”

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The fiscal impact could be enormous on counties as they struggle to implement the new pesticides rules, especially for rural counties that have few staff and limited budgets.


Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution to Support Advanced Cleaner Coal Technologies

Issue: Present and future strategies on United States energy sources have and must continue to include support and funding of advanced cleaner coal technologies.

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties (NACo) strongly supports advancement of cleaner coal technologies as part of this country’s future.

Background: The Industrial Revolution in the United States was primarily fueled by coal, this nation’s most abundant and available energy source, especially manufacturing and transportation. Based on the current rate of consumption, the Demonstrated United States Coal Reserve is estimated to provide us with another 250 to 300 years of coal. Mined in only 251 counties in the United States, coal and products produced by coal and its by-products can be found everywhere in the manufacturing process, turning the wheels in thousands of industries. Coal provides family sustaining jobs in the coalfields of America and it is a “driver industry”, creating 2.7 jobs for every job in the coal industry. Given the fact that we only maintain a 90 to 120-day supply of coal on the ground, coal is a vital industry that provides electrical generation to over 50 percent of the United States population. Demands for reduced green house gases, carbon capture sequestration (CCS), and alternative fuels are a clarion call to our most abundant, adaptable, affordable, available, safe and most importantly secure energy tool. Coal will meet this challenge just as it partners with the electric power industry to finish putting scrubbers on coal-fired power plants making America a true leader among nations in reducing pollution. It is essential to support the research, development, and implementation of advanced cleaner coal technologies. One example of this technology is the ability to change coal into diesel, reducing our reliance on foreign oil and burning a cleaner product within the United States. Another example is the integration of pelletized coal with various biomass products to increase BTW amount for full combustion.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The broad-based fiscal impact on including advanced clean coal technologies will initially be minimum due to private industry’s role. Investments needed to be made are vital if we are to actually address our energy concerns on a large, practical scale. Advanced clean coal technology can make the difference and provide the “bridging” we need to achieve energy independence utilizing all of our fuel sources available.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Community Renewable Energy Projects

Issue: Promotion of Community Renewable Energy Projects. Adopted Policy: NACo supports federal legislation and policies that enables funding

mechanisms, including grant programs, for Community Renewable Energy Projects. Background: Community renewable energy projects are locally owned renewable

energy projects of 20 MW or smaller that have a component of local ownership. They include low impact hydro, biomass, community scale wind, wave and solar.

Community renewable energy projects benefit the counties by providing jobs and economic development. They build locally owned businesses that keep revenues in the communities while bringing in clean renewable power to distributed systems that help strengthen the energy grid. Counties would benefit from policy that supports community renewable energy projects in the following three areas:


1. Provide a federal grant program for “for-profit” and “non-profit” projects that looks similar to the existing ITC/Grant program but is established for community renewable energy projects of 20 MW and less and that is of sufficient duration to allow community projects to develop with assurance the program will be there when the projects are ready for funding

2. Provide a federal power purchase policy similar to a revised PURPA for 20 MW and less projects or a feed-in-tariff that provides adequate funding for community renewable energy projects

3. Provide a funding program for feasibility and technical support for community renewable energy projects to provide early development support.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Local ownership has the potential to increase earnings or income received by a factor of 3.5 beyond non-locally owned wind farms. The local ownership and local financing result in more dollars remaining in the local economy. It provides potential for income to communities, schools, landowners and others that do not traditionally benefit from large projects. Community wind projects improve local grid stability.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Programs

Issue: Supporting PACE programs nationally. Adopted Policy: NACo supports funding for Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE)

programs and supports their treatment by Federal regulators as a traditional tax assessment program with first lien status.

Background: NACo policy supports federal funding and other incentives to promote nationwide energy conservation efforts. The Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program is an innovative local government financing program that allows a property owner to apply for funds to pay for energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements that will reduce their energy costs. Participation in the program is voluntary and repayment is accomplished through a property tax assessment on the participating home or business.

Over 200 local jurisdictions across the country have established or are in the process of establishing PACE programs. However, on July 6, 2010 the Federal Housing Finance Administration (FHFA) issued a statement in which it concluded that the PACE program was not a “traditional tax assessment” and took a series of steps that will prevent PACE assessments from being considered senior to mortgage obligations, as other municipal assessments are treated, and will severely limit or eliminate the use of PACE programs. The FHFA’s action threatens the viability of residential PACE programs, which in turn will hamper job creation and deny property owners an opportunity to responsibly reduce their energy consumption, reduce their utility bills, and benefit their community.

NACo urges the FHFA to work with counties to overcome the FHFA’s objection to subordination, so that more counties can implement PACE programs.

PACE is not a loan, but instead is built on traditional tax assessments, which local governments have managed for over 100 years. PACE was not designed to increase the risk of homeowners, business owners, lenders, or the financial system, and was created with stringent operating rules, to ensure a net positive benefit to all parties. When fully implemented, PACE can achieve significant energy savings, provide positive benefits to the environment and generate local jobs.


Several members of Congress, including House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Frank, and House Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Waxman, and 12 members of the Senate, have contacted the Administration to request that PACE programs be allowed to move forward and have first lien priority over previously recorded mortgages. However, in light of FHFA’s most recent action, it is increasingly likely that Congress will be required to preserve the integrity, autonomy and priority of local governments’ property tax assessments.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: PACE programs are self sustaining and do not cost local, state or the federal government anything to implement. The participants cover administrative costs. Rural and urban counties will be equally impacted by the happening of PACE and stand to lose a valuable tool in creating local jobs and reducing energy and water usage.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution to Request Stakeholder Involvement in Developing USFWS Wind Siting Guidelines Under the Bald and Golden Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act

Issue: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Wind Siting Guidelines and the Bald and Golden Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Adopted Policy: NACo urges the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to reopen the public process and include local governments and consider mitigation and incidental take as they develop the Wind Siting Guidelines under the Bald and Golden Eagle Act and Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Background: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has proposed and continues to work on guidelines relating to siting wind projects and the requirements pertaining to project development under the Bald and Golden Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. These guidelines have received little input from stakeholders but will detrimentally impact wind power development across the country. This will limit local economic development and the availability of renewable wind energy.

Currently USFWS policy requires: 1. No siting of wind projects within 6 miles of eagle nests 2. Shutting down wind farms during eagle migratory periods 3. Possible removal of wind turbines if eagle mortality is documented 4. Open ended requirements for monitoring and undefined mitigation criteria 5. Open ended requirements for the wind industry to fund USFWS research projects These requirements are extremely costly and cannot be achieved by developers if they

hope to remain viable. Wind power development has been beneficial to many counties across the country (particularly rural counties) by bringing in jobs, tax revenue, and alternative energy.

Counties and other stakeholders should be directly involved with the development of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Wind Siting Guidelines and other guidance documents used to address mitigation and planning around eagles and other birds covered under the Bald and Golden Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Counties request that USFWS bring stakeholders to the table when developing policies around wind development so that economic impacts and alternate mitigation may be considered, particularly when the requirements include expensive studies, monitoring, and mitigation.


Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Although it is not known what the full impact will be to counties, failure to include local government and other stakeholder input when developing the siting guidelines could result in a decrease in economic development, particularly in rural counties. Rural counties would lose revenues generated by wind projects as well as the jobs that are created. Urban counties would lose the benefit of the production and availability of clean, renewable energy.


Resolution on Conservation Easement Tax Incentives Issue: Continuation of enhanced federal tax deduction for donations of conservation

easements. Adopted Policy: NACo supports continuation of the enhanced federal tax deduction for

donations of conservation and trail easements to facilitate their use by counties, special districts and other units of local government as a land planning, conservation and management tool.

Background: The National Association of County Park and Recreation Officials, a NACo affiliate, supports continuation of enhanced federal tax incentives for conservation and trail easements. County park departments, forest preserve, conservation and other special districts, and water management agencies, frequently purchase or accept donation of such easements as a cost-effective tool to conserve natural resources, preserve open space, connect regional trail and greenway corridors, or create other green infrastructure networks. Conservation easements also help protect working farm, ranch and forest lands, and historic sites. Such easements are a voluntary means of allowing private land holders to retain ownership, while permanently protecting important conservation values, which may include wildlife habitat, watershed protection, recreational access or other public benefits at a lower cost than fee-simple purchase of the land by a public agency. Allowing conserved lands to remain in private hands also lessens land management costs for public agencies, keeps land on the tax rolls, and avoids the cost of providing services to far-flung residential developments.

Since 2006, an enhanced tax incentive has allowed family farmers, ranchers, and other moderate-income landowners to get a significant tax benefit for donating a conservation easement on their land. Conservation easements allow private landowners to permanently retire development rights to protect significant natural resources or open space, while trail easements provide similar tax benefits for allowing construction of public access trails across private property. Thanks to strong bipartisan Congressional support, the enhanced federal tax incentive was renewed in 2010 through the end of 2011. Continuation of the tax incentive again is needed, and multi-year or permanent renewal would be of special value. Donating development rights to land requires careful consideration by the private landowner, often taking years from initial conversations to execution of an agreement. It would be a great advantage for such landowners not to be pressured with the artificial deadline of each year not knowing if the incentive will be continued for the following year.

Under previous law, landowners with modest incomes received little or no federal tax benefit from donating what may be their family’s most valuable asset. The enhanced federal incentive helps such landowners afford to support conservation, outdoor recreation or other public needs by: raising the maximum deduction a donor can take for donating a conservation easement from 30 percent of their adjusted gross income (AGI) in any year to 50%; allowing


qualified farmers and ranchers to deduct up to 100 percent of their AGI; and increasing the number of years over which a donor can take deductions from 6 to 16 years. Without the enhanced easement incentive, an agricultural landowner earning $50,000 a year who donated a conservation easement worth $1 million could take a total of no more than $90,000 in tax deductions. Under the enhanced incentive, that landowner can take as much as $800,000 in tax deductions spread out over as many as 16 years, still less than the full value of their donation, but a significant increase.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The enhanced incentive helps to encourage “bargain sales” of easements purchased by local, state and federal conservation agencies, whereby the voluntary sale of the property right to a charity or government agency is for less than its full fair market value.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution in Support of Special Redevelopment and Smart Growth Zones

Issue: The federal government should support holistic implementation of county and other local government plans for neighborhood redevelopment and smart growth.

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties calls on Congress to create special economic zones to receive specific federal incentives, such as, but not limited to, tax-preferred bonds, for the purpose of livable, walkable, green developments, and communities.

Background: For the past several decades, both urban downtowns and traditional downtowns have been losing jobs, residents, and revenue. However, in these economic times, the value of their infrastructure and other assets that had previously made these areas great cannot be so easily cast aside. A recent survey conducted by the American Institute of Architects (AIA) found that 43% of Americans, and over 50% of respondents over the age of 45, would pay more for housing in ‘town centers’ where people can easily walk to shops, schools, mass transit, and other public amenities. Unfortunately, very little of America’s housing is in neighborhoods with these characteristics and not every portion of a metropolitan area is suitable for this type of development. Additionally, rising prices for energy and materials will make it essential for governments to support denser redevelopment of existing neighborhoods and rehabilitation of historic buildings, especially in higher populated areas.

To address these concerns, AIA has initiated a legislative project that would create a new program to be jointly administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Treasury. This program would allow for the creation of a limited number of Priority Expansion Zones to receive special economic assistance from the federal government. This program could really benefit counties.

This proposal would allow local governments to identify key districts of their community – from small town centers to metropolitan regional hubs – that are ideally suited to be centers of economic and social activity.

The legislation, yet to be introduced, would create a competitive program to designate a limited number of Priority Expansion Zones (PEZ). Unlike many previous federal attempts at community revitalization driven by Washington, this would be a bottom-up rather than top-down approach. Counties, cities, towns and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) will be eligible to submit proposals for the designation of PEZs.

The program shall be designed to meet the following parameters:


First, it shall be locally driven. Cities, counties and other local groups have the opportunity to identify a small portion of their community to redevelop and promote infill or brownfield revitalization and apply to designate this area as a priority expansion zone.

Second, specific limitations will be placed on the size of the zones to ensure that they are an appropriate for walkable development and respectful of human scale.

Third, standards shall be set to ensure that the designated areas are zoned to remove specific regulatory barriers to density and “by right” mixed use development. These jurisdictions would have to demonstrate that their proposed zones meet certain criteria for location and linkage that are designed to demonstrate both the need and feasibility of the area for sustainable investment. Designations will be limited and applications will be evaluated on a competitive basis by the Department of Treasury, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The purpose of these rules is to identify areas that have “good bones” but that are in need of catalytic projects and infrastructure improvements to become more successful models for smart growth.

Finally, the program will offer a financial tool to support development within designated zones. Currently, this is envisioned as a tax-credit bond, which have been noted by the Joint Committee on Taxation and Congressional Budget Office as being more recent in origin, but potentially more economically efficient than traditional tax-exempt bonds. Regardless, any federal money shall be required to have a local match to leverage the federal investment and the bond will also have a reasonable volume cap to ensure it does not significantly affect the deficit.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: This program would empower local communities to create the kind of neighborhoods that defined small town America for generations, and that a new generation of Americans is demanding. It would result in significant benefits that go far beyond the designated communities. Effective planning and management within zones will lead to spillover effects. Surrounding areas may not receive the same development incentives, but communities will be able to leverage the PEZ area as a centerpiece to a larger district or regional plan.


American County Platform and Resolution 2011‐2012 1

FINANCE AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS STATEMENT OF BASIC PHILOSOPHY

Counties, as political subdivisions of the sovereign states have a right and a responsibility to raise the necessary revenues to finance critical basic public services of a wide variety, many of which are federally mandated. TENTH AMENDMENT

NACo affirms the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States as the operational force governing and balancing the respective powers of the states and local governments and federal government. PARTNERSHIP AND THE NEED FOR STRONG COUNTY GOVERNMENT

Counties are more than just local branches of the state or federal government. As representatives of the local government that reaches all the people, county officials pledge themselves to strengthen and improve county government. The federal government should recognize the inalienable right of state and local governments to participate in the decision making process of a federal system. It should further recognize that because local government is the closest to the citizenry it is often best equipped to deliver services and administer programs. Strong county government is an essential component and partner in the effective operation of national-state-local government activities. INTERGOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY FROM TAXATION

It has been long established, under the Constitutional doctrine of intergovernmental immunity that the federal government and state governments, and their political subdivisions, may not by taxation interfere with the legitimate functions of another. Furthermore, the Constitution, by requiring that the federal government guarantee a republican form of government to the states, requires that state and local governments should have the power to finance their legitimate functions free from federal interference. NACo insists that the federal tax system should acknowledge the direct and indirect linkages between federal and local tax systems. The federal government should not tax county governments or their respective functions, just as local governments cannot tax the federal government. Nor can federal tax policies be allowed to dictate states’ revenue sources. ASSESSMENT AND TAX ADMINISTRATION GASB Activities Related To Performance Measurement NACo opposes issuance by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board of any standard or any other official guidance, such as a statement of recommended practice, on performance measurement for the following reasons:

• Accounting is not synonymous with accountability; • Decisions about performance measurement depend on the specific goals, objectives

and strategies pursued by a local government and inherently not simply an accounting decision but a part of the policy and budget process;

• Even a voluntary action by GASB, an authoritative standard-setting body, will be perceived as mandatory; and


• Standards will discourage, rather than foster, innovation in performance measurement.

Tax Exemption for Municipal Bonds NACo supports the right of counties to issue governmental debt for essential public services by marketing bonds to investors with interest on such bonds remaining totally exempt from federal taxation. Just as federal debt is exempt from local taxes, county governments vigorously oppose any action which would directly or indirectly tax, under the federal income tax, interest on state or local government municipal bonds, or would place these bonds in an inferior competitive position with federal debt instruments and corporate securities. NACo asserts that tax-exempt bonds are a critical tool for budgeting and financing of long-range investments in the infrastructure and facilities necessary to meet public demand for government services. NACo opposes restrictions that would drive up the cost of issuing tax-exempt bonds. NACo endorses simplifications that would ease existing burdensome restrictions on tax-exempt financing. Public Purpose

Counties should have the right to determine the public purposes to be financed by their bonds. The tax-exempt nature of tax-exempt bonds should be safeguarded when they meet a public purpose that benefits the community as a whole, not merely as individuals, regardless of ownership. Ownership or the employing power of those who operate a facility should not be the criteria by which public purpose is defined. However, eligibility for tax-exempt bonds should rest on a test of public purpose, defined in the following manner. A public purpose should be met:

• When a general purpose state or local government’s general revenues have been used to finance a purpose or service over an historic period prior to issuance of a bond for a project determined to be necessary to the provision of such a purpose or service, or

• When local governments carry out a public service as directed by a federal mandate, e.g., jail overcrowding, clean air or water, or

• Where a bond issue is proposed by the local government and meets state and/or local requirements for bond approval. This process should not be used to override Congress’ acts that certain facilities should not be eligible for tax-exempt financing.

Delinquent Tax Bonds Counties should be allowed to issue tax exempt bonds to cover the cost of uncollected and delinquent real property tax bills.

CATEGORIES OF TAX-EXEMPT BONDS Tax-exempt bonds fall into three major categories:

1. Governmental Bonds. Governmental bonds should meet at least one of the above three public purpose tests and their ultimate credit should be pledged from the general revenues of the local government that is the issuer of the bond.

2. Partnership/Private Activity Bonds. Tax-exempt bonds that fall into this category are treated differently from governmental bonds in that they are subject to state-by-state volume limitations based on the population of the state. Partnership bonds are issued on behalf of a governmental body for public purposes that meet one or more of the


above three tests. However, they differ from governmental bonds because they have no claim on the general tax revenues and are largely financed through the revenues generated by the project itself. Furthermore, the bond proceeds benefit a larger percentage of the private sector than the proceeds of governmental bonds. Examples of projects that may generally fall into this category are moderate to low income single family housing and small scale highly targeted economic development.

3. Special Exceptions. Special exceptions should be made for multifamily housing, solid waste facilities, renewable energy improvements, energy efficiency, water conservation and efficiency projects and they should not be subject to volume caps.

501(C)(3) NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION BONDS These are bonds that are issued by authorities created by a government on behalf of organizations that qualify for tax-exempt status under the federal tax code and Internal Revenue Service regulations. They are tax-exempt because they are deemed to perform a charitable service and help government to address the burdens of public service in a progressive manner. Therefore, these organizations should be eligible to use tax-exempt bonds as a capital financing tool as long as they meet certain public service requirements. These bonds are subject to the following restrictions and requirements that distinguish them from purely governmental bonds:

• Non-Profit Hospitals. 501(c)(3) non-profit hospitals should be required to meet appropriate Medicaid/charity care tests in return for the benefit received from using tax-exempt bonds. As long as they provide an appropriate percentage of their services to the uninsured or underinsured their bonds should not be subject to penalties or to the volume cap for all other 501 (c) 3 institutions currently authorized under the Tax Reform Act of 1986.

• Non-Profit Long-Term Care Facilities. 501 (c)(3) non-profit long term care facilities for the elderly, disabled or terminally ill patient, (e.g., AIDS), should continue to be subject to the current volume cap unless, on a case by case basis, they meet appropriate Medicaid/charity care tests.

EXEMPTION FROM THE ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX Interest earned on tax-exempt bonds should be exempt from the federal Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). This exclusion should also apply to ‘excess’ corporate book income, to the extent that it includes interest earned on tax-exempt bonds. REFUNDING

NACo opposes restrictions on counties’ ability to refinance their bonds at lower interest rates, which can save taxpayers millions of dollars. ACCESS TO THE TAX-EXEMPT MARKET

When considering any legislation which would have an impact on the municipal bond market, Congress should ensure that access of state and local governments to the existing tax-exempt market should not be impaired. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION BY MUNICIPAL BOND ISSUERS

NACo recognizes the need for full disclosure of all relevant information concerning a county’s financial condition to potential investors, citizens, and other parties interested in


municipal bonds. NACo opposes federally imposed standards for county financial accounting and reporting and supports those principles put forth by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board.

NACo supports disclosure guidelines developed by the Government Finance Officers Association and the Governmental Accounting Standards Board in cooperation with public interest groups and urges county governments to adhere to these guidelines. ARBITRAGE RATES

NACo opposes requirements that non-abusive arbitrage earnings from investments of bond proceeds in higher yielding securities be rebated to the United States Treasury. The federal government should amend the U.S. tax code to provide simpler and more flexible criteria to determine whether arbitrage has been earned in using tax-exempt bond proceeds. SIMPLIFICATION OF TAX-EXEMPT BOND STATUTES

NACo urges Congress to simplify current tax-exempt bond statutes and that the legislation includes provisions to:

• Raise the small-issuer arbitrage rebate; • Establish an arbitrage rebate safe harbor with a three-year spend out for construction

projects; • Raise the small-issuer bank interest deduction exception; and • Repeal the five percent unrelated or disproportionate use rule.

MANDATED INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY BONDS NACo urges Congress to create a new category of bonds called Mandated Infrastructure Facility Bonds to assist states, counties and cities in financing federal infrastructure mandates. The bonds would not be subject to arbitrage requirements, state-wide volume caps or limitations on advance refunding. CREDIT ASSISTANCE Any credit assistance program should be automatically applicable to all legitimate state and local borrowing and should not be subject to elaborate administrative procedures. EQUALIZATION IN FEDERAL GRANTS

The distribution of federal grants should reflect relative inequalities among recipient governments in program needs and in the fiscal capabilities to meet these needs with the following:

• Appropriateness and Feasibility. Appropriate agencies of the national government should be required to examine those grant programs which distribute funds directly to local governments or support local projects, in order to assess the extent to which variations in local fiscal capabilities should be recognized in their distribution and appraise the feasibility of administering effective and equitable equalization provisions in such grants;

• Periodic Review of Need Indices. The departments and agencies responsible for administering federal grant programs should be required to review periodically the adequacy of the need indices employed in the respective grant programs and the appropriateness of their equalization provisions;


• Recognizing Disparities. States should be required to recognize disparities in fiscal needs and resources among local governments in the redistribution of federal grant funds; and

• Serving Incorporated Areas. All federal grant programs should include equitable criteria that recognize that county governments serve all citizens within their boundaries, including areas within incorporated municipalities. The distribution of federal assistance funds should be based on total county population when determining prime sponsorship or entitlement.

BLOCK GRANTS NACo urges Congress and the Administration to consider the following principles in developing block grant legislation:

• Emphasis should be on reducing expenses and not on shifting costs from the federal government to local taxpayers;

• Federal block grant legislation should be developed in close consultation with county officials;

• States should be required to jointly plan, review, accept, and publish comments from county officials on all expenditures of federal funds;

• Federal block grant funds for health, social services, employment, community and economic development and criminal justice should be allocated to general purpose local governments where existing service delivery systems are in place;

• Reasonable transition time should be allowed to move from categorical to block grants and counties should be given sufficient time to adjust their own laws, budgets and administrative procedures to comply with changes in federal policy;

• Local flexibility should be permitted to address identifiable needs within the context of meeting broad national objectives;

• Block grant proposals should require political accountability for the expenditure of public funds at the county level;

• Accountability for the use of funds should be demonstrated through outcome measurements;

• State administration costs should be capped to what is reasonable and justifiable on the basis of current administrative costs; and

• If a federal mandate is eliminated or waived for a state it should be eliminated for local governments.

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION SCHEDULE CONTRACTS Access to General Services Administration schedule contracts provides volume pricing and reduces unnecessary duplication of effort by multiple federal, state and local government contract managers to make public sector procurement more cost effective. NACo supports total access for local governments to GSA schedule contracts. CONSULTATION IN FEDERAL DECISION-MAKING The federal government should encourage early and meaningful involvement of elected public officials and their representative organizations in all aspects of national decision making. The federal government should discern the difference between the partnership role of public


elected officials and their representative groups and the advisory role of public interest groups representing non-elected officials. RECOGNITION OF FISCAL IMPACTS The national government should protect the integrity of its state and local government partners by establishing an expanded fiscal impact policy. This policy should inform state and local governments of all anticipated regulatory and fiscal impacts of proposed policies on state and local budgets. MANDATE FUNDING

The federal government should fund local government for all costs associated with complying with mandates. PREEMPTION

Preemption of local authority is a growing concern of the nation’s counties. Federal efforts to dictate implementation of traditional county responsibilities and functions undermines the concept of federalism and is contrary to the constitutional framework underlying federal/state/local relations. Therefore, NACo opposes any effort by the federal and state governments, or international agreement, to preempt local authorities. Federal preemption of local authority should not be initiated unless there is an overriding national issue and the fiscal impact on local government of such action has been evaluated closely. DEDUCTIBILITY OF STATE AND LOCAL TAXES

The federal tax code should retain the deductibility of all state and local taxes, particularly the property tax, and it should reinstate the deductibility of sales taxes. QUASI-GOVERNMENT INSTRUMENTALITIES The federal government should not deprive counties of their effective power to tax through creation of quasi-governmental instrumentalities that are exempted from state and local taxes. VALUATION AND ASSESSMENT DECISIONS

NACo opposes federal legislation which intrudes into state and local government valuation and assessment decisions. AD VALOREM TAXES

NACo opposes federal legislation that attempts to usurp state jurisdiction over ad valorem taxes. REFORM OF PROPERTY TAXES The property tax should be regarded as a necessary part of an overall tax system because it raises a substantial amount of money and is, in fact, the largest single source of local tax revenue. However, property tax revenues are no longer sufficient to support all functions of local government, and the property tax is no longer the best measure of a person’s ability to pay. Counties should have the ability to employ additional means of financing county government. NACo recommends the following policies to relieve and reform the property tax:


• Maintenance of Federal and State Funding. Federal and state financing of public assistance and income-maintenance programs should be maintained by federal and state governments.

• Reimbursement. Legislation should be enacted by the federal government or the states to reimburse counties for any loss in property tax revenues caused by legislation or by administrative action which reduces or exempts property from taxation, such as the holding of lands in trust for the benefit of Native Americans.

INTERCEPT OF FEDERAL TAX REFUNDS

NACo supports federal legislation to permit the offset of federal tax refunds for state and local tax debts and outstanding court-ordered obligations in criminal and juvenile justice proceedings. FEDERAL TAX REFORM NACo supports tax reform and simplification, and encourages Congress and the Administration to make it a priority. COUNTY AND TRIBAL GOVERNMENT RELATIONS

The policy of NACo is to support government-to-government relations that recognize the role and unique interests of tribes, states, counties, and other local governments to protect all members of their communities and to provide governmental services and infrastructure beneficial to all—Indian and non-Indian alike.

NACo recognizes and respects the tribal right of self-governance to provide for tribal members and to preserve traditional tribal culture and heritage. In similar fashion, NACo recognizes and promotes self-governance by counties to provide for the health, safety and general welfare of all members of their communities. To that end, NACo supports active participation by counties on issues and activities that have an impact on counties.

NACo supports the reaching of enforceable agreements between tribes and local governments concerning the mitigation of impacts of gaming or other development. NACo opposes any federal limitation on the ability of tribes, states, counties and other local governments to reach mutually acceptable and enforceable agreements or on the ability of these governments to fulfill the purposes for which they have self-governance. Nothing in federal law should interfere with the provision of public health, safety, welfare or environmental services by local government. It is the policy of NACo to support legislation and regulation that preserves—and does not impair—the ability of counties to provide these services to the community. LANDS IN TRUST NACo supports the improvement of the process by which lands are considered to be taken into trust, including revision of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 to require:

(i) adequate advance notice of applications, (ii) actual meaningful consultation (including providing counties 120 days to respond to

applications and requiring the Department of the Interior/Bureau of Indian Affairs to respond within 90 days, in writing, to such comments explaining the rationale for acceptance or rejection of those comments), and

(iii) to the extent constitutionally permissible, the consent of the affected counties.


NACo opposes administrative action or a legislative “quick fix” to overturn the United States Supreme Court decision in the case of Carcieri v. Salazar, 555 U.S., 129 S. Ct. 1058 (2009) which held that the Secretary of the Department of the Interior (DOI) lacks authority to take land into trust for tribes that were not “under federal jurisdiction” upon enactment of the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) in 1934. NACo calls on Congress to address any Carcieri issues as part of a comprehensive examination and congressionally enacted reform of the fee land into trust process. This reform is necessary as the current federal fee to trust process as exercised under the IRA and as used under the “restored lands” exception to the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) is contrary to the original legislative intent; is without clear and enforceable standards; does not take into account county interests; and, at times, interferes with county ability to provide essential services to the community. NACo supports legislative changes to the trust process that also include full compensation to counties for lost tax revenue resulting from taking lands into federal jurisdiction.

GAMING

NACo supports the revision of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) to require consultation with, and mitigation of identified impacts on, affected local governments and the implementation of accountability procedures. ELECTIONS

Counties have traditionally administered and financed elections in the United States, an arrangement that acknowledges the differences in size and requirements of various jurisdictions. NACo opposes unfunded mandates and insufficient deadlines with regard to federal election reform. Counties administer the nation's elections and should be included in any meaningful reform of our election process. NACo further asserts that counties should not be held liable for state failures to comply with election requirements imposed by the federal government. TOOLS FOR MINORITY LANGUAGE OUTREACH UNDER THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT NACo expresses concern that the federal government does not provide the essential resources needed for voters who require assistance to participate in our democracy. Many counties lack essential tools required to comply with Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act and serve the needs of voters who are limited English-proficient. NACo encourages full funding for the Census Bureau and additional funding for the Department of Justice and/or the Census Bureau to notify affected jurisdictions upon publication in the Federal Register of any coverage determination under Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. Such notice should specify the basis for the coverage determination and should include a data supplement for use in targeting outreach required under Section 203. This supplement should disaggregate the demographic data used to determine coverage by census tract or other smallest level appropriate. DISCOUNTED POSTAGE RATE

NACo supports the establishment of a discounted Presort First-Class postage rate, similar to that enjoyed by federal agencies such as the Internal Revenue Service, for specified local government mailings mandated by federal or state law, such as voter registrations, election ballot mailings, property tax statements, summonses, and jury duty pay.


REPEAL OF THE REAL ID ACT NACo urges repeal of the Real ID Act of 2005. It places an unfair burden on the motoring public, threatens privacy and leaves citizens vulnerable to identity theft. The Act fails to accomplish its mission of improving security. NACo urges the federal government to ensure that Homeland Security should start at home by allowing driver's license renewal services to remain at home. AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY

NACo supports nationwide implementation of the American Community Survey to improve the utility of census data and permit more frequent releases of data to demonstrate emerging local and regional trends.


FINANCE AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS RESOLUTIONS

Resolution Supporting Renewal of the Build America Bonds and Recovery Zone Bonds Programs

Issue: Renewal of bond financing programs for counties. Adopted Policy: NACo supports resurrecting direct subsidy bonds (e.g. Build America

Bonds and Recovery Zone Bonds programs) as financing options for county governments. Background: The Build America Bonds program, which was part of the American

Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), was proven to be an effective financing option for local governments. This program increased the market for local government debt by expanding the pool of potential market investors, including pension funds.

ARRA also authorized the Recovery Zone Bonds program, which permitted the issuance of two new types of tax-preferred bonds by state and local governments for areas designated as Recovery Zones: Recovery Zone Economic Development Bonds and Recovery Zone Facility Bonds. Recovery Zones are areas designated by state and local issuers as having significant poverty, unemployment, rate of home foreclosures, or general distress.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The Build America Bonds and Recovery Zone Bonds programs have helped open the credit markets and, along with tax-exempt bonds and other tax credit bonds, are important financing options for counties.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution to Control the Rising Budget Deficit

Issue: Proposed measures to reduce the federal deficit and their effects on counties. Adopted Policy: National Association of Counties asserts the following: • Congress cannot solve the budget deficit by only cutting domestic, non-military

discretionary programs. • Federal assistance to state and local governments will help mitigate further layoffs. • Federal investment in state and local infrastructure produces private sector jobs. • Deficit reduction should not be accomplished by shifting costs to counties (e.g. cuts

to Medicaid), imposing unfunded mandates, or pre-empting county programs or taxing authority.

• The National Association of Counties supports maintaining federal financial assistance for county programs at the 2010 fiscal year levels.

Background: As President Obama and the U. S. Congress evaluate alternatives to control the Federal Government’s rising deficit, counties are concerned that too much emphasis will be placed on reductions to domestic, discretionary spending programs that will affect the American people. When a recession occurs or the economy falters and there is high unemployment, services at the county level are needed most. Historically, there is a greater need for social services, health care, counseling, job training and local economic development during times like we are facing now. Domestic, discretionary programs are critical to the ability of counties to carry out their responsibilities as service providers for both the federal and state governments. The current economic climate has translated into diminished revenue streams at the local level. Over the past three years, counties have seen revenue collections drastically diminish. Local governments across the nation are facing a perfect storm through a combination of decreased local tax revenues (primarily property and sales) and major reductions in state


financial assistance, while at the same time facing an increased demand for social and health services. As a result, counties of all sizes and in all parts of the nation have been forced to institute significant layoffs, furloughs and service reductions. We anticipate that this climate will continue through at least 2014, and perhaps beyond. While we are not calling for additional increases in assistance like the 2009 stimulus plan, we are asking the Administration and the Congress to consider the following points as they deal with the difficult issue of deficit reduction:

• YOU CAN NOT SOLVE THE BUDGET DEFICIT BY ONLY CUTTING DOMESTIC, NON-MILITARY DISCRETIONARY PROGRAMS. The current national debt is over $14 trillion. Non-Military, discretionary programs are only 12 percent, or approximately $430 billion, of the annual federal budget of $3.6 trillion. These cuts will not put a significant dent in the deficit. So, why decimate important domestic programs carried out by state and local government that serve our national goals and our common residents?

• FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WILL HELP MITIGATE FURTHER LAYOFFS. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the $800 billion stimulus plan passed in early 2009 provided a boost to the economy that preserved at least 1.4 million jobs. Even with this assistance, state and local governments still had to shed more than 200,000 jobs in 2010. It would have been even worse without the stimulus package. With the stimulus funds running out in 2011, more layoffs are probable this year. With further major cuts in domestic programs, even more reductions are likely, adding to the already high 9.4 percent unemployment rate.

• FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN STATE AND LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRODUCES PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS. Investment by the Federal Government in county programs such as transportation, water and sewer projects, energy efficiency, rural development, CDBG, PILT, SRS and others produce both public and private sector jobs, has a multiplier effect, and promotes local economic development.

Deteriorating infrastructure is a hindrance to economic expansion, while infrastructure investments unlock untapped potential in our economy leading to higher GDP and increased tax revenues. Counties are responsible for a substantial portion of America’s infrastructure – 45 percent of the nation’s bridges, 44 percent of the roads and highways, one-third of the airports and transit systems, and much of our water and sewer system. We can, therefore, vastly contribute to the creation of jobs and economic recovery.

• DEFICIT REDUCTION SHOULD NOT BE ACCOMPLISHED BY SHIFTING COSTS TO COUNTIES, IMPOSING UNFUNDED MANDATES, OR PRE-EMPTING COUNTY PROGRAMS OR TAXING AUTHORITY. Cost shifting to, or imposing underfunded or unfunded mandates on state and local government will only exacerbate the current fiscal strain and delay efforts toward economic recovery.

County governments are partners with the states and the federal government in providing important programs and services to the American people. We are working hard, making significant cuts, instituting reforms, and being creative in facing the worst fiscal crisis since the Great Depression. Counties will participate in addressing the challenges our nation is facing and expect the federal government and Congress to do the same without drastically hurting the people we all serve.


Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: Significant for all counties by potential loss of programmatic financial assistance from the federal government.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Dissolution of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC)

Issue: H.R. 672, as reported from the House Committee on Administration on June 2, 2011, would eliminate the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and place its duties under the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

Adopted Policy: NACo opposes the termination of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission and transfer of its functions to the Federal Election Commission. NACo supports efforts by Congress through its oversight and appropriations responsibilities to resolve any significant federal concerns relating to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. Should the functions of the EAC be transferred to the FEC or elsewhere, current levels of NACo representation on federal election advisory boards should be maintained.

Background: The U.S. EAC was established under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) to perform multiple functions relating to federal involvement in election administration. The establishment of a dedicated federal agency, outside of the FEC, whose sole function was to focus on the improvement of the election process, was supported by many of the election reform stakeholders including NACo.

The EAC has been in existence less than eight years and is just now coming into its own as a productive partner in the election administration process. Prior to HAVA, the FEC had an election administration office that failed to provide the kind of leadership and guidance that local governments needed. The FEC is, and will always be, primarily a regulatory body staffed overwhelmingly by attorneys whose focus is on campaign finance. The EAC was developed to address the unique concerns facing election administrators who are primarily county officials rather than as an afterthought to campaign finance regulations.

Although NACo’s own Election Reform Commission did not directly call for a new agency, most local officials involved in election administration and its funding have seen significant benefit from the creation of a separate federal agency outside the FEC. Prior to HAVA, little, if any, contact between FEC commissioners and local election administrators occurred. Since the creation of the EAC interaction between the decision makers (Commissioners) and local officials has been extensive. In the past eight years EAC commissioners have visited hundreds of local election offices and have educated themselves thoroughly on the election process. Prior to the EAC, we had no decision making body in Washington DC that bothered to see and hear the successes and concerns of local officials. The EAC has become well aware of the problems facing local governments and the financial challenges we experienced.

Most recently, the EAC has taken the lead in providing us a forum to develop a long-term plan for federal, state and local cooperation in resolving future funding issues for replacement voting equipment. The best practices and management guides developed by the EAC have provided local officials with a broad range of efficiency and money saving steps.

The grant programs they have initiated are just starting to bear fruit for county governments with over a million dollars in grants provided to election officials in May 2011 to develop better procedures and toolkits for our equipment testing. A majority of these grants went to county officials who will be developing materials that will benefit all county officials.


H.R. 672 was drafted after some very legitimate concerns by some members of Congress regarding the explosive growth in personnel at the EAC and some fairly significant personnel missteps. This resolution is not designed to make light of those concerns but rather calls for continuation of a separate agency that is just beginning to show benefit to County government while recognizing legitimate role of Congress to provide oversight. Moving the functions of the EAC back to the FEC can only dilute the impact of county government on federal policy.

HAVA guaranteed strong representation of local officials in an advisory capacity to the Federal agencies that would develop guidelines, reports and perform clearinghouse functions. In addition to guaranteed 20 percent county government representation on the current Board of Advisors, 50 percent of the 110 member Standards Board is by law local officials. The configuration proposed by H.R. 672 will guarantee that state and federal officials will have appointment control of at least 93 percent of the new board.

The contrast between county government’s influence with the EAC versus our previous experience with the FEC is striking to those who have worked under both. Congress has valid concerns about the operation of any federal agency but the termination of the EAC as an agency will reduce county government impact on federal policy.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Both urban and rural counties have benefited from programs advanced by the EAC. The EAC has made extensive efforts to seek input from a broad range of counties when developing management guidelines, best practices and equipment standards.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Opposing Legislative Mandates Regarding the Conduct of Elections at the County Level

Issue: Federal legislation regarding the conduct of elections at the county level. Adopted Policy: NACo opposes legislation that imposes specific and impractical

requirements regarding equipment, procedures, and personnel responsibilities under the guise of Federal election reform when said regulations directly impact the conduct of state and local elections.

Background: The National Association of Counties affirms that the constitutional responsibility for the proper conduct of elections rests with state and county governments. State and county officials have been the guardians of democracy since the inception of our country and have been good stewards of the election process. However, legislative and regulatory proposals continue to be made that would, among other things, require specific voting equipment, mandatory manual audits of election results, and nationwide absentee voting requirements. These and other matters have traditionally been placed in the capable hands of local governments as provided in the Constitution.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: Counties currently make significant expenditures to comply with the mandates of the Help America Vote Act. New legislative and regulatory initiatives would significantly increase the costs for counties of administering elections for federal offices and impact the overall election process.



Resolution to Access Federal GSA Schedules for the Purchase of Environmentally Preferable "Green" Commodities and Services

Issue: Supporting legislation to allow local jurisdictions access to Federal General Services Administration (GSA) schedules for environmentally preferable "green" commodities.

Adopted Policy: NACo urges Congress to enact legislation that will authorize Federal GSA to allow local and state government access to "Green" schedules, supporting greater access for local governments to Federal GSA Schedules.

Background: The General Services Administration administers long-term government-wide contracts with commercial firms to provide access to over 10 million commercial supplies and services. GSA schedule contracts are negotiated by the Federal government with the intent of securing "most favored customer" pricing. Access to GSA schedules provides volume pricing and reduces unnecessary duplication of effort by multiple Federal, state and local government contract managers to make public sector procurement more cost effective.

Accessing Federal GSA contracts offers significant administrative efficiencies and improved value for taxpayer funded purchases by state and local governments. This will allow for significant cost savings and elimination of duplication of effort and time delays in issuing, awarding and obtaining contracts for identical goods and services. This proposal would make "green" procurement for local governments significantly more cost effective, and help to promote environmentally sustainable/good government practices.

Current law limits access to contracts established by the Federal government, however in 2007, through the support of NACo, the National Institute of Governmental Purchasing (NIGP) and the League of Cities, Miami-Dade County was successful in securing authorization to open Schedule 84. This Schedule includes Total Solutions for Law Enforcement, Security, Facilities Management, Fire, Rescue, Clothing, Marine Craft and Emergency/ Disaster Response.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Access to additional Federal GSA schedules containing environmentally preferable "green" commodities and services would result in significant cost savings for counties, while helping them to meet their respective "green" goal missions in an environmentally, economically, fiscally sound, efficient, and sustainable manner. Local governments would also be uniquely positioned to support "green" purchasing, while creating additional "green" jobs to help America transform our economy and compete in the world. In addition, the Federal government would likely benefit from increasing its purchasing power by opening GSA schedules to state and local governments; local governments alone would add $1 trillion in purchasing power to the Federal governments’ roughly $200 billion in annual procurement.


Resolution Supporting Federal Assistance to the Municipal Bond Market Issue: Federal legislative and regulatory efforts to assist access to the municipal

securities market. Adopted Policy: NACo supports legislative and regulatory efforts to assist state and

local governments access the municipal securities market during times of crises. Background: There are times when the municipal bond market has been in turmoil due

to the global and national economic distress, the downgrading of major financial guarantors that are important to the municipal sector, and the overall freezing of the credit markets. This was most recently seen in the 2008 economic crisis, which was not due to any inherent problems in the municipal market. During that crisis, state and local governments had difficulty accessing


the market when issuing new bonds or restructuring and refinancing current debt. NACo supports initiatives that provide clear authority to federal authorities to enhance market access and liquidity for state and local issuers. NACo also supports efforts to create cost effective and widely available credit enhancement for the capital financing needs of state and local governments.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Better access to the municipal securities market will help lower borrowing costs, helping counties improve their financial standings.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Opposing Federal Preemption of State and Local Taxing Authority over Online Travel Companies

Issue: Preemption of state and local taxing authority. Adopted Policy: NACo opposes any federal legislative or regulatory initiatives that

would preempt state and local taxing authority over Online Travel Companies (OTCs). Background: Hotel taxes are a vital revenue source for counties across the nation.

Some jurisdictions funnel these revenues into the general fund and are used for a myriad of public purposes, including fire and police services. Some communities use these funds to promote local tourism, which creates jobs and pumps badly needed funds into local economies. And some localities use these funds to pay bond obligations used to finance the construction of convention centers, sports facilities, and other public buildings.

However, this revenue source is being threatened by efforts of the OTCs to obtain preferential tax treatment at the expense of local government budgets. The OTCs, such as Expedia, Travelocity, and Orbitz pay hotels a discounted, wholesale rate for the rooms they book. These rooms are then sold to customers at a higher, retail rate. But while customers are charged the applicable hotel tax on the retail rate, the OTCs remit taxes based on the wholesale rate, short-changing local governments while pocketing the difference. This practice is currently the subject of numerous lawsuits across the country. In response, the OTCs are actively lobbying Congress to preempt the authority of state and local governments to impose and collect hotel taxes from the OTCs.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Preemption of state and local taxing authority over the OTCs will adversely affect state and local government budgets, with revenue loses nearing $700 million annually.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Opposing Property Tax Deductibility Reporting Requirement

Issue: Reporting requirement for property tax deductibility. Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties opposes any requirements that

place the burden of responsibility on county government to determine and specify on real property tax bills the deductibility of those taxes and also opposes any requirement to report to the IRS the amount of taxes paid by each taxpayer.

Background: The bipartisan staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation prepares revenue estimates of all revenue legislation considered by the Congress, initiates investigations of various aspects of the federal tax system, and assists the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee with the development and analysis of legislative proposals. A major emphasis of the Joint Committee in recent years is the "tax gap" – the estimated $345 billion per year shortfall between federal tax liability and the amount of tax voluntarily and timely paid.


Several options to reduce the "tax gap" identified in reports issued by the Joint Committee on Taxation have suggested additional reporting requirements on state and local governments, including one option that would require local taxing jurisdictions to report to the IRS the deductibility of taxpayers’ property taxes. NACo and NACCTFO have indicated that such a requirement would create a severe administrative and liability burden for county officials, who are, in the vast majority of cases, not CPAs or tax accountants and not qualified to make a determination of deductible versus nondeductible of property taxes as they relate to the IRS code.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The requirement would be an unfunded mandate on county governments.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement

Issue: Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement. Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties (NACo) encourages efforts to

reduce the complexity of state and local sales and use tax laws and supports legislation codifying the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement. However, tax simplification should not be used as a means by the federal government to undermine county government taxing authority and revenue streams.

Background: NACo supports the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement, a multi-state compact that seeks to reduce the complexity of state and local sales and use tax laws and would permit the collection of sales and use taxes from remote sellers. The Agreement seeks to reduce the complexity of state and local sales and use tax laws and provide incentives for sellers to collect and remit such taxes to member states. The goal of the Agreement is to convince Congress to overturn the Supreme Court decision in Quill v. North Dakota, which denies states and localities the authority to collect sales and use taxes from remote sellers that have no physical presence in the taxing state. States and local governments are losing billions of dollars in uncollected sales tax revenue every year.

However, NACo urges Congress and the Streamlined Sales Tax Governing Board to refrain from using tax simplification as a vehicle to preempt local taxing authority and revenue streams. Any federal legislative or regulatory action that affects communications fees or taxes must be revenue neutral to the locality, between providers of like services, and allow for growth in tax revenues as the service or industry expands.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Counties in member states may recoup millions of dollars in foregone sales tax revenue every year with implementation of the Agreement and federal legislation requiring sellers to comply.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Urging Repeal of Unfunded Three Percent Withholding Mandate for County Procurement

Issue: Requirement that counties withhold federal taxes from payments to county vendors and contractors.

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties supports repeal of the unfunded mandate in Section 511 of Public Law 109-222 (25 USC 342(t)) and endorses legislation to repeal this requirement. NACo also supports efforts to temporarily extend the implementation deadline until the requirement can be permanently repealed.


Background: Section 511 of Public Law 109-222 will require many counties beginning in 2012 to withhold federal taxes on payments for goods and services made to contractors and then submit those payments to the IRS. The requirement does not apply to the private sector. This provision is estimated to raise $6 billion for the federal treasury through a first-year accounting gimmick and slightly more than $200 million per year thereafter. The increase in the cost for state and local governments of goods and services and of reprogramming or purchasing accounts payable systems and hiring additional staff to comply with the requirement will likely exceed that amount. Many counties are also concerned that it will discourage contractors from bidding.

Representative Wally Herger (R-CA) introduced H.R. 674, Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) introduced S. 164 and Senator David Vitter (R-LA) introduced S. 89 to repeal this unfunded mandate on county government. H.R. 674 has 156 cosponsors in the House of Representatives, S. 164 has 15 cosponsors and S. 89 has 8 cosponsors. A one-year delay of the deadline for compliance (from January 1, 2012 to January 1, 2013) has been implemented as a result of the final regulations on the withholding requirement issued by the IRS on May 9, 2011.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: This unfunded mandate would cost counties millions of dollars.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Increased Reporting Requirements in the Use of Federal Funds

Issue: Federal legislation seeking to foster transparency and accountability in the use of federal funds at the state and local government level through increased reporting requirements.

Adopted Policy: NACo supports transparency and accountability in the use of taxpayer funds. However, NACo opposes legislation that results in an unfunded mandate for county government due to increased administrative costs with no financial assistance to comply with requirements. Furthermore, NACo opposes legislation that does not seek the input of state and local governments to assist in creating a practical reporting process that can be viewed as a national solution rather than a Federal solution.

Background: Recent focus on the Federal debt has increased the calls to implement measures that would eliminate the waste, fraud and abuse of federal funds. As a result, several initiatives have risen as both the Administration and Congress express their desire to ensure that federal dollars are spent responsibly.

Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) introduced H.R. 2146, the “Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2011” or the “DATA Act.” In general, the legislation seeks to establish an independent body to track federal spending, modeled after the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board. To assist the independent body, the legislation also seeks to set up a single electronic platform for federal spending information that combines several existing data streams, including agencies’ contract and grant data, internal expenditure reports, and reports by grantees and contractors.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The availability of funds for reporting requirements could lower the administrative costs state and local governments face in complying with the data collection and information reporting requirements associated with increasing transparency in federal spending. Seeking input from the various state and local stakeholders who will be responsible for reporting will also ensure that a practical solution is created rather than a solution that only makes sense at the federal level.



Resolution Supporting Uniform Rating System for All Securities

Issue: Federal legislation ensuring uniform and accurate credit ratings of municipal bonds.

Adopted Policy: NACo supports legislation that requires nationally recognized statistical rating organizations to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures designed to apply rating symbols in a consistent manner for all types of securities and money market instruments.

Background: The passage of the Dodd-Frank Act provided for credit rating agencies to use universal rating symbols for all debt instruments. NACo supported these efforts. As the SEC develops regulations to enforce this section of the law, NACo will work to ensure that the rules are developed fairly and meet the intent of the law – which is to maintain the same symbols and criteria for all debt products, whether they are issued in the corporate or municipal sectors. The use of “uniform and accurate credit rating(s)” for all securities will result in lower borrowing costs and make it easier for new investors to participate in the municipal securities market.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The use of uniform and accurate crediting ratings will lower the cost of borrowing and save taxpayers money.



HEALTH

1. STATEMENT OF BASIC PHILOSOPHY

County governments are integral to America's current health care system and will be crucial partners in achieving any successful reform. At the most basic level, county officials are elected to protect the health and welfare of their constituents. County governments set the local ordinances and policies which govern the built environment, establishing the physical context for healthy, sustainable communities. County public health officials work to promote healthy lifestyles and to prevent injuries and disease. Counties provide the local health care safety net infrastructure, financing and operating hospitals, clinics and health centers. County governments also often serve as the payer of last resort for the medically indigent. County jails must offer their inmates health care as required by the U.S. Supreme Court. Counties operate nursing homes for low-income seniors. County behavioral health authorities help people with serious mental health, developmental disability and substance abuse problems that would have nowhere else to turn. And as employers, county governments provide health insurance to the nearly three million county workers nationwide. Clearly, county tax payers contribute billions of dollars to the American health care system every year and their elected representatives must be at the table as full partners in order to achieve the goal of one hundred percent access and zero disparities.

2. HEALTH SYSTEM REFORM

a) Health Care Delivery Systems: prevention and access to health care services are the cornerstones of an effective health delivery system. The National Association of Counties (NACo) supports:

i) 100 percent access to necessary health services and zero disparities; ii) Collaboration between local, state and federal governments and private businesses

and organizations; iii) Coordination of services by primary health care providers to ensure efficient,

accessible and cost-effective care; iv) Enhanced access to preventive health and emergency care for underserved

populations; v) Universal access to basic care that is not dependent upon the resources generated

by the local economy; vi) Universal health insurance coverage; vii) A comprehensive system of care including physical, oral and behavioral health

services; and viii) Efforts that address the shortage of nurses and other health care professionals in

the country.

3. MEDICAL LIABILITY REFORM

i) NACo supports medical liability reform that:

(1) Is a means to prevent a patient's loss of access to needed medical care; (2) Requires pre-trial professional review of cases to discourage frivolous lawsuits

without obstructing the rights of citizens to due process.


(3) Requires medical liability insurance carriers to justify rate increases that exceed the established state rate.

(4) Subjects providers of inadequate medical care to professional discipline.

ii) NACo opposes Medical liability reform that imposes mandates or usurps state authority.

4. HEALTH CARE FINANCING

a) NACo supports:

i) Federal and state governments' efforts to appropriately and adequately fund essential health services;

ii) Providing adequate funding to local governments to carry out essential health and administrative functions;

iii) The use of intergovernmental transfers (IGTs) as an essential means for maximizing the utilization of public funding from all three levels of government;

iv) An emphasis on primary prevention and health education services as the best tools to contain costs;

v) National reporting on health trends or activities that recognize and include the services provided by county government;

vi) Proposals which enhance federal assistance and increase funding to counties for health services;

vii) Requiring individuals to pay for their public program coverage on an ability to pay, sliding fee scale basis;

viii) Providing county public hospitals, participating in the 340B program, with the same discount for inpatient prescription drugs they receive for outpatient prescription drugs. The 340B program should be expanded to include county behavioral health authorities;

ix) Encouraging case managers and managed health care entities to recognize and use county and other public providers and reimburse them for care provided to Medicaid managed care patients;

x) Using alternative delivery methods and treatment settings to reduce costs; xi) Redesigning federal and state reimbursement systems to reflect the unique

responsibilities of county run health care facilities; xii) Ensuring that county health programs are eligible for the same federal

reimbursements available to federally funded entities; xiii) Public reimbursement for services provided to the uninsured and special

populations by any provider or profession licensed or authorized by the state to provide health services; and

xiv) A variety of strategies which assist in cost containment for prescription drugs.

b) NACo opposes:

i) Capping federal health care entitlement programs; ii) Measures which shift costs to counties; and iii) Activities which hamper counties' ability to negotiate the best possible prices for

prescription drugs.


5. PUBLIC HEALTH

a) Infrastructure: Each county should be served by a strong local public health agency. The elements of a strong infrastructure include a skilled workforce, integrated electronic information and communication systems and effective organization and management. NACo supports:

i) The concepts and standards for local public health departments as outlined in the voluntary Public Health Accreditation Standards and Measures;

ii) Active partnerships among the county's health care community and other public and private organizations concerned with health;

iii) Sustained federal support for building and maintaining a local public health infrastructure that is linked with state and federal public health systems; and

iv) Federal scholarships, loan repayment programs and direct support for training of all public health professionals particularly those in shortage areas.

b) Preparedness: local governments and local public health departments are the first responders to public health emergencies. Every county must be protected by a fully prepared governmental public health system. NACo supports:

i) Sustained and ample federal funding for public health preparedness; ii) Full integration of the public health response to emergencies into each county's

emergency management plan; and iii) Federal requirements that allocate a substantial proportion of federal funds to

localities.

c) Chronic Disease Prevention: successful chronic disease prevention requires a combination of individual responsibility for health behaviors and community support for healthy living. NACo supports:

i) Collective action at the federal, state and county levels to create programs, policies and practices that encourage and facilitate healthy living and appropriate behavioral change;

ii) Systematic integration of local public health considerations into land use planning and community design processes;

iii) Policies and programs to improve wellness; iv) FDA regulation of tobacco without preemption of stronger local laws and

regulations; and v) Federal and state governments and the private sector to collaborate with

counties in reducing health care costs associated with preventable disease and disability by creating and supporting programs and actions that promote healthy behavior and the early detection and treatment of preventable diseases.

d) Infectious Disease Control: County public health is responsible for the control of communicable diseases.

i) Immunizations: NACo supports:

(1) Increased federal appropriations for immunization programs to provide vaccines to under/uninsured children and other at-risk populations; to build sustainable infrastructure for immunization assessments and immunization


outreach and coverage. Immunization programs should include public health departments and public health nurses as access points for vaccines; and

(2) Federal purchase and distribution of influenza vaccine during pandemic seasons to address problems of vaccine shortages, delays in deliveries and vaccine availability.

ii) HIV/AIDS: NACo supports:

(1) Policies that facilitate local flexibility in the use of funds for HIV/AIDS prevention;

(2) Full funding and reauthorization for the Ryan White CARE Act; (3) Uniform federal requirements for reporting of HIV testing and a national

voluntary partner notification program; and (4) Continuous training on infection control techniques for all health care

workers.

iii) Tuberculosis Control: NACo supports:

(1) Federal funding for local public health departments to provide effective community based TB control services, including supervised therapy; and

(2) Federal immigration policies that support TB assessment and control before immigrants enter the United States.

e) Environmental Health: public health departments at the county level work to prevent diseases caused by environmental factors such as unsafe food, housing and waste management. NACo supports:

i) The formation of a federal/state/local partnership in the establishment, delivery and funding of environmental health protective services;

ii) The early and continuous involvement of county officials, as the lead contact, and public health authorities in steps taken under the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Superfund statute to assess hazardous waste and disaster sites, place them on the National Priorities List, and establish and implement appropriate cleanup plans. EPA's involvement with local authorities should include immediate notification of site discovery;

iii) Appropriate testing for lead poisoning according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines, providing appropriate medical and environmental follow-up incentives based on financial need to help finance solutions to lead related hazards and the reporting of cases of lead poisoning to state and local health departments; and

iv) Establishment of a national collaborative science-based food safety system that will integrate and fund food safety activities, provide support for county authorities who have primary front-line responsibility for the inspection and compliance of food service establishments and address consumers' behavior related to safe food handling practices.

f) Injury Prevention: Injuries and resulting deaths, particularly those from intentional and unintentional violence, including those from the use of firearms and other weapons, are critical public health and safety concerns. NACo supports:


i) Enhanced federal assistance and increased funding for public health science, programs and services to prevent injuries;

ii) Collaboration among public safety, law enforcement and public health departments; and

iii) Promotion of all strategies to reduce injury-caused disability and death.

g) Clinical Preventive Services and Health Education: Public health departments at the county level provide clinical preventive services and health education through such programs as the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), family planning clinics and health and sexuality education programs for adolescents.

NACo supports:

i) The WIC program and other vital child nutrition programs and urges continued funding for them;

ii) Comprehensive sexuality education for adolescents, including education about abstinence, resisting peer pressure, pregnancy, sexually transmitted disease and HIV/AIDS; and

iii) Family planning programs that provide information on a wide range of family planning methods with sensitivity to the religious beliefs of the client or recipient. Physician-patient communications should not be dictated, defined or restricted by laws or regulations that restrict a patient's right to medical information and legal medical procedures.

6. RURAL HEALTH

a) NACo supports:

i) Elimination of the urban-rural difference in Medicare payments for hospitals; ii) Full funding of the geographic blend for Medicare+Choice; iii) Tax relief for National Health Service Corps scholarships; iv) Tax incentives for health professionals practicing in rural/underserved areas; v) The Rural Hospital Flexibility Grant program for facilities examining their

service and financial role in the community; vi) Reforms to the Graduate Medical Education program to produce more primary

care providers; vii) The J-1 visa program which allows foreign medical graduates to practice in

underserved areas of the United States; viii) Extended Medicare reimbursement for telemedicine to all rural areas and

expanded coverage; ix) Health Services Outreach grants to enhance services to vulnerable populations; x) Initiatives to enhance rural health research, farm safety and health and state

rural health clearinghouses; xi) Initiatives that encourage the assignment of dental students' participation in the

oral health of underserved communities; and xii) Initiatives that integrate the efforts of multiple health disciplines in an approach

to promote total health and well being.


7. INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE

a) NACo supports requiring the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service's Indian Health Service to pay for the full cost of health care for enrolled tribal members who live on Indian trust lands, including reimbursement for care given at county facilities.

8. LONG TERM CARE

a) County governments provide and purchase long term health care. Federal policies and funding must recognize the role and responsibilities of county governments as safety net providers, in assuring necessary and effective services for the elderly and disabled, including community based and long term care services. NACo supports:

i) Services provided in the least restrictive environment; ii) Additional administrative flexibility in federal health financing programs to

encourage and enable the expansion of community based care as a means of avoiding unnecessary institutional care;

iii) A continuum of home, community-based or institutional care services, including room and board, for persons needing assistance with activities of daily living (ADL);

iv) The availability of Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Medicaid to persons residing in community-based and home-based services;

v) The availability of long term care tax credits; and vi) Incentives and support for informal caregivers.

b) Medicare Reimbursement for Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNFs):

i) SNFs provide needed rehabilitation and skilled nursing for their residents. To ensure access and quality care, NACo supports reimbursement formulas that account for high cost, medically complex patients and that reflect annual changes in the prices of SNF outputs.

c) Survey and Certification: NACo supports:

i) The use of benchmarking and outcome measurement systems to determine quality of long term care services. Those systems should provide objective results that can be easily compared with other providers;

ii) Collaboration between providers and regulators to fix problems and empower staff to improve quality;

iii) Clear distinctions between serious offenses and minor offenses; iv) Reinvesting fines collected from providers to improve care; v) Devoting more survey resources to poor performing providers; and vi) Recognition of providers that are outstanding performers.

d) Staffing Requirements: Staff turnover is a major obstacle to continuity and quality of care. NACo supports:

i) Staff empowerment rather than mandated staff ratios to achieve quality care and retention;

ii) Medicaid and Medicare funding which recognizes the cost and importance of adequate staff; and


iii) The ability to hire and train more staff of varying skill levels to help provide long term care services.

9. BEHAVIORAL HEALTH

a) Counties plan, operate and finance community based services for persons with mental illness, substance abuse disorders and/or developmental disabilities (behavioral health).

b) NACo supports:

i) Community based care and services enabling individuals to live in the least restrictive environment;

ii) Federal government support and development of behavioral health information, services and research; particularly into causes and cures and the promotion of those findings;

iii) Parity in coverage and availability of behavioral health services with other health services, regardless of payer source;

iv) The removal of Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) exemption of self insured plans from state insurance regulation, including extending federal behavioral health parity requirements to such plans;

v) Behavioral health parity within Medicare, including eliminating the 50 percent co-pay for mental health services;

vi) Cost controls allowing the availability of the most effective medications at the lowest cost;

vii) The National Institute of Mental Health's efforts to promote systems which finance and deliver care in community settings including reducing federal categorical restrictions;

viii) Private and public insurance coverage of behavioral health services, including non-medical interventions;

ix) Evidence based prevention services; x) Medicaid waivers for behavioral health carve-outs; xi) States' managed care waiver requests which offer sole source provisions for

providing behavioral health services; xii) Full funding and reauthorization for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health

Services Administration (SAMHSA); xiii) Federal funding and legislation to divert non-violent persons with mental illness

from county jails and into appropriate care; xiv) Increased federal funding for school-based behavioral health services targeted to

at-risk youth; xv) State flexibility in determining the length of participation in mental health or

substance abuse treatment that would count toward Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) work requirements;

xvi) Amending Medicaid's Institutions for Mental Disease (IMD) exclusion to promote better access to services;

xvii) Efforts to increase the number of public sector behavioral health professionals and paraprofessionals;

xviii) State and local flexibility in using substance abuse and mental health block grants to address local problems, including services for persons with co-occurring disorders;


xix) State flexibility for integrated and concurrent treatment programs for persons with co-occurring disorders; and

xx) Federal policies which support the development and funding of long term mental health support services to counties which experience major natural and manmade disasters.

c) NACo opposes:

i) Federal regulations that may exempt state licensing and certification standards or regulations;

ii) Federal mandates which require states to have a competitive bidding process for when counties are acting as purchasers on behalf of the state; and

iii) Federal categorical restrictions which limit needed services available to persons with mental illness, substance abuse disorders, and/or developmental disabilities.

10. MEDICAID AND INDIGENT CARE

a) The current Medicaid program reflects four decades of national consensus that the federal government bears primary responsibility for providing health care to the country's most vulnerable citizens. This consensus and the unique federal, state and county partnerships in administering and financing Medicaid services should inform all changes to the system. Such reforms must require state Medicaid agencies to include county officials in state decisions regarding the design and administration of the Medicaid program in each state.

b) NACo supports:

i) Fiscal relief to state and local governments to protect the Medicaid program; ii) An increase in the federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP):

(1) Any proposal for an increase in the FMAP should protect current eligibility for Medicaid and have a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that current Medicaid eligibility within a state will be sustained;

(2) To the greatest extent possible, any proposal for an increase in the FMAP should be exclusively in the form of an increase in the state's FMAP and not in the form of a block grant; and

(3) Any FMAP increase must be passed through to counties commensurate with their financial contributions to the program.

iii) The state option to use provider taxes to raise a portion of their non-federal share for Medicaid as long as that mechanism increases the resources going to health care;

iv) Medicaid coverage of all legal immigrants and HIV infected individuals, while maintaining traditional preventive and case management services by local public health programs;

v) Swift action to help counties serve the growing population of patients seeking uncompensated care in the nation's county emergency rooms and hospitals;

vi) Expanding Medicaid eligibility and enrollment education for women and children, as well as providing greater flexibility to states in using the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) funds, including increasing the


length of time that individual states have to spend their unexpended federal allotment and increasing federal funds for outreach;

vii) Allow redistribution of 50 percent of unspent SCHIP funds to states that spent all their allotment while allowing the other unspent funds to be retained by states three years after enactment of such legislation extending use of the funds;

viii) Fund efforts to reach qualified but unenrolled children and expand SCHIP to cover the parents of SCHIP qualified children;

ix) Legislation to restore Medicaid and SCHIP eligibility to all legal immigrants; x) A stronger disproportionate share hospital (DSH) program that assists systems

serving large numbers of the medically uninsured and Medicaid recipients; xi) Keep DSH funds separate from other Medicaid funds and strengthen and

protect the DSH program in any Medicaid reform proposal; xii) Increase allotments for low DSH states in future legislation, but not at the

expense of other states; xiii) Any federal programmatic changes to explicitly address and support the dual,

interrelated roles of counties in providing personal and public health services to the uninsured, the underinsured and entire communities;

xiv) Comprehensive reform of the Medicaid waiver requirements and process to enable counties and states to implement clinically efficient and cost-effective health services;

xv) Legislation which would create a state option to create a Medicaid buy-in to expand Medicaid coverage to children with disabilities up to age 21, who would be eligible for SSI disability benefits but for their income or resources;

xvi) Legislation to create a new Medicaid option for states to finance an array of intensive community based services for adults with severe and persistent mental illnesses and children with serious mental and emotional disturbances;

xvii) All Early Periodic Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment (EPSDT) Program services will continue to be available regardless of enrollment in any benefit package; and

xviii) Continued utilization of Home and Community Based waivers as a service model for the future with a county government voice and influence in how those waiver programs are designed and implemented in states where counties are responsible for administering them or for paying all or part of the non-federal share of the waivers.

c) NACo opposes:

a) Cuts to all Medicaid programs; b) Capping the amount of the federal contribution to Medicaid or Medicare; c) Any action to restrict the definition of allowable services under the Rehabilitation

Option; d) Citizenship and identity documentation requirements for Medicaid eligibility that

delay service delivery; e) Administrative approval of state benefit packages that exempt services under a

State Medicaid plan or require "contracts" between the beneficiary and the plan; and


f) A definition of third party liability that shifts financial responsibility to county governments.

11. HEALTH FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION AND CAPITAL FINANCING:

a) NACo supports:

i) Funding of health and hospital construction grant programs; ii) Financing and taxing mechanisms for health facilities and providers that

incorporate attention to the provision of indigent care; iii) Expansion or construction of all health care facilities, the acquisition of

equipment and allocation of health care resources to be carefully managed through a local planning process;

iv) Maintenance of the county-based infrastructure for assuring delivery of care; v) Priority to be given to new construction projects for public health care facilities

and to modernization and renovation projects for existing public facilities; vi) Priority to be given to purchasing and equipping mobile, clinical or health

service outreach facilities; and vii) Enforcement of regulations prohibiting refusal of care for financial reasons or

transfer of patients for financial reasons.

12. FEDERAL ROLE

a) The federal government should be responsible for assuring that all citizens have access to adequate and appropriate health care services, and that persons with disabilities can retain health benefits upon returning to work.

b) NACo supports:

(1) Federal research into serious diseases that affect a large part of the population; (2) Adequate funding of federal health care programs so that they do not increase

the burden on the local tax base; (3) Efforts to control the rate of growth of health care expenditures; (4) Reforms to the Medicare and Medicaid systems that will insure optimal benefits

to beneficiaries and full reimbursement to county providers; (5) Federal health insurance programs as the primary payer of benefits and services

provided to all eligible beneficiaries, particularly those who are dually eligible; (6) Reimbursement to counties for providing preventive services, prenatal health

care, treatment and testing of communicable diseases, dialysis and chemotherapy treatments to all immigrants;

(7) U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) reimbursement to counties for the care provided to injured or sick undocumented immigrants that Border Patrol officers apprehend;

(8) Federal government reimbursement to counties for the care provided to humanitarian parolees;

(9) The ability of states and counties to use their own funds to provide health care services to immigrants regardless of their status, without a reduction of federal financial responsibility for those services;


(10) The federal government to require states, in consultation with county governments to set Medicaid reimbursement rates at levels that do not discourage providers from accepting Medicaid patients;

(11) Measures to reform these programs in the context of the entire system of financing health care, including costs to deliver services and utilization of a wage index formula that does not unfairly perpetuate low wages and geographic wage inequities;

(12) Efforts by the federal government to develop a single claims form and development of electronic billing as a means to reduce administrative costs in consultation with state and county governments, insurers and providers;

(13) Changes in the current federal policy that will allow a person receiving federal benefits who has been charged with a crime but not convicted to continue to be eligible for such entitlements including, but not limited to Medicare, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), Veterans and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) benefits until such time as they may be convicted and sentenced to an institution.;

(14) Protecting the privacy of individual medical records in a way that does not impede the flow of information necessary to coordinate care among multiple providers efficiently and cost-effectively;

(15) The importation of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved prescription drugs manufactured in FDA approved facilities to increase access to safe, affordable prescription drugs; and

(16) Fully funding veterans' services especially those that support community treatment for mental illness and that allow for reimbursement to community agencies for services provided to veterans.

c) NACo opposes:

i) The imposition of restrictions upon reimbursement monies.


HEALTH RESOLUTIONS Resolution in Support of Charity Care Requirements for Non-Profit Health Care Facilities

Issue: Charity care requirements for non-profit and tax-exempt health care facilities. Adopted Policy: NACo supports imposing charity care requirements on non-profit and

tax-exempt health care facilities, including standards that measure facilities’ access to and utilization of tax-exempt capital, to objectively determine the amount of actual health care providers tender to those in need against the value of tax exemptions that the facilities receive.

Background: County governments across the United States of America are the health care providers of last resort for the most vulnerable indigent and uninsured residents in our neighborhoods and communities. NACo, in efforts to ensure less cost shifting to county governments, supports federal policies, such as adequate Medicaid funding, to assist in providing health care coverage to such residents and reimbursing county health providers for treatment rendered to our nation’s most critical populations. Stable and adequate Medicaid funding, in tandem with how other providers assist in caring for uninsured individuals, directly affects county budgets, local taxpayers who fund government operations and those who rely on public and non-profit providers for their health care needs.

The United States Congress and many states and counties have considered or addressed issues related to charity care and tax exemptions, seeking to establish fair but objective benchmarks against which hospitals would be measured to determine the granting or renewing of tax exemptions for providing actual charity health care to those in need. Without objective standards to determine the amount of actual charity health care non-profit and tax-exempt health care facilities provide to members of their neighborhoods and communities, county governments cannot accurately access the performance of health care facilities receiving tax exemptions funded by county government taxpayers. The following issues should be considered in crafting appropriate charity care standards: definitions of “charity care” for the purposes of tax exemption qualification and eligibility; guidelines for counties to consider when determining whether a tax exemption applied for by a non-profit hospital should be granted, rejected, renewed or denied; the current and unique fiscal situations confronting states and units of local government today when making recommendations on the appropriate percentage, level or standard of charity care to qualify for tax exemptions.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Requiring charity care in proportion to tax exemption will significantly decrease the burden of uncompensated care at county hospitals, both urban and rural.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution in Support of Provisions of the Affordable Care Act that Help County Safety Net and Behavioral Health Programs

Issue: Essential need to implement key features of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA).

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties supports full funding for, and implementation of, the provisions of the ACA that help counties meet the service needs of low income and disabled populations. Specifically, NACo supports maintaining and expanding affordable health coverage and benefits to uninsured and underinsured residents who rely on county health care delivery systems – including the Medicaid maintenance of effort (MOE) requirements and the scheduled Medicaid expansion. NACo also supports the ACA’s provisions


to improve care coordination to ensure that everyone has a medical/health home for efficient, accessible and cost-effective care; to improve access to preventive care and health promotion, for underserved populations; and to promote the use of peer supports and counselors, together with effective care coordination that spans health and social support services.

Background: Key features of the ACA are fully compatible with and supportive of the operations of county safety net agencies including local behavioral health and developmental disability authorities, and promote the coordination and integration of behavioral health and primary care, with the goal of demonstrating the best care and recovery of consumers served by these systems; they support the stability and expansion of the Medicaid program in a manner that does not place a financial burden on state, county and local authorities; they promote care coordination across Federal programs that serve persons with disabilities; and they extend mental health and substance use care parity legislation to all private and public health plans.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: In the short term, these policies will require additional federal resources. However, over the longer run, this investment will pay off in better health outcomes for low income populations and a greater contribution of persons with disabilities to the economic recovery and productivity of the United States. Although the impact of these policies will be great in urban areas, we expect them to be even greater in rural areas, where such services are currently very sparse.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution in Support of Reducing the 24-Month Waiting Period for Participants in Social Security Disability Insurance

Issue: Coverage of the current 24-month gap in health coverage for disabled individuals receiving SSDI.

Adopted Policy: NACo supports and urges passage of legislation to eliminate the 24-month waiting period for health care coverage, for those individuals who have worked and paid in to the system and then become disabled, seeking assistance through SSDI.

Background: A disabled, formerly working individual can apply for disability coverage through Social Security, and may receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI), or Social Security Disability Income (SSDI). Social Security often does both applications at once depending upon the individual’s wage or work history.

There is a five-month wait for SSDI for a disabled individual; however SSI is available immediately. If the disabled individual first receives SSI, they automatically qualify for Medicaid. If the individual has worked enough quarters to qualify, they will then become eligible for SSDI at the end of the five-month wait period. (Often SSDI is a higher benefit amount than SSI; SSDI is dependent upon the person’s economic work history.) However, once a disabled individual is switched from SSI to SSDI, the individual loses the Medicaid benefit. The client must wait for up to two years before becoming eligible for Medicare, thereby effectively becoming uninsured when this is perhaps the most important benefit to both the individual and society as a whole, to contain costs.

The federal Medicare program provides health insurance coverage for more than 40 million Americans. Although most of those enrolled in Medicare are senior citizens, approximately six million enrollees under the age of 65 have qualified because of permanent and severe disability, such as spinal cord injuries, multiple sclerosis, cardiovascular disease, cancer, and other illnesses and disorders.


Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) is designed for individuals with a work history who paid into the social security system before the onset of their disability. Despite this, federal law mandates a 24-month waiting period from the time a disabled individual first receives Social Security Disability Insurance benefits to the time that Medicare health coverage begins.

The SSDI program itself – a prerequisite to Medicare – delays benefits for five months while a person’s disability is determined, effectively creating up to a 29-month waiting period for Medicare. As of January 2002, approximately 1.2 million disabled individuals who qualified for SSDI and were awaiting Medicare coverage – many of them unemployed due to their disability – and were being forced into poverty due to lack of insurance. By the time Medicare coverage had begun, an estimated 45 percent of those individuals had incomes below the federal poverty level, 32 percent were close to the federal poverty level, and their disabling conditions were worsened due to the lack of access to health care.

Many of these individuals face significant medical expenses with often devastating consequences over this two year period while awaiting Medicare coverage. The American Medical Association has documented that death rates among SSDI recipients are highest in the first 24 months of enrollment.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Reducing the 24-month waiting period not only would prevent worsening illness and disability for SSDI beneficiaries, but would also reduce more costly future medical needs and potential long-term reliance on other public assistance programs.


Resolution in Support of the Healthy Food Financing Initiative Issue: Access to Healthy Foods. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the Healthy Food Financing Initiative (HFFI) and

urges Congress and the Administration to authorize and provide adequate resources to implement the initiative in partnership with counties and local jurisdictions provided that no funding of the HFFI shall come at the expense of any existing NACo Agriculture and Rural Development funding priorities.

Background: Roughly 23 million Americans in underserved and low-income communities lack healthy food options and instead frequent fast food and convenience stores selling high-fat and high-sugar processed foods. Underserved and low-income communities lack economic development opportunities and benefits associated with local grocery stores, including the creation of quality jobs and complimentary retail stores and services. Americans in underserved and low income communities have significantly higher rates of obesity, increasing the chances that they will develop serious health problems including type 2 diabetes, heart disease or other chronic health issues. Childhood obesity is a major crisis in many of these communities, affecting over 30 percent of children ages 10-17.

President Obama launched the Healthy Food Financing Initiative (HFFI) in February 2010 in order to tackle this healthy food access challenge. The President's FY 2011 budget included $345 million dollars for HFFI from three agencies – USDA, Treasury, and HHS. These funds would provide loan and grant financing to attract grocery stores and other fresh food retail to underserved urban, suburban, and rural areas; and renovate and expand existing stores so they can provide the healthy foods that communities want and need.

HFFI would attract investment in underserved communities by providing critical loan and grant financing. These one time resources would help fresh food retailers overcome the higher


initial barriers to entry into underserved, low-income rural, suburban, and urban areas. It would also support renovation and expansion of existing stores so they can provide the healthy foods that communities want and need.

The Administration’s efforts to fund and implement HFFI have been slowed and curtailed due to lack of congressional appropriations and authorizing language. On November 30, 2010, a bipartisan coalition in the House and Senate introduced Healthy Food Financing Initiative bills designed to overcome these hurdles. These bills were introduced with bipartisan support by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D-PA) (S 3986/HR 6462). The bills are likely to be reintroduced in the new Congress and seek to dramatically reduce the number of low-income Americans living in "food deserts." Based off a highly successful model in Pennsylvania, the $500 million Healthy Food Financing Initiative would authorize USDA to administer a mix of federal loans and grants to provide one-time start-up assistance for supermarkets, corner stores, co-ops, and farmers' markets in underserved low-income areas. If passed, the initiative is projected to create or preserve 44,500 long-term jobs and 50,000 construction jobs - all while helping millions of Americans eat healthier.

The Healthy Food Financing Initiative is a viable, effective, economically sustainable solution to the problem of limited access to healthy foods, and can reduce health disparities, improve the health of families and children, create jobs and stimulate local economic development in low-income and underserved communities.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: The proposed initiative supports growth and job creation in underserved rural, suburban and urban counties.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Adapting to Aging Population Issue: Aging population is increasing demands on county health and human services. Adopted Policy: NACo supports legislation to allow for and encourage adaptation of local government health services to an older and larger client base. Background: As the “Baby Boomer” generation ages and enters retirement, the demand for health and human services and the pressure on local governments to provide those services will increase greatly.

It is imperative that our health systems begin now to adapt to the different demands, needs, and methods of communication that these new populations will require. If our local governments are to successfully provide the basic services demanded of them, it is essential that they are prepared to best reach and accommodate those that will need their services.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: TBD Adopted July 19, 2011

Resolution on Changing Nursing Home Oversight to Support and Promote Culture Change

Issue: Regulatory barriers to improving nursing home culture. Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties urges the Centers for Medicare

and Medicaid Services (CMS) to remove barriers and regulations that hinder providers from making transformative environmental, administrative and care practice changes that promote positive outcomes to resident and family satisfaction and improved quality of care and quality of life.

Background: The current survey and certification system for nursing homes support but do not widely promote transformative change in how services are provided. The philosophy that


drives operational decisions away from institutional practices and toward practices that both improve quality of care and quality of life is dampened by the current survey, certification and life safety code processes.

In 1991, Dr. Bill Thomas, a Harvard-educated physician founded the Eden Alternative. The Eden Alternative along with many other organizations and models now work to assist providers to remake the aging experience in thousands of nursing homes across the country. Over 16 years later, in a 2007 report, The Commonwealth Fund conducted a national study of nursing homes and found that 56 percent of nursing homes surveyed still viewed regulation as a major or minor barrier to change.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Changing Nursing Home culture engages all facility staff in a total transformation of thinking and practice. The systematic rebuilding of resident-directed approaches to care, responsive to residents' individual life experiences and needs, leads to many improved outcomes. Facilities that incorporate some aspects of culture change noted their initiatives yielded benefits such as improved staff retention, higher occupancy rates, better competitive position, and improved operational costs. Moreover, the most important positive outcome may be improved resident and family satisfaction.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on County Organized Health Systems

Issue: Local Administration of the Medicaid and Expanded Public Programs via "County Organized Health Systems".

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties (NACo) urges Congress and the Administration to remove current statutory prohibitions that prevent the establishment of additional County Organized Health Systems (federally defined as "Health Insuring Organizations"). NACo also urges the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to adopt a policy of encouraging the formation of County Organized Health Systems as a means to more effectively deliver Medicaid benefits at the local level.

Background: County Organized Health Systems (COHS) are locally established independent publicly-run health plans that administer the Medicaid program, as well as other publicly-funded health care programs for low income populations, in either a county or group of counties. COHS plans have existed in California since 1983 and there are currently five plans serving nine California counties and over 600,000 Medicaid beneficiaries.

COHS plans are governed by boards or commissions appointed by County Supervisors, and each plan develops its program to best suit the needs of the local community.

During the last 25 years, COHS plans have proven successful in terms of both cost-effectiveness (saving approximately 20 percent over fee-for-service Medicaid) as well as improved service delivery to Medicaid beneficiaries (e.g. increased access to care, disease management programs, and high immunization rates). COHS plans cover all Medicaid eligible beneficiaries in their services areas and provide the entire spectrum of care - from prenatal care to hospice. The expansion of the five COHS plans into four additional counties has shown that the county based model can be effectively replicated in both suburban and rural environments. Similar models also exist in 28 rural Minnesota counties.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Short term costs associated with development and implementation of a COHS plan. Long term savings associated with more efficient design, control and delivery of the Medicaid program in participating counties.



Resolution on Creation of a New Oversight System for Nursing Homes

Issue: Ineffective nursing home survey and certification system. Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties urges the Centers for Medicare

and Medicaid Services (CMS) to convene a national commission, with members drawn from a broad base of stakeholders and experts, including county health facility administrators, to reexamine the current survey and certification system and to issue recommendations for a new oversight model for long term care facilities to ensure sustained compliance with regulation and the highest quality of care and quality of life possible for residents.

Background: The current survey and certification system for nursing homes does not meet industry or consumer needs to ensure sustained compliance with regulation or foster a high quality of care and quality of life for residents who live in nursing homes.

The American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging commissioned a 20-member task force in 2006. In 2008 they issued a report, Broken and Beyond Repair: Recommendations to Reform the Survey and Certification System. They quickly came to the realization that the current system had some major flaws. Three such flaws that stand out are: (1) Punishment does not equal improvement (2) Complexity breeds inconsistency and (3) Inconsistency signals deeper flaws.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: An improved and efficient survey and certification process would be a cost savings to the federal Government, state Governments and the private pay consumer. CMS and states would be able to spend their limited survey resources more efficiently by concentrating oversight efforts on poor-performing facilities and placing more responsibility for self-monitoring on facilities that consistently perform well. Additionally, a fair and consistent survey process would free more provider time, talent and resources towards worthwhile projects that lead to increased resident satisfaction, quality of life and positive clinical outcomes.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Essential Support Services for Persons with Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities

Issue: Close coordination across health and social service programs. Adopted Policy: Care coordination across Federal programs that serve persons with

disabilities should be fully maintained for current beneficiaries and expanded appropriately to serve the disability population newly insured through National Health Reform; social service programs, particularly affordable housing and job training, should be expanded so that persons with disabilities can become and remain fully independent in their home communities.

Background: Close coordination across health and social service programs is essential to assure the effectiveness of care and supports for persons with disabilities. County behavioral health and developmental disability authorities are concerned that federal care and support programs should be available to persons with disabilities, including the newly insured, in the post National Health Reform environment, and that care coordination should be available to make them operate efficiently.

Health services are less effective and more costly when needed social services are either not available or are not coordinated well. This Resolution is an effort to address this problem directly, both for the currently insured and the new populations to be insured through National Health Reform.


These tools are also very important so that persons with disabilities can live independent lives in their own communities.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: In the short term, these policies will require additional federal resources. However, over the longer run, this investment will pay off in a greater contribution of persons with disabilities to the economic recovery and productivity of the United States. Although the impact of these policies will be great in urban areas, we expect them to be even greater in rural areas, where such services are currently very sparse.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Health System Reform

Issue: Health system reform. Adopted Policy: NACo supports implementing – and improving – the Patient Protection

and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act through regulation and additional legislation in such a way as to restore the partnership between the federal government and counties as outlined in the health chapter of NACo's American County Platform and Proposed Resolutions and as summarized in the white paper, "Restoring the Partnership for American Health: Counties in a 21st Century Health System".

Background: NACo's Health System Reform Working Group, appointed by then President Don Stapley in July 2008 and chaired by then President-Elect Valerie Brown, reviewed and refined NACo's health reform policies and priorities. The working group held three regional hearings: in Maricopa County, Arizona, in December 2008; in Wake County, North Carolina, in February 2009 and in Sacramento County, California in April 2009. It summarized its findings to date in the white paper. NACo will continue to engage the Administration and the Congress to achieve these goals and priorities:

Restoring the Partnership for American Health: Counties in a 21st Century Health System Full Partners: County governments are integral to America's current health system and will be crucial partners in achieving successful reform. At the most basic level, county officials are elected to protect the health and welfare of their constituents. County governments set the local ordinances and policies which govern the built environment, establishing the physical context for healthy, sustainable communities. County public health officials work to promote healthy lifestyles and to prevent injuries and diseases. Counties provide the local health care safety net infrastructure, financing and operating hospitals, clinics and health centers. County governments also often serve as the payer of last resort for the medically indigent. County jails must offer their inmates health care as required by the U.S. Supreme Court. Counties operate nursing homes and provide services for seniors. County behavioral health authorities help people with serious mental health, developmental disability and substance abuse problems who would have nowhere else to turn. And as employers, county governments provide health benefits to the nearly three million county workers and their retirees nationwide. Clearly, county tax payers contribute billions of dollars to the American health care system every year and their elected representatives must be at the table as full partners in order to achieve the goal of one hundred percent access and zero disparities.

Local Delivery Systems-Access for All: NACo believes that reform must focus on access and delivery of quality health services. Coverage is not enough. County officials, particularly in remote rural or large urban areas know that even those with insurance may have difficulty gaining access to the services of a health care provider, which can be exacerbated by the severity of their illness. Insurance carriers participating in public programs should be


required to extend coverage into rural areas and to contract with local providers. Local delivery systems should coordinate services to ensure efficient and cost-effective access to care, particularly primary and preventive care, for underserved populations. County governments are uniquely qualified to convene the appropriate public and private partners to build these local delivery systems in a way that will respect the unique needs of individuals and their communities. A restored federal commitment to such partnerships is necessary for equity's sake.

Public Health and Wellness: NACo believes that a greater focus on disease and injury prevention and health promotion is a way to improve the health of our communities and to reduce health care costs. Disease and injury prevention and health promotion services can be delivered by a health care professional one patient at a time. Local health departments, in partnership with community based organizations and traditional health care providers, deliver community-based prevention services targeted at an entire population. Population-based prevention services can save money by keeping people healthy and reducing the costs of treating unchecked chronic disease. These critical services include assessment of the health status of communities to identify the unique and most pressing health problems of each community and health education to provide individuals with the knowledge and skills to maintain and improve their own health. The public health response to emergencies should be fully integrated into each county's emergency management plan. Local public health considerations likewise should be systematically integrated into land use planning and community design processes to help prevent injuries and chronic disease. Policies are also needed to address health inequity, the systemic, avoidable, unfair and unjust differences in health status and mortality rates, as well as the distribution of disease and illness across population groups. Investing in wellness and prevention across all communities will result in better health outcomes, increased productivity and reduce costs associated with chronic diseases.

Expanding Coverage: NACo supports universal health insurance coverage. Existing public health insurance systems should be strengthened and expanded, including Medicare, Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). As states and counties attempt to shoulder their legislatively mandated responsibilities to provide care for the indigent and uninsured, federal regulatory barriers should be removed to allow flexibility and innovation at the local level. Restrictions on the expansion of County Organized Health Systems should be lifted and they should be authorized to serve as a public plan option in their service areas. Furthermore, in the effort to expand coverage, reformers should not forget that the coverage must be meaningful, without imposing additional mandates on county governments. The benefit package must be defined so as to provide the full range of services people need, including prevention services, pharmaceuticals, dental, full parity for behavioral health, substance abuse and developmental disability services. Barriers to cost-effective treatments, like living organ donation, should be removed.

Maintaining a Safety Net: NACo believes that the intergovernmental partnership envisioned in the Medicaid statute should be restored and strengthened. Medicaid reimbursement rates should be enhanced and increases to the Medicaid federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP) should be passed through to counties contributing to the non-federal share. Local safety nets, supported by Medicaid and disproportionate share hospital (DSH) payments, should not be dismantled to "pay for" universal coverage. We must not allow the safety net infrastructure to be undermined. County hospitals and health systems provide surge capacity, emergency and trauma services and other critical high cost services like neo-natal, HIV/AIDS and burn care. Safety net hospitals will continue to need extra support to carry


out their missions, including addressing health disparities. Health care is not just coverage it is also access and it is the safety net hospitals where translation services for hundreds of languages can be found.

DSH payments address two otherwise unreimbursed costs: (1) services provided to the uninsured and underinsured; and (2) Medicaid reimbursement rates that pay less than the cost of providing health services. It is too early to predict the net effect of Medicaid expansion and reimbursement reform. In addition, unfortunately, there will always be some individuals who will remain uninsured. These and other at-risk populations financed by DSH are unlikely to be among the groups to be covered in the initial stages of reform. All individuals, including the uninsured, should receive treatment and DSH supports that care. Therefore DSH payments should not be phased out or down until health care reform is fully implemented and its effects on DSH payments can be accurately assessed. Assumptions should not be made that DSH can be cut by any arbitrary amount on some arbitrary timeline during the implementation of heath care reform.

Health Workforce: NACo believes that the health professional and paraprofessional workforce must be supported and enhanced. It is important that we sustain training programs and sites of service that enable us to develop a complement of health professionals that can address the needs of a changing, growing and aging population.

Public hospitals have often been teaching hospitals. The sites of service include hospitals, outpatient clinics, and community health centers. These settings provide access for patients seeking care, and a diverse set of patient conditions and cultures that make for a comprehensive learning experience. Reasonable medical education funding is an integral part of the business model of these institutions.

Every effort should be made to recruit, train, license and retain health professionals, and allied professionals and paraprofessionals, on an expedited basis. A large body of evidence supports the contribution of direct care staff, nurses and nursing assistants, to quality outcomes. Funding for existing education and training programs - in secondary, post-secondary and vocational educational settings - should be increased and targeted towards initiatives to expand and diversify the health workforce. Partnerships between local economic developers and workforce development professionals should be encouraged to meet growing health care sector demand. Targeted incentives including scholarships, loan forgiveness and low-interest loan repayment programs should be developed to encourage more providers to enter and remain in primary care and public health careers. Primary care providers should be empowered to - and compensated for - case management services.

Health IT: The federal government should support the integration of health information technologies into the local health care delivery system. NACo supports the President's goal of implementing a nation-wide system of electronic health records in five years. NACo supports efforts to promote the use of a range of information technologies to facilitate appropriate access to health records and improve the standard of care available to patients, while protecting privacy. This includes deployment of broadband technologies to the widest possible geographic footprint. Other tools facilitate evidence-based decision making and e-prescribing. Using broadband technologies, telemedicine applications enable real-time clinical care for geographically distant patients and providers. Remote monitoring can also facilitate post-operative care and chronic disease management without hospitalization or institutionalization.

Long Term Care: Federal policies should encourage the elderly and disabled to receive the services they need in the least restrictive environment. Since counties provide and otherwise


support long term care and other community based services for the elderly and disabled, state and federal regulations and funding programs should give them the flexibility to support the full continuum of home, community-based or institutional care for persons needing assistance with activities of daily living. Nursing home regulatory oversight should be reformed in order to foster more person-centered care environments.

Jail Health: Reforming America's health care system must include reforms to its jail system. Counties are responsible for providing health care for incarcerated individuals as required by the U.S. Supreme Court in Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976). This unfunded mandate constitutes a major portion of local jail operating costs and a huge burden on local property tax payers. The federal government should lift the unfunded mandate by restoring its obligation for health care coverage for eligible inmates, pre-conviction. Furthermore, a true national partnership is needed to divert the non-violent mentally ill from jail and into appropriate evidence-based treatment in community settings, if possible. Finally, resources should be made available to counties to implement timely, comprehensive reentry programs so that former inmates have access to all the health and social services, including behavioral health and substance abuse treatment, to avoid recidivism and become fully integrated into the community.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Large investments will be required from the federal government in order to achieve a more equitable health system, but benefits could also be very large.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Nurse Home Visitation Programs

Issue: Nurse Home Visitation Programs. Adopted Policy: NACo recognizes the importance of evidence-based nurse home

visitation programs that serve low-income parents, pregnant women and young children. NACo supports the premise that parents need access to public health resources to promote a healthy environment for their families. NACo supports adequate funding including Medicaid funding for all nurse home visitation programs that benefit families.

Background: Home-visitation programs have been around for years, not only in the United States, but in most industrialized nations. Home visitation was initiated in the United States in the late 19th century with public health nurses and social workers providing in-home education and care to women and children, primarily in poor urban communities. Specialty programs were started that focused on specific problems such as premature or low-birth-weight infants, children with developmental delays, teenage parents and families at risk of child abuse or neglect. Dr. David L. Olds initiated the Nurse-Family Home Visitation program (mid-1970s) designed to help low-income, first-time parents start their lives on a sound course and prevent the health and parenting problems that can contribute to early development of anti-social behavior. These behaviors are associated with youth crime and delinquency, child abuse, maternal substance abuse, and maternal criminal involvement. About ten years later, Dr. C. Henry Kempe suggested that to ensure the right of every child to comprehensive care, every pregnant woman should have the opportunity to a health visitor who would work with the family until the child began school. Insurance companies declined to pay for this service because it lacked evidence to support its effectiveness.

The Elmira study shows average family net costs to the government for nurse-visited and non-visited groups. Over the first 15 years of the study (child’s life), the use of AFDC (TANF), Medicaid, food stamps, foster care, and emergency room visits was substantially lower in


families with home visitation than in non-visited families. The nurse-visited group used $56,000 (2001 dollars) less per family in government services than did the non-visited group. The nurse -visited group paid $8,300 more in taxes per family than the non-visited group which resulted in a 393 percent recovery of dollars invested in the program in the child’s 15th year. The lower the social-economic-status of the family the higher the recovered visitation program costs. The Rand Corporation evaluated the economic impact of the Elmira, New York nurse home visitation program. For every dollar spent on the home visits, four dollars were saved in reduced welfare and criminal justice expenditures and in increases in tax revenues. This study did not feel full cost-benefit could be analyzed because numerous benefits to society such as reductions in child abuse and neglect and crime and improvements in children’s behavior cannot be cost-estimated easily.

In addition to the nurse home visitors program there are several more evidence-based nurse home visitor programs in the United States. Many are unique to a specific state such as Prenatal-Plus in Colorado, Nurses for Newborns in Tennessee and First Born in New Mexico.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: Poverty is the biggest obstacle to opportunity for children. Nurse home visitation programs are crucial particularly in rural areas where poverty rates are higher and employment opportunities at a supportable wage are fewer. These programs assist families to complete education, reduce dependence on welfare benefit programs, improve birth outcomes, and save money.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Persistent Health Disparities

Issue: Persistent health disparities. Adopted Policy: NACo supports legislation to reduce health disparities and address the

social determinants of health, increase the diversity and cultural and linguistic competencies of the health workforce, and improve environmental justice. This must include significant direct federal funding for counties to implement programs designed to reduce disparities, by direct service delivery and in partnership with providers.

Background: Disparities in health outcomes for vulnerable populations as defined by race/ethnicity, socio-economic status, geography, gender, age, disability status, risk status related to sex and gender have been well documented and are well understood by county officials. These vulnerable populations disproportionately experience worse health and safety outcomes across a broad spectrum of illnesses, injuries, and treatments. These disparities are likely to be exacerbated during a prolonged recession.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Large federal investments will be required to eliminate health disparities in urban and rural communities where they tend to be the most acute.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on V.A. Health Benefits for Veterans in Custody Pending Disposition of Charges

Issue: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (V.A.) medical benefits for veterans detained in county facilities prior to conviction and sentencing to secure detention.

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties supports changing federal policy such that veterans in custody pending disposition of charges remain eligible for V.A. health benefits.


Background: V.A. regulations provide that veterans held in federal, state, county or local prisons or jails are not eligible to receive in- or out-patient services or medications from the V.A. until after their release from custody 38 CFR 17.38 (c)(5); M-1, Pt. 1, Para. 4.23. Since they are also ineligible for federal Medicaid funding, states terminate or suspend their Medicaid eligibility. All costs of medical care for veterans in county detention are therefore borne solely by counties, since the Supreme Court has ruled that all incarcerated persons are entitled to medical care. Many of the jailed veterans rendered ineligible for federal health benefits are not residents of the counties where they are incarcerated, having traveled there to receive V.A. treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder or other serious medical conditions. These veterans have served their nation abroad and at home and have earned the medical benefits the V.A. is denying to them and the V.A. is unduly placing this medical care burden on the local governments who can least afford this cost rather than continuing to provide care for these veterans in one of the largest and best medical care systems in the world. This policy also violates the principle of presumption of innocence.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: This immediate cessation of benefits prior to the final disposition of charges, causes major financial hardships for counties, and indirectly causes higher costs to the federal government due to the exacerbation of medical conditions from discontinuities of care.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Supporting County Preparedness for Pandemic Influenza

Issue: The ability of counties to engage in effective planning for pandemic influenza. Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties (NACo) urges the

Administration and Congress to recognize that pandemic influenza response is primarily local in nature, and to provide adequate funding, sound guidance, and support that will enable counties to prepare effectively for pandemic influenza in a manner that is consistent with local emergency management plans and that permits optimally efficient use of local resources. Eighty percent of federal funds granted to states for pandemic influenza preparedness should be designated for use at the local level.

Background: Public health experts predict the occurrence of an influenza pandemic. This may arise if the current avian influenza virus acquires an ability to be transmitted from human to human, or it may arise from another new virus. It cannot be predicted when such an event will occur, but it is important that counties anticipate and prepare for the enormous demands that a pandemic will place on both public and private sectors to respond. Such planning is already underway and Congress appropriated $350 million in FY2007 to support both state and local pandemic influenza preparedness.

Success in responding to an influenza pandemic will depend on engaging all the resources of every community, including hospitals, physicians and nurses, police, ambulance services, social services, schools, businesses, and volunteers. The communication and organization necessary to manage those resources will all occur locally.

The number of activities necessary to fashion a viable local plan for response to an influenza pandemic is enormous. They all require substantial resources, as well as regular training and exercising. Some of these are:

• Tracking cases of influenza or illness that could be influenza as they occur, by collecting information from hospitals, physician offices, laboratories, and pharmacies. This enables the earliest possible identification of an outbreak.


• Planning in advance what to tell the public if an influenza outbreak occurs, with messages ready for use by the mass media in multiple languages, to avoid public panic and help people understand how to protect themselves.

• Identifying locations, trained health personnel, and equipment for isolating and taking care of sick people, both in hospitals and in alternate locations.

• Planning how to keep people out of crowded places where infectious disease can easily be spread, by closing down schools and other public places and public transportation, at the same time maintaining social order.

• Planning how to meet the needs of people who must quarantine themselves in their homes, particularly the elderly and the disabled.

• Devising methods to acquire distribute and administer vaccines and antiviral medications in mass quantities, if effective vaccines and medications become available in sufficient quantity.

The federal funds now available are insufficient to enable counties to complete all the necessary tasks of preparedness. Moreover, the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Homeland Security have not coordinated their pandemic influenza response activities in a way that reflects and supports the strong coordination among first responders, including public health departments, that already occurs at the county level.

Federal direction now includes redundancy and contradictions in requirements for planning, exercising of plans, and reporting, and does not uniformly recognize that pandemic influenza response is an element of overall local emergency management planning and cannot occur in isolation from other county emergency and public health preparedness work.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Pandemic influenza will require a response in all jurisdictions, whether they are urban or rural. The Resolution asks increased federal funding for county pandemic influenza preparedness.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Supporting Efforts in the Prevention and Treatment of Obesity and Overweight

Issue: Reduce obesity and overweight and improve wellness. Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties recognizes obesity and

overweight as conditions that can persist from childhood to adulthood, that are associated with chronic disease, and that cause preventable and premature deaths in adults, adolescents and children. NACo supports local public health department leadership in obesity and overweight prevention.

Background: According to the National Center for Health Statistics, 66 percent of adults 20 years of age and older are overweight and 32 percent are obese. In addition, almost five percent of adults are extremely obese. From 1980 to 2004, the prevalence of obesity among adults increased from 15 percent to almost 33 percent. Being either obese or overweight increases an individual's risk for developing medical conditions including, but not limited to, hypertension, Type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, stroke and some cancers. Approximately 17 percent of children and adolescents (ages 2 to 19) are overweight.

Furthermore, the percentage of overweight children two to five years of age increased from seven percent to almost 14 percent and the percentage of overweight children six to 11 years of age increased from 11 percent to 19 percent between 1994 and 2004.

Also during this period, there was an increase in the percentage of overweight adolescents aged 12 to 19 years of age from 11 percent to 17 percent. Overweight children and


adolescents are at an increased risk for developing risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease, such as high cholesterol, high blood pressure, asthma, and Type 2 diabetes.

In addition, these children and adolescents are at an increased risk for psychosocial problems, such as low self-esteem, due to social discrimination. Obesity and overweight in children and adolescents are strongly correlated with obesity and overweight in adulthood. One study found that approximately 80 percent of children who were overweight at ages 10-15 years old were obese adults at age 25.3.

In 2003 approximately $75 billion in medical expenditures were attributed to obesity, half of which were financed by Medicare and Medicaid. Certain races and ethnicities are at an increased risk for obesity and overweight. Among adults, approximately 45 percent of non-Hispanic blacks and 37 percent of Mexican-Americans were obese, as compared to 30 percent of non-Hispanic white adults. Furthermore, in industrialized countries an individual from a low-socioeconomic status (SES) group is more likely to be obese than someone from a high-SES group.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Significant long term benefits for quality of life and reduced chronic disease costs in rural and urban communities.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Endorsing the Vision and Goals of the National Prevention Strategy Issue: Support for the National Prevention Strategy Adopted Policy: NACo endorses the overarching vision and goal of the National Prevention Strategy and will support actions and promote policies that support its effective implementation across all levels of government and in communities. Background: Pursuant to the Affordable Care Act, the President established a National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council, known as the National Prevention Council, chaired by U.S. Surgeon General and composed of seventeen Federal department and agency heads charged with promoting prevention and wellness. The National Prevention Council is responsible for coordinating and leading prevention, wellness, and health promotion efforts across the Federal government and the Nation.

The President also appointed members of the Advisory Group on Prevention, Health Promotion, and Integrative and Public Health – including two county officials – to offer a non-Federal perspective on policy and program recommendations to the National Prevention Council and advise them on effective, science-based prevention and health promotion practices.

The National Prevention Council is developing a National Prevention and Health Promotion Strategy, known as the National Prevention Strategy, to lay out the most effective and achievable means for improving the health of Americans through prevention and health promotion policies and programs, to align prevention and health promotion priorities across the Federal government and to recommend the most effective actions the nation can take to accelerate prevention of leading causes of death and disability in the United States. The National Prevention Strategy envisions working together to improve the health and quality of life for individuals, families, and communities by moving the nation from a focus on sickness and disease to one based on prevention and wellness with a goal of increasing the number of Americans who are healthy at every stage of life. It identifies four Strategic Directions that are the foundation for all prevention efforts and form the basis for a prevention oriented society. The strategic directions are Healthy and Safe Community Environments; Clinical and Community Preventive Services; Empowered People and Elimination of Health Disparities


which are each needed to fully support Americans in leading longer and healthier lives. The Strategy’s seven Priorities include Tobacco Free Living; Preventing Drug Abuse and Excessive Alcohol Use; Healthy Eating; Active Living; Injury and Violence Free Living; Reproductive and Sexual Health; and Mental and Emotional Well-being.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Implementation of the strategy does not assume significant additional investments. It will have urban, suburban and rural applications.


American County Platform and Resolutions 2011-2012 1

HUMAN SERVICES & EDUCATION


The National Association of Counties recognizes the responsibility of county governments to protect and enhance the lives of citizens. Counties have been at the forefront in the implementation of a comprehensive, integrated children and families system. While the role of county governments varies widely among states, almost every county administers and pays part of the cost of some portion of the federal/state/county network of programs collectively known as welfare and social services. Human services and health expenditures are among the largest costs to county governments.

NACo recognizes the role of the federal and state governments, as well as that of county government, in strengthening community and family structures. In recognizing and building upon existing social foundations, state and local governments serve as the links between federal policies and the delivery of critical services in ways that maintain and foster self-sufficiency in communities, families, and individuals.

NACo supports a comprehensive continuum of services for families and children which facilitates coordination of parent education and support services, early childhood development, social services, public health, preventive services to children and youth and correctional services. Federal policy should promote and facilitate preventive and early intervention services to limit the need for excessive social and correctional services in the future.

Poverty is a national problem requiring a national solution. Federal efforts to reform public assistance must recognize that poverty is influenced by national economic factors not within the control of local or state governments. Providing income-maintenance benefits in the context of work programs is the way to break the cycle of welfare dependency and to improve welfare programs.

Employment rather than public assistance should serve as the mainstay for employable individuals. The goal of work programs should be to provide employment opportunities at adequate wages. They should be coordinated with economic development activities and should provide a full range of employment services. They should offer job development and job creation services, skills training and work experience, and upgrading opportunities.

In some areas of the country, such as the inner city and rural communities, there may not be enough private sector jobs to meet the demands of those individuals who are trying to make the transition to work. In these cases, government may have to be the employer of last resort. NACo therefore supports a flexible federal job development program that would allow counties to provide public sector employment if necessary.

To become self-sufficient or to sustain independence, many welfare families need support services such as education and training, child development, child care, Medicaid, mental health and substance abuse services, transportation and case management. Local governments are uniquely able to respond to the needs of their communities provided they are given the flexibility and the resources. Work programs, income security, support services and other social services should be carefully coordinated at the federal, state and local levels in order to provide a seamless range of services.

Any programs mandated by the federal government should be fully federally funded. Counties should have adequate time to implement major changes to federally assisted programs to prevent disruptions in program delivery. Administrative changes in federal program policy and practice should be done through the federal regulatory process and should allow for formal


public review and comment with appropriate and mandatory federal consideration of public comments.

New federal programs should be integrated with an appropriate, existing administrative delivery system. Congress should encourage coordination with state and local governments when seeking citizen input, such as advisory committees to oversee program development, so that these groups do not duplicate existing state and local coordinating efforts.

NACo urges the federal government to base decisions about federal laws and regulations pertaining to human services and education on data and measurable outcomes. Scrutinizing existing and proposed mandates using these two standards will help all levels of government reduce unnecessary and unfunded mandates, stream-line government and use limited resources more efficiently to the benefit of clients and constituents alike. NACo urges the federal government to ask the following key questions when considering legislation, rules or regulations:

• Was comprehensive data used to define the problem and desired outcome? • Were experts who administer the affected programs engaged? • Will it streamline or add layers of bureaucracy? • Is it redundant or inefficient? • Are current staffing levels sufficient to comply with additional requirements? • Are there measureable outcomes to be achieved by this change? • Is there adequate federal funding to pay for all direct local costs? • Are there models in existence that may provide better outcomes? • Have local elected officials been consulted? • Has there been collaboration between federal, state and local agencies? • Does it limit local and state flexibility to be responsive to community needs? As the front-line providers of basic social services, counties seek to achieve an

appropriate blend of local administrative flexibility and federal and state standards to provide a basic level of assistance for children and families. Counties must be partners in the design and reform of human service systems. Finding the appropriate balance of basic standards and local flexibility is indeed a daunting task. NACo proposes the following principles:

The federal government must maintain its responsibility to ensure a level of assistance and support services to children and families and equitable program administration.

Beyond the basic level of federal protection for children, families, and individuals with physical and mental disabilities, the federal government must provide state and local governments with additional flexibility to tailor programs to meet local needs.

The federal, state, and county governments, in exercising their mutual responsibility to support children and families, must collaborate in planning and implementing service programs which meet the particular needs of local communities.

PUBLIC ASSISTANCE

The original nature and intent of income maintenance programs is to provide adequately for individuals who cannot work and those our society has determined should not be required to work. This intent must be preserved. It is the government's responsibility to assure that all who need social services receive them.


Block Grants for Entitlement Programs—NACo believes that the federal government should be responsible for adequately funding its entitlement programs. NACo opposes mandatory block grants and funding caps for federal assistance programs such as SNAP, Medicaid, and Foster Care. Capped block grants in these programs would shift the full cost of program growth and inflation to states and counties. NACo also opposes reductions in administrative funding for these programs that would result in unfunded mandates to counties and states.

Block Grants for Categorical Programs—NACo recognizes strong county government as an essential component and partner in the effective operation of national-state-local human services programs. Local governments are often best equipped to administer human services programs, and therefore must be assured an effective role in the development and implementation of federal programs.

NACo supports consolidating existing categorical grant programs in order to reduce complexity and improve flexibility and program delivery at the local level. Human services block grants must follow the following principles:

Programs should be controlled by elected county officials responsible directly to the taxpayers.

Federal block grant proposals must be developed in close consultation with county officials.

Federal block grant funds for health and social services programs should be allocated directly to counties where an existing service delivery system is in place.

States must be required to plan jointly with county officials and to publish program plans for review and comments.

Where direct funding is not available, states must be required to pass through maximum dollars to counties.

Reasonable transition time should be allowed to move from categorical grants to block grants, including sufficient time to adjust county and state laws, budgets, and administrative procedures.

There must be an absolute reduction in federal mandates and regulations and increased flexibility and simplicity in program administration.

No matching funds should be required of local governments. No maintenance of effort should be required. State and local government laws and

procedures governing spending should apply to block grants.

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF): The success of TANF depends on counties' flexibility to target local needs and support participants' work activities. Without that flexibility and the funding to implement it, the working families who are struggling toward self-sufficiency will lose supportive services and many will fall back on cash assistance. Welfare reform is an ongoing process of supporting working families in gaining self-sufficiency, not a one-time removal of families from the welfare rolls.

Many TANF participants who find work continue to need assistance with job retention, transportation, counseling and other support services such as childcare and health care. Additionally, TANF funding must be able to react quickly to economic downturns and other emerging issues by having unallocated reserves that states can tap quickly.


Funding: TANF should have an annual inflation increase, including the supplemental grants for high-growth states. The TANF state entitlement block grant structure should be maintained without carve-outs or set-asides. The funding level for the TANF Contingency Fund should be increased. NACo supports new funding for research and dissemination of information on family formation.

Flexibility: States, counties and Native American tribes should be permitted to spend carryover funds on any allowable use of TANF. This would include transferring funds to the CCDBG and SSBG.

Participation Requirements and Work Activities: NACo opposes arbitrary and counterproductive work and participation requirements and supports a strong county role in mutually negotiated outcome measures in which states are judged by their progress toward achieving these goals. NACo supports greater flexibility in the TANF work requirements in order to allow counties and states to meet the individual needs of their caseloads. These include, but are not limited to the following:

• A 50 percent work participation rate for two-parent and single parent families; • Thirty hours of work a week for two-parent and single parent families; • At the very least the 12 activities included in the original TANF law; • Allowing individuals who are participating in substance abuse treatment, mental

health treatment and domestic violence services to count those activities as work; • Continuing to exclude victims of domestic abuse and mothers with young children

from the participation requirement; • At least twelve weeks a year for job search and job readiness activities; • Twenty-four months for vocational education to a higher percentage of the caseload; • Allowing more than 10 hours a week of basic skills and education training to count as

work activities and allowing these hours to count toward work participation rates; • Removing teen parents from the 20 percent vocational education limit; • Exempting relatives who are caring for a child who would otherwise be in foster care

from the work requirements and the time limit; • Allowing vocational education and GED education to count towards the work

participation rates; • Exempting adults who are the primary caregivers of a disabled family member from

the work requirements; and • Allowing a parent providing child care in a two parent family to count toward the

work requirement.

Time Limits: For time-limited assistance to be successful, it must be accompanied by adequate federal and state funding for a wide continuum of supportive services that will help families move toward self-sufficiency. NACo supports preserving and increasing state flexibility in administering the federal time limits. This includes allowing states to discount months in which the recipient participates in work and/or specific work activities, including substance abuse treatment, mental health and domestic violence services in compliance with their employability plan; and eliminating child care, transportation and housing from the definition of assistance.

NACo supports the 20 percent hardship exemption and the family violence exemption from the five year time limit. Victims of sexual assault should be added to this exemption. States


should be allowed to lift the lifetime ban on TANF eligibility for individual family members with drug felony convictions.

Maintenance of Effort: Current law is unclear on the ability of states to supplant existing funding with federal TANF funds, and under what circumstances a state may use federal funds to increase existing state-funded programs. Once a state or county spends its Maintenance of Effort (MOE) for a given fiscal year, it should be able to draw down its full allocation of federal TANF dollars for that year at any time. Unspent funds should not be applied against future allocations. Obligated funds should be treated and reported as spent. The supplantation provisions must be clarified so that replacement of state dollars with federal dollars is strictly prohibited, but allow using federal dollars to increase the coverage or availability of a state program above current state spending levels.

Teen Parents: Teen parents in particular are at great risk of long-term welfare dependence. Teen parents should be required to pursue their high school education or GED. Alternative education should be provided when needed and waivers should be developed for special circumstances. The education system should make the necessary provisions to provide needed childcare, counseling and other supportive services for teen parents. NACo supports alternatives that would encourage teenage parents to live with their parents or other responsible adults, and fund enhanced case management and independent living arrangements.

Program Coordination: An integrated workforce development system should be encouraged by giving counties greater flexibility to coordinate programs and blend funds.

Family Promotion: TANF already has the flexibility for states to promote marriage and family formation. Any new incentive programs aimed at marriage promotion must be funded with new money, and should not be carved out of TANF. NACo opposes penalties associated with marriage promotion outcomes. NACo supports funding and disseminating further research on these subjects.

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): The 2008 Farm bill made significant improvements to the Food Stamp program (now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). These include raising and indexing the minimum standard deduction; indexing asset limits for inflation; increasing the minimum allotment for one and two-person families; and lifting the dependent care cap. However, the new law did not change the administratively cumbersome time limit for able bodied single adults or the lifetime ban on eligibility for individual family members with drug felony convictions. NACo supports greater state and local flexibility to address these two issues.

Supplemental Security Income (SSI): SSI benefits and resource limits have not kept pace with inflation. A significant number of persons, including the homeless, who are potentially eligible for the program do not participate. The 1996 welfare reform law removed large numbers of previously eligible individuals, particularly disabled children and individuals with substance abuse problems from SSI. As a result, locally funded General Assistance programs assumed the burden of aiding these individuals. The federal government should:

Provide sufficient income maintenance benefits, including a nutrition supplement, so that state supplementation is unnecessary;


Provide benefits to disabled, elderly, and indigents who receive care in county-owned mental, medical, and residential facilities, including nursing homes and assisted living facilities.

Reevaluate payment levels to ensure SSI recipients are provided with an adequate standard of living;

Reevaluate the asset limit to reflect growth for inflation; Extend the interim assistance program indefinitely; Determine eligibility within thirty days for aged and within sixty days for blind and

disabled; Provide 100 percent of the Medicaid costs of the disabled, blind, and persons over

sixty-five. Establish common application forms for SSI and Medicaid; Create a new category of SSI eligibility called "Specially Disadvantaged Individual."

This category would include those persons who are unable to qualify for SSI as aged or disabled but who are unable to work due to a combination of factors including but not limited to age and work history, functional disabilities, or drug and alcohol abuse;

Fully fund and expand SSI outreach and advocacy programs; and Make the process easily accessible to all applicants and include ample opportunities

for applicants to provide additional information.

Earned Income Tax Credit—The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) has significantly boosted the incomes of low-income working families. According to Census Bureau data, the EITC helps move more children out of poverty than any other program. NACo supports changes to the EITC structure that increase the number of eligible families and provide higher benefit amounts. EITC expansions should be funded through the tax system and should not be offset by TANF funds. The Internal Revenue Service public awareness campaign should be expanded to ensure that all families that are eligible for the EITC receive the credit. EITC eligibility should be extended to non-custodial parents who pay their full share of child support. The EITC marriage penalty should be eliminated.

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

Early Childhood Education and Development: Research has demonstrated the importance of the early years in child development. Quality prenatal services, health care, nutrition, and pre-school education are essential to the healthy development of a child. Numerous advantages have been realized from early intervention and prevention programs, particularly home visitation programs such as Healthy Families, Parents as Teachers, and Success by Six, Educare, and Incredible Years. Children who participate in early childhood development programs record outstanding developmental progress and greater success in the future. Other advantages include early detection of health and learning problems, higher educational achievement, preventing juvenile delinquency, lower crime rates, greater parental involvement in school programs; and reduced teen pregnancy rates.

Finally, investment in early childhood development programs can reduce future expenditures in chronic health care services, child welfare, the juvenile justice system, and welfare. NACo supports federal initiatives to help counties develop these voluntary early childhood and parent education programs.

Congress should provide adequate funding for comprehensive programs such as Head Start, to ensure that needed educational, nutritional, and social services are available to


disadvantaged pre-school children, including children with disabilities. Emphasis should be given to expanding the Early Head Start program for infants and toddlers so that they can take advantage of the program's continuum of services at an earlier age.

NACo supports strengthened coordination of pre-school programs, and other federal and state pre-school programs with county agencies that provide related services to children and their families. NACo further supports coordination between child care programs and Head Start to allow for full-day, continuous care at a single location. Better coordination and follow-up with schools are needed to ensure that the gains made by Head Start are not lost in future years.

Adequate nutrition not only prevents serious health problems, but also helps children improve their ability to learn. The Supplemental Feeding Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) is a valuable component of the continuum of services needed to ensure children's physical and mental development. NACo therefore supports continued expansion of the WIC program.

Child Welfare Services—The child's natural family has the primary right and responsibility to provide each child a safe and nurturing environment. Society must provide the necessary services and supports to safeguard and enhance the ability of all families to fulfill this essential role. Failing this, it becomes society's responsibility to provide for expeditious, alternative arrangements that are permanent and meet the child's physical, mental, and emotional needs.

In many states child welfare, substance abuse treatment and children's mental health services are county responsibilities, yet these systems often operate independently of each other. Children whose parents abuse drugs and alcohol are more likely to be abused and neglected than children of parents who are not substance abusers. Many children in the child welfare and juvenile protection systems come from families with substance abuse. Additionally, many of these children have substance abuse and mental health problems. Unfortunately, states and counties are able to provide treatment to only a fraction of these parents and children. NACo supports funding for new partnerships among federal, state, and local child welfare and substance abuse agencies; including funding for mental health programs in schools. Counties must be involved in the planning and implementation process and must be eligible for direct funding.

NACo believes that it is possible to construct a system for the protection of abused and neglected children that retains the categorical eligibility for out-of-home care for children who cannot remain safely in their homes while at the same time increasing the flexibility of local governments to design prevention and reunification systems that meet the unique needs of communities.

Foster Care, Kinship Care, Guardianship and Adoption Assistance: A variety of foster care situations should be available and sufficiently funded to provide for the differing needs of children. NACo strongly opposes block grants and/or funding caps in the federal Foster Care program. NACo strongly supports the following:

De-linking federal foster care eligibility from the 1996 Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) income eligibility standards and developing a financing system that responds to a child's imminent risk of abuse or neglect;

Enhancing state flexibility to provide supportive services for children and their families, including preventing unnecessary removal from the home and enhancing outcomes for children;


Using Title IV-E funds for subsidized kinship guardianship and kinship post guardianship services both prospectively and retroactively;

Allowing Medicaid to cover more than life threatening care for dependent, abused and neglected undocumented children in state custody. At a minimum, rehabilitation associated with abused or neglected children should be covered and medical care required by federal policy pertaining to foster children should be covered;

Allowing states to include reunification services within the definition of IV-E Foster Care maintenance payments;

Allowing IV-E Adoption Assistance funds to be used for post adoption services for adopted children as well as subsidies;

Government owned/operated residential treatment programs of more than 25 beds in size should be treated on an equal basis as similar not-for-profit and for-profit facilities, and should be eligible for Title IV-E reimbursement;

Allowing states and counties to use IV-E funds to provide services for children placed in non-IV-E settings that prevent children from being placed in foster care;

Allowing states and counties to use IV-E funds to provide prevention, pre-placement and early intervention services for children who are determined to be candidates for foster care;

Allowing states and counties to apply specially designed standards and/or procedures for related foster parents who meet the state's criteria for basic health and safety;

Clarifying the law to permit the use of TANF funds to provide support services, including childcare, to kinship caregivers of TANF-eligible children, without regard to income; and

Allowing states to provide childcare funds and Medicaid to relative caregivers up to 200 percent of poverty.

NACo strongly opposes block grants and/or funding caps in the federal Foster Care program because they would undermine counties' ability to ensure the health and safety of our most vulnerable children. If Congress adopts a capped allocation rather than continue to operate under an open-ended entitlement, NACo recommends the following basic principles:

There must be adequate funding available through the duration of the grant; Training and welfare information systems must remain separate from the flexibility

proposal; States should be required to maintain their current level of effort in child welfare; Emergency funds should be flexible and broad enough to allow access by sub-state

regions with sudden caseload increases; Foster care children must remain categorically eligible for Medicaid; States that opt to receive the capped allocation must be allowed to opt back into the

open-ended entitlement at any time; States should be able to negotiate the funding baseline for a block grant with the

federal government; States should be allowed to retain the current flexibility to negotiate waivers for

localities; and State associations of counties in states where counties operate child welfare systems

must be consulted and state legislatures must have the right to approve a state's request to opt into the capped allocation system.


Foster Youth—Research shows that children aging out of foster care generally have poor outcomes. NACo calls for a national "call to action" to raise awareness to the issues faced by children aging out of the foster care system. Additionally, NACo supports the following measures to improve outcomes for children aging out of foster care:

Change federal law to enable disabled youth receiving federal foster care payments to immediately receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits when leaving the foster care system;

Enhance federal funding for workforce development, housing, health care, independent living programs, mental health, substance abuse services, and transitional services; and

Coordinate and align resources between human services and workforce development to ensure completion of secondary education, gainful sustainable employment and/or post-secondary occupational training.

Training and Administration of Foster Care, Kinship Care, Guardianship and Adoption Assistance—Proper administrative support for these programs is essential to ensure children's continued well-being. NACo opposes any attempt to cap the Title IV-E administrative reimbursement for foster homes and social worker case management costs as a warranted cost shift to counties and states. States and counties also need to be given adequate time and resources to implement new requirements such as more frequent case reviews and computerization.

Staff training should be reimbursed at 75 percent regardless of the proportion of children in a state who are eligible for federal IV-E Foster Care maintenance and Adoption Assistance program payments. Additionally, states should have the flexibility to use IV-E funds for cross-agency training of child welfare staff and other public and private agencies that work with these children, including substance abuse, mental health, education, juvenile justice, probation, and welfare agencies. Training funds should also be provided for foster parents, kinship care and guardianship care providers, and adoptive parents.

Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) are trained community volunteers appointed by courts to advocate for the best interests of children who are involved in the juvenile and family court system. CASA advocacy is cost-effective, because it is an organization of volunteers. NACo supports annual appropriations increases until the program reaches its fully authorized level.

Child Protective Services—Federal policy and local program design must ensure capacity for immediate response to reports of child abuse and a coordinated, comprehensive services system designed to protect children and restore family functioning. NACo supports the development of an outcomes-based child protection system through a series of benchmarks developed at the local level that will monitor a community's progress based on its socio-economic needs and priorities.

Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services for Children—Most children in need of mental health or substance abuse services do not have access to adequate services. Children in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems have a disproportionately high need for mental health and substance abuse services. In-patient and children's health treatment beds are scarce, resulting in worsening problems, including violence. NACo supports increased federal funding for school-based mental health services and for mental health and substance abuse services


targeted at at-risk children, especially children who are in the child welfare or juvenile justice system.

Child Care—Adequate, quality, and age appropriate child care services are needed to ensure that we meet the developmental needs of children. Child care policies must recognize that the majority of mothers with young children are employed at least during a portion of the child's early years. Federal support for child care should be available to all welfare recipients who need it while participating in employment, education, or training. Funding for the Child Care and Development Block Grant must be increased to meet the needs of eligible families, while maintaining the funding and flexibility in TANF.

Federally funded day care should be available to working parents as they leave public assistance and should continue to be available on a fee scale based on their ability to pay. States should be allowed to offer 12 months of transitional childcare coverage for families leaving TANF. At the very least there should be enough federal child care funds to ensure that quality services are available to families with incomes of up to 225 percent of the federal poverty level and for families that leave TANF. Financial support should be made available for infant care, child care for children with special needs, children in foster care, and child care during non-traditional hours when needed.

Public child care resources such as licensing and monitoring of providers, information and referral, and assistance in selecting appropriate care, should be available to all, without regard to income or resources. State and local licensing laws should be carefully monitored to ensure adequacy of facilities and caretakers.

Employers should be given increased financial incentives to provide child care for their employees on site or as a benefit. The Dependent and Child Care Tax Credit should be made refundable.

Child Support—It is the right of every child to be supported by his or her parents. NACo supports the federal Title IV-D Child Support Enforcement program as a cost-effective means of ensuring that right and of reducing welfare costs. NACo supports providing incentives to states to pass-through a higher percentage of child support collections to families on welfare by reimbursing the state child support enforcement program dollar-for-dollar. Any pass-through program must be optional and not carved-out of existing funding. NACo urges Congress to permanently restore the ability to draw federal match dollars from the reinvestment of child support incentive payments. The cap on the Child Support Incentive Fund must be removed. The 66 percent reimbursement rate for administrative costs and the 90 percent rate for genetic testing must be maintained. NACo supports programs that assist non-custodial parents to be appropriately involved in the lives of their children financially and emotionally. Any new child support enforcement mandates must be accompanied by enhanced federal reimbursement.

Support payments should be allowed to be made and distributed locally, with local accountability; with the option to encourage electronic funds transfer to provide a "single-payment plan" for employers and other payers. NACo is concerned about ensuring privacy; therefore opposes private sector access to child support data and enforcement tools.

NACo supports legislation that creates a corrective action plan for states that have been unable to implement federal child support requirements; restricts penalties to corrective action


plan non-compliance; and allows alternative systems configurations that allow expanded local flexibility for automated child support payments.

SERVICES TO OLDER AMERICANS

Between 2011 and 2030 the 78 million individuals who were born between 1946 and 1964 will reach the age of 65. This means that the number of older adults in the United States will more than double. Not only will there be significantly higher numbers of the elderly, they will also be living longer. Individuals over the age of 85 are already the fastest growing sector of the population. At the same time, the number of working age people is only increasing by 20 percent and there will be fewer workers to support the retired population.

NACo supports a continuum of care for the elderly that provides supportive services to assist older persons remain active, productive and independent. These services would include adult day care, transportation, respite care, housing alternatives, caregiver training, support groups, in-home support services, family counseling, daily money management, public conservatorship and guardianship services as well as chore services, personal care, skilled nursing care and long term care.

NACo supports federal policies which recognize the role and responsibilities of county government in assuring necessary and effective services for the elderly, including community based and long- term care services. Federal policy should recognize that these costs have increased, and should support, facilitate and provide adequate federal funding for county implementation of these ever increasing costs and responsibilities.

Older Americans Act—NACo supports the Older Americans Act's goal of developing a coordinated program of services and opportunities for our older citizens. The Act should provide maximum flexibility for county governments to target Older Americans Act resources to address the needs of the elderly in their community. Congress should fully fund the programs authorized under this legislation. Congress should expand and improve access to daily nutrition and meal services, respite care, home care services, adult daycare, services to family caregivers, information and referral services, and research.

The changes in the aging population require better planning and targeting of health and human services programs. NACo urges the federal government to assist states and counties by funding in-depth needs assessments to determine the real needs of the elderly in their community and the adequacy of existing services and gaps in delivery.

Long-Term Care—County government has a long, established role as a provider, purchaser, administrator and/or contractor for long term health care. Services should be provided in the least restrictive environment meeting the individual's needs.

Additional flexibility should be provided in Medicare, Medicaid, Veteran Services and other federal programs to encourage and enable the expansion of community-based care and assisted living facilities as a means of avoiding unnecessary institutional care.

Informal caregivers should be given support and provided incentives to encourage them to continue to provide support for those in need of services. The continuity of care between formal and informal settings should be met through periodic assessments that can be measured by those who are providing necessary long-term care services.

Rural counties have a higher percentage of senior citizens than urban counties, but they are less likely than their urban counterparts to have access to in-home and community-based


services. Inter-disciplinary models such as the Programs for All-inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) are designed to provide services at home and in the community and maximize senior citizen's independence. NACo supports efforts to expand these programs in rural areas.

Social Security—As the providers of last resort for health and social services, counties have an interest in preserving the benefits received by the nation's most vulnerable populations. Social Security benefits prevent poverty for people of all ages. NACo urges Congress, as it reforms Social Security, to protect the financial security of current and future Social Security beneficiaries, especially low-income individuals, the disabled and surviving spouses and children.

SOCIAL SERVICES

There must be a human services program designed to achieve the full objectives of encouraging self-support, self-reliance, strengthening of family life, and the protection of children and adults. The broad range of supportive social services needed to strengthen the community and family structure should emerge at the local level from a federal-state-county partnership that provides for maximum flexibility at the county level.

These services should be administered at the local level and adequately funded at the federal and state levels. For programs established and funded by the federal government and operated by counties, states should be required to pass through to counties the majority of the state's share of federal funds. To ensure this pass-through, a limit should be placed on the amount states can retain for administrative or other purposes. Further, to assure equitable distribution of funds among the counties within the states, the federal government should monitor the fiscal formulas by which states distribute federal social services funds to counties.

Social Services Block Grant (Title XX)—Title XX is used by many counties for a variety of programs, such as adult protection, child care for children with special needs, child welfare and child abuse prevention. In some cases such as adult protection, this is the only source of fund for this type of services.

NACo supports restoration of Title XX Social Services Block Grant funding to a minimum statutory level of $3.1 billion prior to the 1981 block grant reductions, and opposes consolidation of other programs into the block grant. Further consolidation of programs within the block grant would not result in savings but would shift costs to county social services budgets in addition to those caused by the federal block grant funding reductions.

Additionally, NACo strongly supports continued flexibility in the Title XX program and restoring the authority to transfer up to ten percent of TANF funds to Title XX. This flexibility enables states and counties to use the program to meet their specific local needs and goals.

Services to Individuals with Disabilities—Counties recognize that the objectives of encouraging self-support, self-reliance, strengthening of family life, and protective services apply equally to the physically, mentally, and developmentally disabled. NACo supports federal action that will promote these objectives by removing categorical restrictions that inhibit comprehensive planning and delivery of services to the disabled.

NACo supports federal action that increases incentives for deinstitutionalization and encourages and funds the expansion of community-based services, including the necessary individual and program financial support, to prevent reinstitutionalization. NACo supports equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities in all aspects of American life. Federal funding is


necessary to supplement local efforts to achieve program and facility accessibility and equal employment opportunity.

Community Action Agencies—Through its boards involving the public sector, the private sector, and the community, the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) represents a unique and effective partnership with counties, states, the federal government and community organizations. NACo strongly supports full funding for CSBG.

Domestic Violence—Domestic violence is a major social problem not only because of its high incidence, but also because of its pervasive and self-perpetuating nature. The problem affects individuals in a wide range of living arrangements, including children, senior citizens, and those with developmental problems, as well as spouses.

Children living in violent homes, whether victims or witnesses, frequently become abusive parents and/or mates themselves. Domestic violence is often associated with the development of other social and emotional problems. Treatment of the problem often involves temporary respite and permanent community resources to shelter victims. However, federal funding is insufficient.

The federal government should fund domestic violence programs that permit counties and communities to develop resources and services to protect family members and prevent family violence, improve staff training, and link programs in the health, mental health, welfare, criminal justice, law enforcement, and social service systems for effective treatment and prevention of domestic violence.

Energy Assistance for Low Income Persons—NACo recognizes the need for a comprehensive energy assistance, weatherization, and conservation program with sufficient federal funding and incentives so that the cost burden does not fall on county government. Assistance to pay energy costs should not be a separate, additional category or welfare program, but should be integrated with an appropriate existing administrative delivery system.

Eligibility criteria should include renters. It should not discriminate against single-person households and should not be limited to persons eligible for other federal programs.

Assistance for the Homeless—NACo recognizes the need for a comprehensive national policy to end homelessness and poverty. A significant federal commitment is necessary to meet the growing need for services, including housing, mental health services, and substance abuse treatment to ensure that the burden for providing care and assistance to the homeless does not fall disproportionately upon counties. NACo endorses the federal strategic plan to prevent and end homelessness; especially the commitment for greater cooperation among federal agencies and the special attention being paid to Veterans, families, and youth. NACo endorses the targeting of federal resources to housing first and rapid re-housing strategies and other innovations in ten year plans that have demonstrated results towards reducing and ending homelessness. NACo supports additional federal funding for ten year plans without unfunded mandates.

Veterans' Services—NACo strongly supports full funding to qualified veterans for educational, housing and medical costs. NACo endorses increased investments in solutions to veteran homelessness, and encourages both the Administration and the Congress to continue to increase the resources targeted to end homelessness among veterans. NACo supports a process that is responsive to the needs of veterans and their families, provides appropriate information, and facilitates administrative services.


Substance Abuse—NACo strongly supports enhancing and expanding prenatal and treatment programs, education, prevention programs and funding solutions to eliminate crack cocaine, and its devastating consequences on the well-being of America's families.

According to the 2003 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, approximately 7.9 million Americans ages 12 and older have tried crack cocaine at least once during their lifetime; 1.4 million admitted that they used crack cocaine in the previous year; and 604,000 reported that they used crack cocaine the month before.

EDUCATION

The health of our economy and the quality of life in our communities is directly related to the caliber of education in our schools. Local education systems affect all segments of the community and are critical to the success of many programs operated by counties. Regardless of the specific funding arrangements between counties and school districts, they share a common tax base and are both faced with limited resources. In the interest of educational quality and protection of the tax dollar, county governments and school districts are encouraged to work closely together to minimize duplication of services and promote maximum coordination in the use of facilities and the delivery of services.

Although the primary responsibility for education is with the states, quality of education and equal access for all children to excellence in education are appropriate national concerns. NACo believes that the long-term prospects for initiatives such as welfare reform hinge upon our ability to create conditions whereby every child has an opportunity to achieve productive citizenship. Education is the key to that success.

Elementary and Secondary Education—Education is in the national interest and merits continued federal financial support. NACo urges Congress to substantially amend the No Child Left Behind Act to grant greater local flexibility: in the use of student achievement measures, in the design of interventions for schools not making Adequate Yearly Progress, and to address the individual needs of students with disabilities and students of English as a second language. NACo strongly urges Congress to fully fund the law so that states and local education districts can implement all aspects of the law.

NACo supports the current method of disbursement of funds to local Boards of Education, and does not support the use of vouchers and policies such as tuition tax credits that would provide an unfair competitive advantage to private schools, and erode support for public schools.

Bullying and harassment interfere with students' ability to achieve higher academic standards and can lead to even greater school safety problems. NACo urges the federal government provide school districts with the tools and resources they need to ensure that all students feel safe within their schools.

Health Services in Schools—The Medicaid program should reimburse states, local governments and school districts for health, mental health, and health-related activities provided in schools. This reimbursement should include direct services such as medical appointments and therapies and administrative services such as outreach and care coordination activities.

Adult Basic Education—Congress should provide adequate funding of adult education, including English as a Second Language programs.


Discrimination Costs—Congress should provide increased funding to assist local communities in meeting regulations designed to eliminate discrimination.

Impacted Areas—NACo urges Congress to continue to recognize the additional burdens placed on local communities having a large number of federal employees and facilities, and to continue to provide federal aid to impacted areas to meet these extra costs involved in educating children of federal employees.

Federal Aid to College Students—NACo deems the continuation of federally backed student loan programs to be a vital necessity if this nation is to preserve equal educational opportunity and receive the benefit of the fully developed talents of the younger generation. Loans and grants should be based on economic need and require reasonable levels of self-help.

Vocational and Technical Education—The federal government should place increased emphasis on the promotion of vocational and technical programs across the secondary and post-secondary educational spectrum. Vocational programs should be responsive to the growth industries of the economy and should be coordinated with local welfare reform and job training programs.

Education for Children with Disabilities—NACo supports the goal of available free public education to all children with disabilities. The federal government should keep its commitment to ensure full funding to local governments so they can meet the requirements of the law. Timetables and other regulations should be coordinated with state and federal fiscal policy in order that children with disabilities receive optimal benefits from expanded educational opportunities.

Education Research and Data—The Department of Education should provide information and research data to the states, including appropriate student performance data which can assist school boards, local governments and other agencies in the monitoring and evaluation of programs.

National and Community Service—Community service instills in young people a sense of responsibility. NACo supports full funding for the Corporation for National and Community Service, which operates programs in more than 350 separate locations, with more than 20,000 participants.

After School Programs: County governments run a variety of programs such as after school day care, mentoring/tutoring, and recreational programs. Programs such as the 21st Century Community Learning Centers should be available directly to counties.

School Construction: NACo supports efforts to establish federal incentives that will help state and local governments finance school repair, renovation, modernization, and construction projects and facilitate the development of community services for children and families in school buildings.


LEGAL IMMIGRANTS, MIGRANTS, REFUGEES AND UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS

Legal immigrants, refugees, undocumented immigrants and others enter and remain in this country as a result of federal action or inaction. The heavy fiscal burden that is placed upon local governments is the direct result of national immigration policies or the lack of enforcement of immigration policies. Congress and the administration should establish an on-going consultation process on immigration issues with NACo and other national organizations representing state and local governments.

Services—Counties traditionally provide health, welfare, and social services to persons residing within their boundaries, regardless of their legal status. Since immigration is a federal responsibility, NACo believes that the full cost, including administrative costs, of any services or assistance to non-citizens should be paid by the federal government rather than by county and state governments.

The 1996 welfare reform law limited access to federal means-tested programs such as Medicaid and TANF by prohibiting newly-arrived legal immigrants from receiving benefits for the first five years in the country. NACo supports legislation that would permit states to provide these federal programs to legal immigrant children and pregnant women from their date of entry. Additionally, the law limited refugee eligibility for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) to seven years. NACo strongly supports restoring full SSI eligibility to refugees.

In addition to reimbursing county governments for costs incurred in assisting legal immigrants, refugees, undocumented immigrants and others, the federal government should strengthen its enforcement efforts to control illegal immigration. However, we oppose the creation of a national worker identification system, which could be a potential threat to civil liberties.

Refugee Program─Refugees should be resettled in a manner that minimizes their

concentration into a few counties. When making decisions to admit new refugees into the country the U. S. State Department should give advance notice of those decisions to the states and counties that are most likely to be affected by the refugee resettlement.

There should be a permanent federal refugee program with uniform policies for all refugee groups and with sufficient federal funds to provide assistance during the first 36 months that a refugee is in the United States. Federal funding should continue at the 100 percent reimbursement level for financial assistance, medical care, social services, employment services, and education until refugees reach a reasonable level of self- sufficiency.

Funding should follow refugees. It is therefore critical that funding formulas respond not just to the challenges that state and local governments face at the point of initial resettlement. The new normal of secondary migration needs to be addressed through accurate data and funding that follows the refugee.

The federal government should develop contingency plans, in consultation with state and local elected officials, for handling mass asylum situations in which the United States is a country of first asylum. The legal status and rights of applicants for asylum and their eligibility for federal assistance must be clarified.

The federal government needs to increase its dialogue with and accountability to state and local governments. NACo opposes any proposal that would transfer funds needed by states and counties for refugee assistance to resettlement agencies without proper state and county


consultation and agreement. States and counties should be allowed to use refugee employment services fund for refugees on public assistance who have been in the United States more than five years.


HUMAN SERVICES AND EDUCATION RESOLUTIONS

Resolution on TANF and CCDBG Reauthorization Issue: The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Block Grant and the Child Care

and Development Block Grant programs expired September 30, 2010. Adopted Policy: NACo urges Congress to revise the current Temporary Assistance for

Needy Families Block Grant (TANF) program to provide greater state and county flexibility to create and provide services that support and move families off welfare. NACo supports allowing more state flexibility in TANF program design such as allowing higher education to count as work; realistic time limits on education; and allowing states to use TANF funds to support post secondary educational expenses. NACo urges Congress to, at a minimum, retain and enhance state flexibility to use TANF funds for subsidized employment. NACo further urges Congress to reauthorize all programs within TANF. NACo urges Congress to ensure that reauthorization includes the provision that the TANF block grant is increased annually in an amount commensurate with the rate of inflation. NACo supports reauthorization of the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) programs with additional funding. Finally, NACo urges Congress and the Administration to ensure that CCDBG funds are not diverted to other programs or supplanted.

Background: The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Block Grant (TANF), the TANF Contingency Fund, TANF Supplemental Grants and the Child Care and Development Block Grant entitlement and discretionary programs expire at the end of the year. The Contingency Fund also needs to be replenished, since states have drawn down most of the available funds as a result of the recession.

The TANF Emergency Contingency Fund (ECF), which provided subsidized employment, cash assistance and short-term supports to needy families expired September 30, 2010. ECF earnings reduce greatly or eliminate the family’s TANF cash grant. Work skills and relationships developed by individuals in ECF jobs help build the foundation for permanent employment. With unemployment still hovering at a national average of nine percent, it is clear that ECF is still needed. The federal TANF regulations limit counting education as work. After the first 12 months, the participant must do some other type of work for 20 hours, and then pursue higher education while caring for minor children in the home. Removal of these restrictions would enable states to make choices about what will best benefit their citizens.

Many TANF families struggle with multiple barriers to self-sufficiency such as disabilities, mental health issues, domestic violence and substance abuse. As a result they may not always be able to meet the full participation requirements. States and counties should be given the flexibility to provide partial credit to these families with special needs. A number of states have chosen to give a reduced grant to children whose parents reach their time limits on aid but still meet income criteria. The current HHS regulations include these parents in the state’s work participation rate. Given the current economic situation, this rule puts states and counties in the untenable position of having to decide whether to eliminate assistance for these vulnerable children.

An inflation adjustment was not included in the 1996 statute and therefore TANF funding has been at a fixed level since 1997. Reauthorization should include automatic annual increases so the TANF block grant reflects state and county spending needs. It is likely that TANF reauthorization will only be for one year. In the absence of long-term reauthorization, NACo urges the Department of Health and Human Services to review the current TANF regulations to


determine which changes could be made administratively. Counties support the Administration’s proposal to increase CCDBG. Additionally, counties are concerned that some states are diverting child care funds to other programs due to budgetary constraints.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: Long term impacts on intergenerational poverty and child well being.


Resolution on Comprehensive Immigration Reform Issue: Congressional action needed to fix our broken immigration system. Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties urges Congress and the President

to enact comprehensive immigration reform this year that: • Provides for uniform enforcement of all existing laws; • Secures our borders; • Includes a national strategy for coordination among federal, state, local and tribal

authorities; • Establishes a sensible and orderly guest worker program for legal immigrants; • Imposes no unfunded mandates on state and local governments; • Includes no mandates on counties to enforce immigration laws; and • Provides a sustainable funding stream to counties for immigrant health care funded by

fees levied on legalized immigrants. Background: Comprehensive immigration reform failed in the last two Congresses, and

as a result we continue to have an immigration system that discourages legal immigration and creates a loss of respect for the rule of law.

On January 13, 2010, NACo released an immigration focus questionnaire of county officials from across the nation. When asked what the most pressing issues are regarding immigration reform, the overwhelming responses were eliminating the piecemeal approach to immigration and clear federal laws and enforcement policies. County officials were also asked what is needed in immigration reform. The four responses receiving the highest number of votes were border enforcement, a path to citizenship, a temporary worker program and funding for local governments for health and education programs.

NACo envisions an earned legalization process that could include, but would not be limited to, registering, demonstrating employment, learning English, criminal background checks, paying fees and returning to the country of origin.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Would provide additional funding for county health and education.


Resolution on the DREAM Act Issue: Support for the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act. Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties calls upon Congress and the

President to promptly enact the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act.

Background: Under the 1982 Supreme Court decision Plyler v. Doe, state and local education districts are required to provide resident immigrants, regardless of legal status, with a free primary and secondary education. NACo believes that is in the best interest of counties to


ensure that all children maximize their potential, which would include higher education opportunities.

The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (P.L. 104-208) preempts state laws regarding postsecondary education benefits (“in-state tuition”) for immigrant students, even when the child has successfully graduated from the state’s K-12 system and has lived in the country since before his or her 16th birthday. The federal law prohibits states from providing in-state tuition benefits to those not lawfully present unless all students, regardless of state residence, are eligible for such benefit. NACo believes that this prohibition is a preemption of states’ ability to determine who is and who is not eligible for in-state tuition and it should be repealed.

The DREAM Act would restore the flexibility that states had prior to 1996 to determine who should receive in-state tuition. The bill would apply to students who have been in the country prior to their 16th year of age, have been in the country for at least five consecutive years, have graduated from high school or have high school equivalent diploma, have been accepted to an institution of higher education, are not subject to an order of deportation, and are of good moral character.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: None. Adopted July 19, 2011

Resolution on the Elder Justice Act Issue: Fiscal Year 2012 funding for the Elder Justice Act. Adopted Policy: NACo urges Congress to fund the Elder Justice Act in FY 2012. Background: The Elder Justice Act (EJA) was enacted as part of the Patient Protection

and Affordable Care Act. EJA is the first federal program designed to combat elder abuse, neglect and exploitation of elder adults. The program was authorized at $777 million over four years but has yet to be funded. The President’s proposed budget for FY 2012 included approximately $22 million for EJA.

The National Institute of Justice study, estimates that almost 11% of people ages 60 and older (5.7 million) faced some form of elder abuse in the past year. Additionally, a 2009 report by the MetLife Mature Market Institute and the National Committee for the Prevention of Elder Abuse estimates that seniors lose a minimum of $2.5 billion each year to financial abuse.

Funding for EJA would have a direct impact on state and local Adult Protective Services (APS) at this time of severe budget constraints. EJA authorizes $400 million over four years for APS. According to the Leadership Council of Aging Organizations, a recent survey of Adult Protective Services (APS) agencies in 30 states, 60 percent reported average budget cuts of 14 percent. At the same time two-thirds reported an increase of 24 percent in reports of abuse.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Would provide new federal funds to counties. Adopted July 19, 2011

Resolution on Reauthorization and Funding of the Older Americans Act Issue: The Older Americans Act is up for reauthorization his year. Adopted Policy: NACo urges Congress to reauthorize the Older Americans Act (OAA),

expand program flexibility to distribute funds between nutrition programs, and increase authorization and appropriations levels.

Background: Nearly 39 million Americans, or 13 percent of the population, are over the age of 65, and this number continues to grow. As the population ages, the need to provide home-


delivered meals increases and sometimes overshadows the need that younger, more mobile seniors have for congregate meals. Under current law, states and area agencies on aging have limited ability to transfer funds between these two programs (Titles III C1 and C2).

NACo supports merging these two programs into one category and allowing local area agencies greater flexibility to distribute between the two.

According to the National Council on Aging (NCOA), nearly 80 percent of states report waiting lists for home-delivered means and over 50 percent report waiting lists for personal care, homemaker services and respite care. Additionally, 96 percent of state units on aging report that their budgets have been reduced. At the same time that the elderly population continues to increase, funding for OAA programs has not kept pace with inflation or increased demand. NACo supports increasing the authorization and appropriations for all OAA programs.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Would provide new federal funds to county area agencies on aging.


Resolution on the Community Services Block Grant Issue: The Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) has been targeted for serious cuts

and program changes. Adopted Policy: NACo supports full funding for CSBG as well as the program’s

formula grant structure. Background: The Community Services Block Grant (CSBG), which was funded at $700 million in FY 2010, is being cut by approximately 50 percent in the House Continuing Resolution for FY 2011 (H.R. 1) as well as the President’s proposed FY 2012 budget. Additionally, the President’s budget includes language that would “introduce competitiveness” into CSBG. While the proposed budget doesn’t provide further details, this language is being interpreted as a proposal to change CSBG to a totally competitive grant process. CSBG operates in 90 percent of the nation’s counties through a network of more than 1,100 eligible public or private entities, many of which are community action agencies (CAAs). CSBG grants go to the states, but they are mandated to pass through 95 percent of the funds to the eligible entities. Many of these anti-poverty agencies also serve as the local Head Start agency and the local energy assistance agency. After Hurricane Katrina, many CSBG agencies played a key role in helping individuals who were displaced. CSBG agency boards are composed of local elected officials and community representatives.

Turning CSBG into competitive grants would disadvantage smaller communities that don’t have the wherewithal to hire grant writers. It should be noted that CSBG already has a competitive component. States are allowed to use a percentage of their allocation for discretionary grants.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Would preserve county funds. Adopted July 19, 2011

Resolution on Indian Child Welfare Notices Issue: Cost of Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) notices. Adopted Policy: Amend the notice provisions of the ICWA statute § 25 U.S.C. 1912

from registered mail with return receipt requested to certified mail. Background: Currently, under federal law, ICWA notices must be sent via registered

mail with return receipt requested. The cost of a registered mail letter is $14.50, and must be


sent out to comply with the provisions of ICWA when a child may be of Indian descent. The cost of certified mail is $6.75. Certified mail may also be sent with return receipt requested and changing to certified mail would not violate this provision in the statute. This would be a simple federal statutory adjustment that could save administrative dollars at the local level.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Approx $180-200/week for the City and County of Denver. Cost to other counties is unknown at this time.


Resolution Supporting the Establishment of an Office of Rural Education Policy in the Department of Education

Issue: An office within the Department of Education representing rural schools. Adopted Policy: NACo strongly supports the establishment of an Office of Rural

Education inside the Department of Education. Background: Rural education is becoming an increasingly large and important part of

the U.S. public school system. According to the Digest of Education Statistics reported annually by the National Center for Education Statistics, the number of students attending rural schools increased by over 11 percent, from 10.5 million to nearly 11.7 million between the 2004-2005 and 2008-2009 school years. The share of the nation’s public school enrollment attending rural schools increased from 17.9 percent to 21.6 percent.

Rural schools face unique challenges and are often able to provide unique benefits to their students. The challenges faced by rural schools are diverse and can include small enrollments, federal and state education funding inequities, geographic isolation, challenges in recruiting and retaining effective teachers and leaders, and limited access to advanced courses.

Rural schools often have the asset of a strong relationship to their community. They have often led the way with regard to distance-learning and place-based learning opportunities. It has been said that rural education is “too large to be ignored but too small and diverse to be highly visible.”

As a result, research on rural education is limited compared to other areas of educational research. Recognition of the unique health related needs in rural communities led to legislation passed in 1987 that created the Office of Rural Health Policy at the Department of Health and Human Services. This structure has proven itself successful and the current legislation, while more modest, is modeled after this successful program.

The Office of Rural Education Policy Act establishes an office inside the current Office of Elementary and Secondary Education at the Department of Education headed by a director. The Act also requires the preparation and publication of impact analyses describing the effect of proposed rules and regulations on rural schools.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The Office of Rural Education Office will not require additional taxpayer money for funding; rather the office would be staffed and paid for by existing education department dollars.


Resolution on the Social Services Block Grant Issue: The House Budget Resolution proposed to eliminate the Social Services Block

Grant. Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties strongly supports the Social

Services Block Grant and opposes any efforts to eliminate or reduce its funding.


Background: The House Budget Resolutions has proposed to eliminate the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG), which is currently funded at $1.7 billion, claiming that it is duplicative funding. SSBG is an entitlement to states. Several sates in turn pass the funds to counties.

SSBG funding is used for a variety of services, but the most common include adult protective services and child welfare and are not duplicative. SSBG is currently the only federal source of funding for adult protective services. Child welfare services funded by SSBG make up for insufficient funds in other federal program , and may also cover children and families who are not eligible for other federal programs

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: would preserve county funding. Adopted July 19, 2011


JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY STATEMENT OF BASIC PHILOSOPHY

It is only through a county partnership with the other levels of government in the American system of federalism that a full-scale comprehensive approach may be taken to crime and public safety problems. Counties must increasingly look to the federal government for substantial amounts of financial assistance; to the states for coordination of state crime and public safety programs with those of local areas, and for appropriate statutory authorizations and a measure of financial assistance; and to their sister municipal governments and regional agencies for cooperative and coordinated local approaches to these problems. The need for comprehensive planning in order to bring about a more rational approach to problem solving in both enforcement and crime prevention is evident. Counties must exercise a strong leadership role in this regard.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

County governments are geographically best suited to coordinate local criminal justice activities, since all major criminal justice agencies are usually included within county boundaries and since county governments allocate local tax dollars to these agencies. However, the triple threat of increasing costs, rising standards imposed by courts and state legislatures, and the inherent autonomy of criminal justice agencies places on county officials unique planning and coordination requirements.

Criminal Justice Planning and Coordination—Due to the nature of the local criminal justice “system,” elected county policy makers should develop a criminal justice planning and evaluation capacity. A criminal justice planning staff should do research, manage feasibility studies, recommend alternative options to the policy makers who make budget decisions, and provide technical assistance to operating criminal justice agencies. NACo encourages the use of state and federal funds to establish a planning capacity that can develop programs and priorities for county-financed operations as well as for federally-funded projects.

A. Location—The criminal justice planning staff should be tied closely to the county budgeting process in order to assist county officials in making a rational allocation of scarce resources. Coordinating staff should be located at the county level in urban areas and within standard multi-county planning regions in rural areas, with staff located in the areas they serve.

B. Form—Policy boards composed of representatives of local agencies, private organizations, and general purpose units of local government should be formed to develop policy options for legislative or executive action. NACo supports majority representation by officials from general purpose units of local government on policy boards.

Law Enforcement and Crime Prevention—The control of crime and the improvement of criminal justice are basically local concerns, and, as such, all efforts to alleviate and prevent crime must begin at the local level.

Sheriffs and other law enforcement officials should have written policy, sanctioned by legislation, which specifies the objectives and priorities that will guide the agency’s delivery of police services. These policies should include the role of police in the protection of constitutional guarantees, the enforcement of the law, as well as the provision of services necessary to reduce crime, maintain public order, and respond to the needs of the community.


A. Diversion—Criminal justice officials are encouraged, where permitted by law, to divert from the criminal and juvenile justice system those individuals or cases for whom the criminal and juvenile justice system would not be appropriate, or in such instances where other resources would be more effective. All diversion policies should be written to ensure fairness and uniformity.

B. Citation Release—Counties are encouraged to promote the use of citation release by law enforcement officers. This form of release should be utilized in misdemeanor cases where allowable by law. Police agencies should have written procedures to aid officers in making the decision whether to release or detain an arrested individual.

C. Team Policing—Team policing is encouraged where research and testing in that jurisdiction indicate that such a system would enable it to use its resources more efficiently and improve crime control through better community relations.

D. Quality of Personnel—Counties should improve the strength and caliber of law enforcement personnel through a revision of personnel practices, requiring minimum standards, and by raising education and training. Training should include the needs of victims and witnesses of crime. The Department of Justice should provide assistance programs to train and educate local law enforcement personnel.

E. Recruitment—Recruitment should be directed toward attracting the best qualified candidates to fill vacancies. Efforts to fill these vacancies with capable personnel should be made without regard to race, creed, sex, or national origin.

F. Interjurisdictional Contracts and Coordination of Police Services—Municipalities should be encouraged to contract with counties for those police services which can be delivered more effectively at the county level. States should provide authority and financial incentives to encourage multi-jurisdictional cooperation.

G. Coordination between Police and Other Criminal Justice Agencies—County police agencies should cooperate with other criminal justice agencies, especially in developing programs to apprehend career and white-collar criminals. Cooperation with qualified private security personnel is essential for complete protection of local communities.

H. Neighborhood Police—County police agencies are encouraged to develop neighborhood police programs which emphasize community involvement and crime prevention.

I. Assault Penalties—Adequate penalties for assault upon law enforcement officers in the performance of their duties should be provided.

J. Hot Pursuit—County police agencies are encouraged to develop objective, written guidelines concerning hot pursuit, as well as policies as to when hot pursuit should be abandoned. Police agencies should also provide adequate training for police officers who might engage in high-speed chases.

K. FBI Training of Coroners and Medical Examiners—The Federal Bureau of Investigation should provide advanced training for coroners and medical examiners. Such training should include organization and management issues, effective techniques for delivering medical legal investigations, methods for enhancing the pooling of resources, and the coordination of activities between county coroner/medical examiner offices and other law enforcement agencies.


L. Forfeiture—The assistance of state and local criminal justice agencies is essential to federal efforts to control crime. All components of state and local systems—law enforcement, courts, and corrections—provide manpower and other resources to federal law enforcement agencies who are conducting investigations in their jurisdiction.

Therefore, proceeds from property subject to criminal forfeiture as a result of joint federal and local law enforcement activities should revert to state and local governments. The Department of Justice should be required by statute to establish equitable procedures for distributing to state and local governments any proceeds generated from forfeited property. Funds accrued through this system can be used as reimbursement for costs incurred as a result of the forfeiture or to supplement the existing resources of state and local justice programs.

M. Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies—The National Association of Counties shares with and approves the mission of the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies to promote excellence, efficiency and professionalism in our nation’s law enforcement agencies through its voluntary accreditation program.

The Commission and its Board have completed a well-conceived and tested process for accreditation and have already begun to accredit county law enforcement agencies. The Commission was formed through the active partnership of the nation’s leading law enforcement associations and contains elected county policymakers, representing general purpose local government on its Board.

The National Association of Counties encourages its member counties to voluntarily seek to be part of this accreditation process in furtherance of professionalism and excellence.

N. Community Policing—NACo enthusiastically supports community policing as a crime fighting strategy that encourages law enforcement to work in partnership with the community to prevent and seek solutions to problems in the criminal justice system with systems integration principles and goals. A fundamental shift from traditional, reactive policing, community policing stresses the prevention of crime before it occurs. Core components of community policing include partnering with the community; problem solving; and transforming policing agencies to support and empower frontline officers, decentralize command and encourage innovative problem solving.

O. Public Safety Radio/Telecommunications Spectrum Access—Radio/Telecommunications Spectrum is a finite resource critical to the ability of police, fire, emergency rescue, and disaster agencies to communicate in the event of a natural disaster, a crime, a fire or bombing, or any other serious incident jeopardizing lives and property. In many instances, counties throughout America have no current spectrum available for advanced interoperability.

The willingness of the FCC and Congress to enact stronger regulations that require the vacation of channels 60-69, will allow public safety in all its aspects to begin deployment of truly interoperative infrastructure.

P. Racial Profiling—The National Association of Counties strongly opposes racial profiling and supports incentive funding for counties to promote best practices to prevent its occurrence.

Incentive funds could be used to support activities such as:

(1) Development and implementation of training to prevent racial profiling and to encourage more respectful interaction with the public.


(2) Acquisition and use of technology to facilitate the collection of data regarding routine investigatory activities in order to determine if law enforcement agents are engaged in racial profiling.

(3) Acquisition and use of technology to verify the accuracy of data collection, including in-car video cameras and portable computer systems.

(4) Development and acquisition of early warning systems and other feedback systems that help identify officers or units of officers engaged in or at risk of racial profiling or other misconduct, including the technology to support such systems.

(5) Establishment or improvement of systems and procedures for receiving, investigating, and responding meaningfully to complaints alleging racial or ethnic bias by law enforcement agents.

(6) Establishment or improvement of management systems to ensure that supervisors are held accountable for the conduct of their subordinates.

Racial profiling damages law enforcement and the criminal justice system as a whole by undermining public confidence and trust in law enforcement officials, the courts, and the criminal law. This practice continues to harm individuals subjected to it because they experience fear, anxiety, humiliation, anger, resentment, and cynicism when they are unjustifiably treated as criminal suspects.

Courts—A number of important reforms are necessary to enable state and local courts to operate with effectiveness. Substantial changes in the processing of criminal cases and increased utilization of qualified judges and county court clerks are essential to more effective and efficient administration of justice.

To improve state and local courts, NACo supports the following:

A. Coordinated and Simplified State/County Court System—Establish and provide necessary funding mechanisms for a coordinated and simplified state/county court system to enable the consistent, fair, and expeditious administration of justice. The control of the counties' justice systems shall rest with local government.

B. Judicial Quality—States shall adopt better procedures for judicial qualifications, selection, training, discipline, and tenure.

C. Prosecution—States shall consolidate local prosecutorial functions, where appropriate, in order to provide fulltime prosecutors.

D. Defense Counsel for the Indigent—Recognizing the constitutional requirement for the assistance of counsel for persons accused of crimes, recognizing the justice system requires the furnishing of counsel to indigent persons who have a substantial likelihood of confinement and otherwise could not afford the assistance of counsel, recognizing the significant role that counties perform in maintaining programs of legal services to indigent defendants, NACo supports adequate multi-government funding and training to guarantee the continuation of this essential component of our criminal justice system. States shall participate in the funding of a system for defense of the proven indigent. Stricter standards should be established for determination of indigency.

Indigent Defense in Rural America: Rural counties are urged to implement multi-county public defender systems that would enable a full time public defender to ride a multi-


county circuit similar to multi-county district attorney offices. A full time public defender should be an active participant in the local criminal justice system.

E. Intake and Assessment—Counties should ensure that every individual who is booked into the county jail have a thorough intake interview conducted. This interview should include screening and assessment for the presence of substance abuse and mental illness. The information provided by the arrestee should be investigated prior to the pretrial release decision.

F. Pretrial Release—Counties should establish written policies that ensure:

• The interview and assessment of all arrestees booked into county jails; • The investigation of information provided in order to provide a report to the

judiciary for use during the pretrial release or detention decision; and • The use of release methods that are in compliance with state bail statues which

call for the least restrictive conditions during the pretrial stage that can protect the community and assure the appearance of the arrestee at all court events. These include release on recognizance, non-financial supervised release, and preventive detention.

G. Mediation/Arbitration of Minor Disputes—To help relieve overcrowded court dockets for both criminal and civil charges, increase citizen participation, reduce the costs in processing minor disputes, and guarantee a full presentation of the issues, counties are encouraged to establish mediation and arbitration programs, or a combination thereof, which rely on discussion and compromise rather than criminal prosecution or civil litigation. The definition of minor disputes can be determined by the courts, the prosecutor’s office, and/or the legislature.

H. Linking Sentencing Guidelines to Community Corrections—In order to reduce sentencing disparity, eliminate unnecessary confinement, establish more rational and appropriate sentencing policies, and, in general, better manage limited correctional resources—including jails and prisons—NACo supports the development and enactment of rational and uniform statewide sentencing guidelines. These should be tied to comprehensive community corrections legislation and legislatively predetermined jail and prison population maximums at both the state and local level. Such sentencing recommendations should set fixed presumptive terms for felony and serious misdemeanant populations, indicating who should go to jail or prison, and who should be placed in alternative community programs and for how long.

The guidelines should be based on an appropriate combination of offense and offender characteristics and allow judges to depart from the sentencing guidelines only in exceptional cases, when they can provide written reasons explaining why the sentence chosen is more appropriate or more equitable than that provided in the guidelines. A very thorough and rigorous monitoring system should be established.

I. Drug Courts—NACo enthusiastically supports the concept of drug courts. Drug courts are special courts given the responsibility to handle cases involving drug-using offenders through comprehensive supervision, drug testing, treatment services and immediate sanctions and incentives. Exceeding the constraints on offenders under standard probation or pretrial supervision, drug courts ensure close and intensive offender supervision.

The first drug court was established in Dade County, Florida in 1989, and there are now over 1,500 courts in existence, with many more being planned in the United States. The Government Accounting Office (GAO) has reported that 71 percent of all offenders entering


drug courts have either successfully completed their drug court program or are actively participating in the program.

Additionally, Columbia University’s National Center of Addiction and Substance Abuse concluded that drug courts provide the most effective control of drug using offenders’ criminality and drug usage while under the court’s jurisdiction. Drug courts also save money, program costs average about $2,500 per offender, while the cost of incarcerating that same offender is between $20,000 to $50,000.

Corrections—It is the primary responsibility of the counties to ensure public safety and at the same time protect the constitutional rights of pretrial and convicted persons. Most individuals in the local criminal justice system eventually return to their own communities. Counties are the best suited in providing to the individual basic social and physical environments which can help him/her to take a more productive place in the community. Counties alone cannot assume the full financial burden of providing comprehensive correctional programs and therefore need to make maximum use of intergovernmental arrangements to develop the capability of assessing the risk of an individual to the community.

A. State-County Partnership Programs for Community Corrections—NACo supports state-county partnership programs which foster local comprehensive planning and provide a range of community alternatives to incarceration for less serious felony and misdemeanant populations. State governments should assist counties in this process by providing a stable source of financial and technical assistance.

Partnership programs should emphasize, wherever feasible, the systematic sharing of resources on a multi-county basis. Inherent in the practice of community corrections is the recognition that the community is the best place to deal with the behavior of less serious offenders and that county governments are uniquely able to coordinate, collaborate, and provide administrative leadership and oversight in developing programs suited for their communities.

B. Community-Based Corrections—States and counties should place increased emphasis on correctional programs within local communities. Counties should locally determine and assess their needs in developing flexible treatment programs according to the available resources within their communities.

C. Intake Services—County governments are urged to establish an intake screening process for the purpose of determining the overall needs of persons charged and assessing risks, in order to select persons charged for release on recognizance (ROR) and pretrial services programs. These programs should provide regular reports on outputs, outcomes, and needs for community-based services to the county governing board, courts, and other community agencies.

D. Alternatives to Incarceration—Counties are urged to minimize the cost of inappropriate incarceration by maximizing the use of existing community services. Counties should identify gaps in services and develop a systematic plan for implementing a range of alternatives to incarceration. Such programs might include ROR, work release, halfway houses, substance abuse and mental illness programs, vocational training, educational programs, and restitution.

E. Confinement of Mentally and Developmentally Disabled—The federal government should reduce its budgetary emphasis on reimbursement for institutionalized care and provide increased resources for community-based programs. The National Association of Counties supports the goal that the mentally and developmentally disabled should not be


incarcerated in local jails and that programs to provide alternative institutional or community-based residential facilities and services should be developed.

F. Institutional Services—Correctional institutions of any jurisdiction—federal, state, or county—should provide humane living conditions and rehabilitation programs, as well as providing services for their offenders' well-being, i.e., medical care, recreation, counseling, etc.

G. Multi-County Correctional Systems—States should authorize and encourage county governments, through financial incentives and technical assistance, to contract with other counties or with other units of government for the joint establishment of multi-county correctional systems. Such systems should encompass a full range of services and sanctions in the community and provide various levels of security for those who require confinement. A systems approach must be based on comprehensive planning and should generate new opportunities for dividing or sharing responsibilities among participating jurisdictions.

H. Quality of Personnel—State and county governments should improve recruitment, compensation, and specialized training to attract and provide sufficient numbers of high-quality personnel to the corrections system. Minimum standards of qualification and training should be established and greater use made of paraprofessional and volunteer aides.

I. Establishment of Standards—States and counties should jointly plan and develop state standards for adult and juvenile detention services, personnel, and facilities. Technical assistance and financial incentives shall be provided by the state in order to assist counties in meeting standards.

While NACo applauds the important work of the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission, longstanding NACo policy calls for state standards for jails and other local correctional and detention facilities developed in partnership with county government. State government should be given a reasonable time limit to develop standards for preventing rape in jails, detention centers, and prisons. However, if a state fails to take appropriate action or fails to make a good faith effort, then minimum federal standards should be implemented. NACo recognizes that the rights of all Americans are protected by both the state and federal constitutions. Therefore if a state fails to act, NACo would support federal standards.

J. Private Industry in County Correctional Programming—Counties are encouraged where economically feasible to jointly develop with private industry and organized labor productive work experiences for inmates that teach marketable skills, good work habits, and provide real wages. Inmates should be judged on their productivity. Congress should, with the support of organized labor, remove restrictions prohibiting inmate-made goods from being sold in interstate commerce. The salaries from such ventures can help defray the costs of incarceration, help offenders support their families, and pay taxes and restitution.

K. Federal Corrections Assistance—The federal government should provide financial and technical assistance to counties to develop local strategies to reduce jail populations and to develop humane correctional facilities and services.

Counties lack the financial resources both to improve substandard correctional and detention facilities and services and to provide comprehensive community alternatives to secure detention for those inappropriately confined, since federal courts increasingly have mandated improvements in local correctional facilities and programs.

It is essential that greater emphasis be placed on local comprehensive planning and the sharing of facilities, programs, and services, wherever feasible, on a multi-county basis. Any


standards promulgated to implement such a program should provide for effective input by local elected and appointed officials.

Existing federal programs designed to provide health and mental health services, social services, educational and vocational training, and employment services should be made available to local correctional and detention facilities.

L. Nondiscrimination—All corrections employment opportunities, as well as corrections programs and services, should be available without regard to race, creed, sex, national origin, or handicap.

M. Creating State Commissions—NACo urges that states, where lacking, establish state correctional commissions with local as well as state members to develop comprehensive state and local correctional policies.

N. Women in Jail—The majority of women in jail are confined for nonviolent misdemeanor offenses and, almost half have one or more children. Because of limited space and separation requirements many women are often housed in isolated circumstances, or under more restrictive conditions than their male counterparts.

NACo urges that counties consider the principle of parity in new sentencing and corrections practices for women that will provide equity of treatment and alternatives to isolation that will access the services necessary to help female offenders succeed, thereby breaking the jail cycle for themselves and their children.

O. The Police Lockup—NACo supports the consolidation or transfer of the police lockup function to county correctional agencies as part of a comprehensive strategy for system-wide correctional reform at the local level. In most jurisdictions such change will require intergovernmental agreements on the sharing of costs and responsibilities; and improved population controls through the expanded use of release mechanisms (citation release, release on personal recognizance, supervised release, etc.) home detention and other alternatives to incarceration for persons charged with non-dangerous offenses. State governments should play a supportive role in furthering these goals by: (1) intergovernmental cooperation; (2) providing financial assistance, and where necessary, providing appropriate enabling legislation. Careful planning and the involvement of all affected agencies is essential to successful implementation.

P. Use of Federal Facilities for Correctional and Other Alternative Purposes—The National Association of Counties favors the use of federal facilities for jail purposes on the condition that the county in question has taken all reasonable measures to develop alternative programs prior to seeking the use of such facilities.

NACo supports a special intensive technical assistance program administered by the National Institute of Corrections to assist counties utilizing federal facilities for correctional purposes; and supports the full utilization of federal facilities to reflect the priorities established by Congress and the Executive Branch and local governments in addressing policy on homelessness, drugs, education, corrections, and other areas of national concern.

Q. The Commission on Accreditation for Corrections—The Commission on Accreditation for Corrections performs a valuable service to the counties of this nation in advocating humane standards for local correctional institutions and its standards are directed toward achieving improved administration, conditions and services in said institutions.

NACo realizes the inherent value of standards and has advocated state standards developed and designed in partnership with local government and tied to state financial and


technical assistance to achieve the stated goals. NACo values the work of the Commission and its Revised Standards for Adult Local Detention Facilities as an important collateral resource for improving local correctional institutions:

The National Association of Counties acknowledges the important work of the Commission on Accreditation for Corrections and pledges NACo’s support in achieving closer cooperation between our respective organizations. The Commission’s standards should include in its detailed commentary alternative methods for treating in the community persons inappropriately confined (e.g. public inebriates, mentally ill, etc.).

R. Loss of Federal Entitlement Benefits for Pretrial Defendants—Currently a person incarcerated in a county jail or juvenile detention center in nearly all states is ineligible to retain Medicare and Medicaid benefits or Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) once they enter the facility. U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 42, Part 435.1009 states that Federal Financial Participation (FFP) is not available for services provided to individuals who are inmates of public institutions. As a consequence, the cost of medical care for these inmates becomes a non-federal responsibility (typically borne by county governments) upon arrest and detention. The cost to counties for persons who would otherwise be receiving federal entitlement payments is significant based on county estimates. The vast majority of states are unable to provide the non-federal cost of providing medical services to FFP eligible persons and tend to terminate or sometimes suspend eligibility.

If the individual has been terminated from these programs, it may take months for these federal benefits to be restored once they leave the institution. What is clear is that the immediate cessation of benefits occurs prior to the issuance of formal charges or conviction when the individual is presumed innocent.

Many people awaiting trial, who are charged with crimes, are released upon posting of bond, released on their own recognizance, released under house arrest or other alternative means of detention. These accused people (who have not been convicted of a covered crime) continue to be eligible for benefits under Medicare, Medicaid, or SSDI while awaiting trial. Some individuals who are charged with crimes and incarcerated in county jails are ultimately acquitted of the crime or the charges may be dropped and the individual released.

Therefore, NACo supports changes in current Federal policy that will allow a person receiving federal benefits who has been charged with a crime but not convicted to continue to be eligible for such entitlements including, but not limited to Medicare, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), Veterans and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) benefits until such time as they may be convicted and sentenced to an institution.

Bail Practices and Release Options—The National Association of Counties (NACo) recommends that to ease the financial burden of bail on poor defendants, all states enact defendant-based percentage bail laws. NACo also recommends that states and localities make greater use of such non-financial pretrial release options such as citation release and release on recognizance where there is a reasonable expectation that public safety will not be threatened.

Further, NACo recommends, where not already incorporated in state statutes, enacting legislation: (a) requiring the court to consider danger to community safety in judicial determinations of bail or other pretrial options; and (b) provides for the preventive detention of those shown to be incorrigible, repeat violent crime offenders.


NACo recommends that all counties establish a written set of policies and procedures aligned with state statue, national professional standards, and best practices on the pretrial release decision. This includes: screening of all arrestees booked into county correctional facilities; the investigation of arrestees background information in order to provide a complete and accurate report to the judiciary for use during the pretrial release decision; and the option for the court of placing arrestees on supervised release to be monitored until disposition of case.

Federal State County Partnership Programs for Community Corrections—NACo supports state-county partnership programs which foster local comprehensive planning and provide a range of community alternatives to incarceration for less serious felony and misdemeanant populations. The federal government should provide incentive funds to assist states and counties in developing or enhancing Community Corrections Acts. State governments should assist counties in this process by providing a stable source of ongoing financial and technical assistance. Partnership programs should emphasize the role of the private sector and encourage, wherever feasible, the systematic sharing of resources on a multi-county basis. Inherent in the practice of community corrections is the recognition that the community is the best place to deal with the behavior of less serious offenders and that county governments are uniquely able to coordinate, collaborate, and provide administrative leadership and oversight in developing programs suited for their communities.

In Support of the National Commission on Correctional Health Care—The National Association of Counties encourages the nation’s jails to seek voluntary accreditation through the use of the National Commission on Correctional Health Care’s Standards for Health Services in juvenile and adult confinement facilities and encourages all correctional health professionals to maintain their professional credentials and seek recognition through NCCHC’s Certified Correctional Health Professional Program.

Federal Incentives to Promote Comprehensive State-County Partnership Programs in Corrections—For many years NACo has called for new alliances between counties and state governments to better manage jail and prison populations and community corrections/detention programs.

At the time when county correctional expenditures account for about one-third of total state and local outlays, Congress has eliminated language, under Title II of the 1994 Crime Act, that made it mandatory for states to consult with counties and to share funds with them for certain purposes in accordance with a “comprehensive” state plan certified by the Attorney General of the United States.

Consequently, the National Association of Counties calls on Congress to require a mandatory pass through of Title II funds to counties to be used in support of state-county partnership programs, including the implementation of statewide sentencing guidelines, community corrections acts, and other local programs or detention facilities set forth in a statewide plan. State associations of counties should be intimately involved in the design and development of such programs.

The Appointment of Statewide Task Forces and the Use of Neutral Facilitation to Resolve Statewide Correctional Disputes—NACo strongly supports the appointment of state task forces made up of senor representatives of key constituent organizations including the state association of counties, the state municipal league, the state sheriffs’ association, the governor, chief judge, among other key local and state organizations and individuals. A neutral board


certified facilitator should assist the parties in designing and implementing “win-win” solutions for safely lowering jail as well as prison populations.

COMMUNITY CRIME PREVENTION Criminal justice professionals readily admit that without citizen involvement in crime

prevention activities the traditional criminal justice agencies cannot control crime. Although swift apprehension and certainty of punishment can be a crime deterrent, and more research, coordination, and resources are badly needed by the county criminal justice system, the involvement of citizens in helping the public agencies apprehend and adjudicate offenders is also essential.

Beyond helping public agencies become more effective, citizens have two additional roles:

(1) to reduce the opportunities for crime among potential victims through public education and target hardening; and

(2) to alleviate social and economic problems associated with crime.

Federal and state agencies should aid counties in assisting citizen groups with crime prevention activities. Citizen groups should have a role in designing crime prevention programs, and they should receive grants to implement crime prevention activities. County officials, in conjunction with criminal justice agency heads, should develop criteria for selecting citizen groups that are representative of their communities and are accountable for resources provided them. Such programs should be initiated and implemented only after consultation and participation by elected county officials.

CONTROL OF FIREARMS NACo supports the enactment of appropriate federal, state, and local legislation that

would strengthen criminal sanctions relating to the illegal possession or sale of firearms. NACo further supports legislation providing for mandatory prison sentences for the use

of dangerous weapons in the commission of a felony. NACo also supports the provisions of the 1968 Gun Control Act and the Omnibus Crime

Control and Safe Streets Act, which are directed at preventing possession of handguns by proscribed groups of people.

These Acts stipulate that the following individuals are ineligible to receive firearms: fugitives from justice; persons under federal or state felony indictment; persons convicted of a federal or state felony; persons ineligible by state or local law to possess a firearm; minors (under eighteen for rifles and shotguns, and under twenty-one for handguns); adjudicated mental defectives or persons committed to a mental institution; unlawful users of or addicts to any depressant, stimulants, or narcotic drug; felons; persons dishonorably discharged from the United States Armed Forces; mental incompetents; former United States citizens; and illegal aliens.

In order for the intent of these laws to be fulfilled, an effective method is needed to verify a purchaser’s eligibility. NACo supports the requirement of a reasonable waiting period for the purchase of a handgun to allow for a records check, where possible, to ensure that the purchaser is not ineligible under existing federal law to possess a handgun.

Reducing the Supply of Illegal Guns to Criminals and Juveniles—NACo recognizes that many guns used in crime are purchased from gun dealers by illegal gun traffickers who distribute them to juveniles and criminals, both in the same state and through illegal interstate


gun trafficking to those in other states, and through international gun trafficking to international criminals, drug dealers, and terrorists.

The tracing of all recovered firearms with ATF’s National Tracing Center leads to the disruption of illegal gun trafficking by enabling law enforcement to identify and incarcerate illegal traffickers, and by enabling municipalities, counties, and states to identify local, regional, and national patterns in the illegal gun supply.

Moreover, many jurisdictions are instituting comprehensive crime gun tracing to assist in reducing illegal gun trafficking, especially since tracing all recovered firearms need not cost any additional money or manpower because it can be done through existing communications systems such as NLETS, and the states of Connecticut and Illinois have enacted statewide tracing legislation.

The National Association of Counties encourages counties to adopt as a countywide strategy the tracing of all firearms that have been seized or confiscated in order to identify the illegal sources of firearms that supply criminals and juveniles in our nation’s counties, and also endorses state and federal legislation and state and federal funding to facilitate statewide tracing measures.

National Child Safety Lock Up—Recognizing that an estimated 1.2 million latchkey children have access to loaded and unlocked firearms, the National Association of Counties endorses National Child Safety Lock legislation.

Safe Ownership of Firearms—The National Association of Counties recommends that counties actively promote firearm safety programs of proven effectiveness as part of a comprehensive strategy to deal with the use of firearms.

FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR FORENSIC SCIENCES—DNA INITIATIVE Recognizing that in a number of states and counties death investigations are being

performed by individuals who lack sufficient training and expertise to determine the cause and manner of death, NACo calls for the creation of a national research and technical assistance project to create or enhance statewide training and certification programs.

The National Association of Counties fully supports and strongly encourages the implementation and full funding of the National Forensic Sciences Improvement Act, which will provide grants to existing local and state forensic laboratories to improve productivity, quality measures, and overall operation, and achieve professional certification based on generally accepted forensic science performance standards, common definitions and protocols.

The National Association of Counties supports and encourages the implementation and funding of the Administration's DNA initiative as part of the funding for state and local forensic sciences under the Paul Coverdell National Forensic Science Improvement Act.

DNA testing is one of several problems facing state and local crime labs in their efforts to support public safety. These problem areas vary from region to region and include backlogs in narcotics cases, fingerprint examinations, firearms evidence, forensic toxicology evidence and trace evidence. In order to fully realize the tremendous potential that crime labs offer to the criminal justice system to identify the guilty and free the innocent, federal funds for forensic science support are better invested through the Paul Coverdell National Forensic Science Improvement Act. This act permits local agencies to define their particular priority, whether it is DNA or any other forensic science area, including the medical examiner-coroner office.


FEDERAL REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAMS SCAAP - NACo supports full federal reimbursement of state and local costs of

incarcerating undocumented criminal aliens. SCAAP provides partial reimbursement to states and counties for the costs associated with the detention and incarceration of undocumented criminal aliens. Although it is the federal government's responsibility to protect and secure our nation's borders, counties incur millions of dollars in un-reimbursed expenses each year as a result of housing undocumented immigrants that violate state or local laws. Additionally, it should be noted that counties are responsible for processing and prosecuting illegal aliens, and, in many cases, must provide medical care and other services to these individuals. Counties bear a disproportionate share of the criminal justice-related costs associate with illegal immigration. As a result of having to house pre-trial and convicted aliens, our counties are forced to divert funds from other important local programs in areas such as healthcare, social services, and key public safety-related programs. Counties are concerned that while SCAAP-related costs to local jurisdictions have been rising, the level of reimbursement provided by the federal government remains grossly inadequate.

ORGANIZED CRIME NACo recognizes that any success in combating organized crime will require a greater

commitment of resources and imagination at all levels of government. Coordination at the local level is essential, with the necessary legal tools for gathering evidence and the power to grant witness immunity. Investigations must be carried out with a broader focus than merely the prosecution of individual cases.

Investigation—Special grand juries should be impaneled by the appropriate U. S. District Court for the sole purpose of investigating organized crime within its jurisdiction.

Witness Immunity—Federal and state statutes should be enacted which grant general witness immunity.

Organized Units—State or regional organized crime intelligence units should be established and their activities coordinated.

JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION 1. General Recommendations—Federal justice grant funds should go directly to

counties, with the following requirement: leadership from all entities working to prevent, reduce and control juvenile crime must collaborate in the preparation of a comprehensive plan. Elements of such a plan shall include, but not be limited to (1) strategies, programs, services and supports designed to prevent delinquency through provision of resiliency factors which offset risk factors; (2) strategies, programs, services and supports designed to intervene early and effectively when delinquent behavior is encountered utilizing the least restrictive approach; (3) strategies, programs, services and supports which protect the community, hold offenders accountable to individual victims and the community, and which remedy the skill and competency deficits of offenders.

Since 1974, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act has been a major catalyst in producing positive change in the juvenile justice system and in creating preventive and interventive approaches for youth. Societal change has heightened concern for a community’s ability to address the rise in violent juvenile crime at increasingly younger ages. In light of this trend, NACo proposes that the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act promote the following essential principles:


• collaborative planning and authority at the local level; • all federal monies coming to local communities shall be distributed through the

collaborative planning process at adequate and sustaining levels of support; • core requirements in the Act shall be preserved; • violent and repeat offenders need to be identified in order to provide appropriate

interventions; and • encouragement of prevention, education and treatment strategies for juveniles

involved with illegal substances. 2. Countywide Collaboration—The primary responsibility for ensuring the

comprehensive delivery of services to control and prevent juvenile delinquency resides with local government. The unique role of county government in this process—as the primary provider at the local level in health, social services, juvenile corrections—provides the organizational framework for constructing a comprehensive strategy to provide for community protection, offender accountability to victims, and the supports and services necessary to positively change offender behavior. Programs and services must seek to combine early problem identification and assessment with appropriate and timely interventions.

Program planning, development and implementation should involve a wide variety of organizations and individuals, including public, private and voluntary sectors to achieve the goals of a comprehensive plan, and to ensure access by youth to available services. The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 and, especially, its 1992 Title V Amendment funding prevention at the local government level provides vital financial and technical assistance to state and local governments to strengthen the juvenile justice system through collaborative efforts to prevent and control delinquent behavior. The funds and processes of the Act, when combined with other federal state, and resources and mechanisms, can assist in the development of programs and services to assist troubled youth.

Government Responsibility for Juvenile Programs—The executive and legislative branches of local government share primary responsibility for the overall planning, regulation, and administration of juvenile programs, delinquency prevention, and youth development services for the community.

Organizational and Planning Capacity—Counties should develop an organizational planning capacity to develop and coordinate a full spectrum of youth development and delinquency prevention services and to ensure accountability for service delivery in their communities. Whole communities including a wide variety of public, private and volunteer organizations and individuals should be mobilized to be involved in planning and implementing national strategies to prevent delinquency and to ensure access to services.

Counties should take the lead in structuring interagency partnerships, involving all strata of government, business, education, and the community, to develop comprehensive community based services for at risk children and families. Counties should use their budgetary powers to leverage cooperation and collaboration.

The organizational structure should accommodate strong local control and should reflect the unique characteristics of each community. The organizational structure should provide flexibility to local units of government and service providers to plan and prioritize services based on the needs of the individual or family.

Planning and Implementing a Comprehensive Strategy—The process of planning and implementing a comprehensive strategy is crucial to the prevention and control of juvenile


delinquency. Counties should take a leadership role in assuring that the following essential elements are included:

A. Take a community-wide approach. B. Create ownership. C. Reach the diverse groups in the community. D. Include key elected officials and grassroots community leaders. E. Give priority to protective factors that are most promising in addressing risk. F. Gain the commitment of all stakeholders to a long term, sustained effort of rebuilding

the community’s social infrastructure.

The most effective approach is one that increases resiliency by protecting youth from health and future jeopardizing risks in all areas that affect youths’ lives from the time of birth, including the family, school peer group and community.

Juvenile Justice System—The traditional role of the juvenile and family court is to treat and rehabilitate the dependent or wayward minor, using an individualized approach and tailoring its response to the particular needs of the child and family, with goals of (1) responding to the needs of the troubled youth and their families; (2) providing due process while recognizing the rights of the victim; (3) rehabilitating the juvenile offender; (4) protecting both the juvenile and the public. Juvenile justice systems must develop a better balance among individual treatment, accountability to victims and community protections if they are to effectively address serious, violent and chronic juvenile crime; and keeping youth from deeper penetration into the juvenile justice system where appropriate.

Juvenile Court Jurisdiction—The jurisdiction of the juvenile court should be limited to those acts which if committed by an adult would constitute a crime and to dependent and neglect cases.

Continuum of Interventions—An effective juvenile justice system is one that provides a continuum of services and interventions combining accountability and sanctions with increasingly intensive treatment and rehabilitation. This continuum must be wide-ranging to fit the offense and include both intervention and a secure corrections component. The intervention components include the use of immediate response, intermediate sanctions such as victim-offender mediation and victim restitution, community service, intensive supervision, probation and competency development within the least restrictive environment. The secure corrections components may include but not be limited to community confinement, state training schools, ranches and camps.

A. County Strategy for Front End Investment to Prevent Crime—A decade of cuts in domestic spending has reduced or eliminated many of the services that have traditionally protected America’s at-risk children and families.

A decade of massive increases in the construction of jails and prisons at the state and local level has not resulted in any significant decrease in the level of crime. In fact, during this same time, we have witnessed a dramatic increase in the incidence of violent juvenile crime.

A number of quantitative studies document the theory that front-end investment in youth development is the most effective means to prevent crime.

The National Association of Counties, therefore, calls for a National Front-End Youth Investment Policy. We urge Congress and the Administration to work with state and local


government in designing and funding effective prevention and early intervention strategies for children and families. These include health, shelter, education and employment.

Counties must develop partnerships with business and industry, education, private sector volunteer and human services agencies, and all strata of governments to plan and deliver a broad range of support supports and services for at-risk children and families that address the needs of the whole person.

Relevant research on human brain development and its linkage to the growing threat of violence perpetuated by children shows that through abuse, neglect, and a general lack of nurturing, many youthful offenders have sustained lasting neurological damage that interferes with their ability to reason, to feel and to regulate their emotions and behavior.

Moreover, the factors that put children at risk for developing violent personalities also often relate to prenatal care and development (including malnutrition, parental addictions and physical and psychological trauma) and the lack of “bonding” and development with strong, positive adult models.

This research has caused a number of counties to reassess their strategies for preventing crime.

NACo recommends flexibility and federally funded programs, including crime prevention, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), education and others to allow counties to design and implement comprehensive countywide strategies to provide a full continuum of services for families and children with special focus on early prevention prenatal to age three.

Exploited and Missing Children—No one determinant of juvenile crime can be identified, however research does point to a relationship between child physical and sexual abuse and neglect and future emotional and behavioral problems, including criminal involvement.

NACo supports the Missing Children Act as amended which established the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children® (NCMEC).

NCMEC operates a toll-free, 24-hour telephone hotline for reporting cases of missing children; maintains the CyberTipline®, a resource for the public to report occurrences of child sexual exploitation; and provides assistance to law-enforcement and the public in the location, recovery, and prevention of missing and sexually exploited children. NCMEC has developed programs designed to reach into communities to prevent occurrences of child abduction and sexual exploitation. Counties are urged to make use of its resources.

NACo supports sex offender laws requiring convicted sex offenders to register their addresses with law enforcement. Recognizing the ambiguity in sex offender registration and community notification laws and increased mobility between jurisdictions, NACo further supports county and statewide efforts for increased funding of sophisticated measures of tracking sex offenders, specifically the satellite tracking of convicted sex offenders. Counties should adopt a nationally uniform system to prioritize sex offenders according to dangerousness as well as a nationally uniform reporting system.

Juvenile Court Jurisdiction—The jurisdiction of the juvenile court should be limited to those acts which if committed by an adult would constitute a crime and to dependent and neglect cases.

Transfer of Juveniles to Adult Court— Current research confirms that the portion of the brain that controls and suppresses impulses, and is critical to good judgment and decision-making, is not fully developed in youth under age 18. Youth have difficulty thinking of


consequences under stress and managing powerful impulses without adult help. Therefore, they should not be viewed as acting with the level of moral culpability that characterizes adult criminal conduct. Further, 75 percent of youth under the age of 18 sent to adult facilities will be released by the age of 22. They likely will have not been held fully accountable for their actions. These youth will have been denied adequate education, mental health, drug treatment and employment skills training. In light of these facts, NACo opposes trying and sentencing youth in adult criminal court, except in the case of a chronic and violent offender, and then only at the discretion of a juvenile court judge.

It is harmful to public safety, as well as young offenders, to confine youth in adult jails, where they are eight times more likely to commit suicide, five times more likely to be sexually assaulted, and, upon release, much more likely to re-offend than youth in juvenile detention. NACo supports the reform of state laws that inappropriately send far too many youth under the age of 18, including first-time and non-violent offenders into the adult criminal justice system.

NACo supports that the decision to transfer a juvenile to adult court should be made by a juvenile court judge or jury.

Unaddressed Mental Health Needs—NACo believes that children suffering from mental disease require effective assessment, diagnosis and treatment. NACo advocates for non-institutional, community and family-based treatment for children with mental illnesses. The juvenile court system is largely ineffective at identifying—much less treating—mental health problems. Yet, fifty to seventy-five percent of kids in juvenile detention facilities have diagnosable mental illnesses. Juvenile court professionals must use culturally sensitive and comprehensive assessments, and, whenever viable, family and community-based treatment interventions to recognize and treat symptoms of mental illnesses. NACo also supports continued eligibility of federally funded health benefits of juveniles arrested and held in pre-trail detention.

Sexual Abuse and Domestic Violence—Research indicates that sexual abuse of a child is a risk factor for later offending by that child. NACo supports efforts to eliminate both physical and psychological abuse of children. Juvenile crime places an enormous financial and social burden on counties. Efforts must be placed on the prevention of child abuse and neglect, interrupting the cycle of violence. Elected county officials should use their budgetary powers to leverage interagency cooperation and coordination. Criminal justice, juvenile justice, public health and social service agencies should be encouraged to design and implement programs that will better protect children. Coordinated responses are also necessary to improve measures to deal with children who have already been victimized.

Gang Violence—The prevention and control of crime, including gang violence, is at its roots a community issue. While social disorganization and the presence of crime and drugs in the neighborhood pose a small risk of violence when measured on an individual level, both of these risk factors have a substantially grater effect on the neighborhood (and community)

level[1]. Therefore, NACo supports efforts that strengthen local governments in implementing a comprehensive approach to the prevention and control of gang violence.

[1]Youth Violence—A Report of the Surgeon General (2001)

Racial Disparities: From the point of arrest to sentencing and confinement, minority youth receive harsher sanctions than their white counterparts. African American youth are six


times more likely to be sentenced to a juvenile facility and nine times more likely to be sentenced to an adult facility for violent offenses, as compared with white youth charged with the same crimes. Latinos are also over represented of the youth population sentenced to adult prisons.

• Clearly no single policy will result in the eradication of racism, poverty, and other powerful forces that contribute to the current racial composition of detention centers. Detention reform, however, should seek to eliminate systemic bias so that the juvenile justice system does not exacerbate or contribute to the impact of those forces. Detention reform that effectively addresses over-representation of minorities in secure facilities should accomplish at least two measurable changes: (1) the rate at which minority youth are detained should decline and (2) the number of minority youth in detention should decline over time. In order to achieve these changes juvenile justice professionals should consider the following strategies:

• Develop objective admission screening instruments; • Create new or enhanced alternatives-to-detention programs; • Expedite case processing to reduce lengths of stay; • Develop new policies and practices for probation violations, warrents and “awaiting

placement” cases.

Financial assistance to develop these programs and policies may be available from state juvenile justice advisory committee formula grant funds. NACo believes that children deserve to be treated fairly, regardless of race and/or ethnicity. NACo urges policy makers to craft solutions that educate police, officers of the court and correctional/rehabilitative service providers to remove racial inequalities from the juvenile justice system.

Limit Use of Secure Detention: Despite a continual decline in juvenile offending over the past decade, the population of youth confined in pre-trial secure detention has steadily grown. Today, an alarmingly high number of youth with serious emotional, behavioral and substance abuse issues, and a disproportionately high number of youth of color, are behind locked doors awaiting court hearings.

On an average day, more than 27,000 youth are estimated to reside in locked detention centers—a number that has grown 72 percent since the early 1990s. It is also estimated that 300,000-600,000 children and teens cycle through secure detention facilities each year in the United States. These numbers are especially poignant when you realize that most are young, nonviolent, relatively minor offenders—some of whom will be acquitted of all charges—most of whom do not need to be there at all. NACo calls upon state and local policy makers, through funding and legislation, to support the philosophy that youth should be placed in the least restrictive, appropriate environment and be removed from secure detention as quickly as possible, taking public safety into account. NACo also supports continued eligibility of federally funded health benefits of juveniles arrested and held in pre-trial detention.

Prevention of Victimization—Programs should be developed which identify victims and potential victims; educate parents about the importance of maintaining up-to date records of their children; teach children the difference between nurturing contact and exploitative contact and ways to protect themselves; teach parents about the threat of exploitation; and education children about the skills they need as a future parent to create an environment to protect their own children.


The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) should develop crime prevention materials specifically directed at child abduction, abuse and sexual exploitation.

Juvenile Detention Facilities and Community Confinement—Juvenile offenders whose presenting offense is sufficiently serious or who fail or respond to intermediate sanctions as evidenced by continued re-offending may be appropriate for community confinement in a juvenile detention facility. Offenders at this level represent the more serious and violent offenders among the juvenile justice system correctional population.

The concept of community confinement provides secure confinement in small community-based facilities that offer intensive treatment and rehabilitation services. These services include individual and group counseling, educational programs, medical services, and intensive staff supervision.

Proximity to the community enables direct and regular family involvement with the treatment process as well as a phased reentry into the community that draws upon community resources and services. Counties are urged to remove juveniles from correctional facilities which detain accused or adjudicated adults.

Detention Pending Court Disposition—Detention pending court disposition shall be based on clearly enunciated standards compatible with this section of the platform and reduced to a minimum.

Law Enforcement Training—County law enforcement agencies should provide intensive specialized preparation and training for their personnel in working with juveniles, as far as possible.

State Subsidies—States should establish subsidy programs to assist counties in establishing a broad range of community-based youth development and diversion programs. Such subsidy programs should be developed jointly by counties and states.

Education—Education is a vital part of any youth’s attempt to develop as a contributing member of society. The education system has a responsibility to assist the community in the prevention and control of juvenile delinquency and to provide educational opportunities for young people who become involved in the juvenile justice system. These approaches include:

A. Community Education—School authorities, in collaboration with local government, should make school facilities available year-round as well as during and after regular hours, to provide a central location for youth development activities, the delivery of health and social services by local agencies, as well as opportunities for recreational and cultural activities.

B. Education During Detention—Continued educational services should be provided for juveniles during detention. Local school districts should assume financial responsibility for the education of the youth detained or otherwise under the authority of the juvenile justice system.

C. Education of the Handicapped—Consistent with PL 94—142, the juvenile justice system and programs, services, and facilities which provide assistance to the youth under the authority of the juvenile justice system should develop and implement procedures which meet the individual needs of the handicapped.

D. Alternative Education—School agencies and districts are encouraged to develop and implement policies and programs which keep delinquents and other youth in elementary or


secondary schools or in alternative training situations. School agencies and districts should promote policies which avoid dropouts and unwarranted and arbitrary suspensions and expulsions, and develop in-house suspension systems.

Adult Responsibility—In so far as adults are responsible for the actions of juveniles, adults will be held answerable for the illegal actions of for juveniles.

Intergenerational Programs—Working with youth, the elderly have an opportunity to remain vital and productive, to mentor, to share their knowledge and wisdom, to expose hidden talents and to overcome limitations. Participation in cost effective inter-generational service programs allows our youth to learn confidence, decision making skills, a sense of history, and a sense of understanding change, and respect.

Intergenerational service programs promote mutual support across generations and meet essential individual and community needs that are increasingly lacking. Intergenerational programs are successful prevention devices for fostering the independence of the elderly and the positive development of youth.

The National Association of Counties recognizes the importance of incorporating intergenerational programming in human services planning and recommends that the concept of intergenerational programming be woven into all appropriate federal, state and local initiatives that provide services to children, youth and the elderly.

National Children’s Memorial Day—The National Association of Counties urges Congress to support the goals and ideas of National Children’s Memorial Day as a way of remembering children who die by violence and committing to end preventable deaths of children. America has lost too many children in violent and preventable deaths. We as a nation need to heighten awareness, acknowledge needless violence, and do whatever we can to end preventable deaths of children.

ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE A broadly based attack must be carried out by counties to combat the problems of

alcoholism and, to an even greater extent, that of drug abuse, both of which are mounting at an alarming rate. Programs emphasizing rehabilitation together with punitive measures for violators of the criminal codes are needed.

Alcohol Treatment—Counties should increase present efforts to find alternatives to the treatment of alcoholism within the criminal justice system. Criminal treatment of drunkenness when not accompanied by unlawful conduct should be eliminated. Counties should investigate the possibility of conducting detoxification therapy for short-term detention. Aftercare services, including psychiatric care and halfway houses, should be established, to which referral could be made after diagnosis at a detoxification center.

Since alcohol and drug-dependent persons are recognized as handicapped under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, no such person should be denied admission to, or treatment by, any program or service, such as emergency medical treatment, when under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

Alcohol Abuse Prevention—Increased federal funding shall be provided for adequate alcohol prevention and rehabilitation programs on the state and county level.


State Legislation—States are encouraged to adopt uniform alcoholic treatment legislation to remove alcoholics from the criminal justice system and place them in the social and mental health care system of state and local governments.

Narcotics and Drug Abuse—The growing problem of narcotics and drug abuse must be attacked by strengthening all approaches—law enforcement, rehabilitation and treatment of users, and public education of the dangers involved.

Federal Assistance—The federal government shall give special assistance to counties for the purpose of halting the flow of dangerous drugs and for programs dealing with drug and narcotic addiction, prevention, treatment, and crimes related to the use of drugs and narcotics.

Federal Responsibility for Drug Control—Narcotics and dangerous drug traffic transcend state lines and international borders; therefore, regulation and control are major federal responsibilities.

Control of Drug Manufacturers—The federal government is encouraged to exercise its legal power to strengthen and enforce regulations and controls over manufacturers and distributors of dangerous drugs and narcotics.

Manpower for Drug Abuse Control—The federal government is hereby petitioned to provide sufficient manpower to control the traffic in narcotics and dangerous drugs, particularly at international border crossings.

Substance Abuse and Treatment in Jail—A recent report issued by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (CASA), entitled Behind Bars: Substance Abuse and America’s Prison Population, found that drug and alcohol abuse and addiction are implicated in the crimes and incarceration of 80 percent of the inmates in local jails.

According to the CASA report, most substance abuse involved offenders in county jails do not receive adequate substance abuse treatment and related services. Treatment has been demonstrated to be a cost-effective intervention for substance involved offenders:

• The National Association of Counties calls on the federal government to provide funds to counties in both urban and rural areas to develop assessment and treatment programs for offenders whose substance use and abuse is linked to their criminal offense.

• The federal government should provide funds to encourage counties to develop and implement treatment-based alternatives to local incarceration for nonviolent offenders whose core problem is substance abuse and addiction.

• The federal government should provide funds to encourage counties to develop and provide a range of services to substance-involved inmates, including education and literacy, vocational training, HIV prevention, medical and mental health services, and aftercare services.

• The federal government should provide funds to encourage counties to develop training programs for judges, prosecutors, probation officers, corrections officers, and other county criminal justice personnel to educate them about substance abuse, addiction and treatment.


METHAMPHETAMINE EPIDEMIC NACo supports adequate funding for the fight against the devastating methamphetamine

epidemic. NACo supports increased funding for methamphetamine research, enforcement, treatment and education of users and their families, and cleanup of contaminated sites.

Over the last decade, a devastating and highly-addictive drug has spread across the country, especially in rural counties. Methamphetamine, commonly called "meth", is a homemade amphetamine made from common, easily accessible materials: antifreeze, white gas, ether, starting fluids, Freon, lye, paint thinner, acetone, and ephedrine or cold pills. Mixing these chemicals to make meth can occur in a variety of locations from homes to inside vehicles. The harmful long-term effects of meth include bone loss, malnutrition, liver, kidney and lung damage and psychiatric problems. Yet, the effects of meth not only exist for users. Individuals, especially children, who are exposed to the toxic chemicals, can also develop severe respiratory, neural and other health problems.

Investigating and busting meth labs, corrections, court costs, treatment and clean-up are all direct costs to county governments as a result of the skyrocketing use and manufacturing of meth. However, there are many societal effects that also must be considered. National statistics suggest that in at least 70 percent of all meth arrests, there is a child living in the home. These children many times suffer from neglect and abuse.

Meth labs also pose a significant danger in the community as they contain highly flammable and explosive materials. Additionally, for each pound of meth produced, five to seven pounds of toxic waste remain, which is often introduced into the environment via streams, septic systems and surface water run-off. NACo urges Congress and the administration to commit more resources to fight this harmful epidemic.

Specifically, NACo supports implementation of H.R. 365, the Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2007, which became public law in December 2007 and provides a research program for remediation of closed methamphetamine production laboratories. NACo also supports S. 1276, the Methamphetamine Production Prevention Act of 2007, which would establish a grant program to facilitate the creation of methamphetamine precursor electronic logbook systems, and for other purposes.

COMPREHENSIVE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT The goal of comprehensive emergency management is to coordinate all of the resources

available to meet all potential emergencies.

Building a Sustainable Future—The National Association of Counties recognizes that to ensure the safety of people and the livability of communities, significant resources for disaster planning, mitigation and recovery should be provided. These resources should provide for education and encourage the use of innovative approaches that result in positive changes and adhere to the following principles:

Sustainability—Disaster mitigation and recovery resources should be invested to improve the quality of life in the areas of public health and safety, environmental stewardship, and social and economic security.

Planning and Incentives—Plans designed to reduce the impact of disasters and to encourage recovery should provide incentives to individuals, the private sector, and government to pursue sustainable development and redevelopment.


Partnerships—Individual citizens, the private sector, local, state, and the federal government should act as partners with shared goals and values to further the capacity of our communities to be self-sufficient.

Locally Driven Process—Decisions should be driven by a consensus based, inclusive process that stakeholders use and trust. The process should identify local sustainability priorities, leading to the investment of pre- and post-disaster resources that will meet those needs, emphasizing the need for local responsibility and self-sufficiency. State and local governments should be consulted in policy decisions and initiatives related to preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation early in the process and rationale should be given when suggestions are not included. Process should support state and local advisory councils, task forces, and other relevant groups.

Comprehensive emergency management enables a county to meet its responsibility in emergencies and disasters by coordinating public and private programs not only through preparedness planning and immediate response, but also through prevention and long-term recovery activities. Emergencies can be categorized into five basic types:

A. Technological and Human—caused nuclear accidents, hazardous materials accidents, utility failures, epidemics, crashes, explosions, and structural fires;

B. Natural Disasters—earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, major storms, drought, range infestations, and forest and brush fires;

C. Internal Disturbances/Terrorism—civil disorders, violent demonstrations, strikes leading to violence, and acts of terrorism (as defined by the applicable Presidential Directive.)

D. Energy and Material Shortages—natural resource shortages or human-caused shortages resulting from price wars or labor disputes; and

E. Attacks—nuclear, conventional, chemical, or biological warfare.

Emergency Management Coordination—Emergencies arising from man-made or natural disasters can provide drastic psychological, social and economic consequences at all levels of government. County government is often the first line of public responsibility in the local, state, federal system of emergency management. Counties should develop, in cooperation with local, state, and federal governments, comprehensive emergency management systems that include preparedness, response, mitigation, and long-term recovery activities in order to minimize the destructive impact of all types of disasters.

Federal and state governments should continue to provide leadership in the development of a local, state, federal coordinated system. Such a system should be a robust, sustained and consistent process for soliciting local, state, tribal, territorial and private sector engagement, including un-filtered input to key federal decision makers, on the full breadth of homeland security issues. This process must ensure stakeholders are included in all aspects of national policy development as successful collaboration requires a partnership with state and local governments, the private sector and non-governmental organizations. This process must improve the capability for federal agencies and legislative committees to communicate and work together to ensure a coordinated and unified national approach to homeland security, and consistent messages to non-federal stakeholders. The process must establish clear cross-cutting direction to federal agencies and requires that their individual implementation of homeland


security initiatives be fully coordinated within the federal inter-agency in a manner that promotes a unified national effort. The process must ensure that federal agency offices responsible for maintaining on-going policy-level liaison with non-federal government officials and private sector executive leaders, report directly to the head of their respective federal agency. This system should also convene a broad ranging discussion with relevant stakeholder organizations to formally establish consistent processes and expectations about how collaboration will occur in the future and improve coordination of legislatively directed deadlines imposed on federal agencies that subsequently create corresponding requirements for state, local, tribal, territorial and/or private sector input, to minimize redundant and conflicting demands for information from non-federal stakeholders.

Federal and state governments should recognize the first-line responsibility of county government by providing aid to counties in the preparation and response to emergencies and more expeditious, practical, and substantial aid to citizens who suffer from disasters. Emergency management functions should be fire-walled and protected in legislation similar to the Secret Service and Coast Guard treatment in the Homeland Security Act of 2002. A firewall will prevent funding, personnel and resources from being used for other function.

FEMA Leadership—Regardless of where located in the federal government, the FEMA Administrator must have a direct reporting relationship to the President during periods of Presidential disaster and emergency declarations, similar to the Joint Chiefs of Staff relationship in military engagement. Congress should require that criteria be developed for the FEMA Administrator to ensure competent leadership and provide for a direct reporting relationship with the President. Congress should allow stakeholders to have input in the vetting process for nominees. Reductions should be made to the number of political appointments within federal emergency management functions and fill positions of authority with individuals who have requisite experience. Federal emergency management leadership should be the lead for the National Response Plan (NRP) as outlined in the Homeland Security Act of 2002.

Role of the Military—The role of the military should continue to be in support of civilian authorities. Procedures should be refined for requesting assistance from the Department of Defense (DoD) in those rare and catastrophic events when assets are needed that only DoD can provide. Congress must protect the constitutional role of states with regard to control of their National Guard forces and clarify the circumstances as well as the command, control and coordination procedures under which federal active duty forces are to be employed in operations within the homeland. Congress is also encouraged to ensure that the National Guard remains under the command and control of the nation's Governors for all homeland security operations purposes. The appropriate federal entity is also encouraged to develop an on-going monitoring process to ensure that during periods when the National Guard are called to federal service, Governors will retain sufficient manpower and resources in their states for homeland security, disaster and emergency response missions; establish clear joint force command protocols to assure federal active duty forces engaged in domestic operations within states can be placed under the supervision or the command and control of the Governor and the State Adjutant General; adequately define and resource the National Guard for its domestic support/protection and war-fighting missions; and create clear policy for the Chief of the National Guard Bureau in consultation with Adjutants General to set National Guard operational requirements for inter-state domestic disaster relief and homeland security missions, without requiring Combatant Commander approvals.


FEMA Regional Offices and Staffing—FEMA Regional offices should be strengthened through adequate staffing and resources. FEMA must be fully staffed and have the capability to establish and maintain stockpiles and pre-position resources and equipment, as well as establish trained cadres of personnel to provide surge capacity in large disasters.

Intelligence and Information Sharing—The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) and other relevant federal agencies must preserve progress to date and continue to expand/ implement efforts to ensure timely and effective sharing of information. Recent national information sharing strategies affirm the importance of these principles, but implementation remains inconsistent. The appropriate federal agency and/or Congress must fix federal guidelines that inhibit the granting of security clearances to local, state and private sector partners and address the continuing inconsistency of recognizing clearances granted by different federal agencies; promote through policy and resources the inclusion of the private sector and non-governmental organizations with local, state and federal information sharing; sustain federal funding for state and local information sharing and make it predictable and not limited to a single threat or hazard; actively engage non-federal stakeholders in the development of federal program guidance and related budget creation, essential tools for implementing national information sharing policies; integrate national databases and ensure the capability for local, state, tribal, territorial and private access where needed; and regularly assess the capability and progress for fusing and sharing information vertically and horizontally within government and between the public and private sectors to ensure that vital information is constantly provided to those responsible for protecting the homeland.

Integrated Emergency Management—Preparedness functions must be linked both statutorily and operationally with response and recovery functions within federal emergency management. Integrated planning, training and exercise are a requirement for effective disaster response. Preparedness cannot be a separate function from disaster readiness, response and recovery. Unity of effort is a pre-requisite for effective disaster response. Relationships must be established and communications networks in place prior to events. The Department of Homeland Security should establish a field presence that interacts with state and local partners on a day-to-day basis. Federal emergency management must provide additional focus on its ability to effectively implement recovery programs for local governments, individuals, families, and businesses. Governors must remain the lead in disaster response within their states in support of and in consultations with local officials.

National Response Plan/Incident Command System—County governments support the Incident Command System model for emergency management. The Incident Command System (ICS) provides a management structure and system for conducting on-site operations. It is applicable to small scale daily operational activities as well as major mobilizations. ICS provides command center and operational staff with a standardized operational structure and common terminology. Because of this, ICS provides a useful and flexible management system that is particularly adaptable to incidents involving multi-jurisdictional or multi-disciplinary responses. ICS provides the flexibility needed to rapidly activate and establish an organizational format around the functions that need to be performed. This model should be adopted by all county emergency management and public safety agencies.

Building on the model of the ICS system, DHS unveiled the National Response Framework (NRF) in late 2007. The NRF presents the guiding principles that enable all response partners to prepare for and provide a unified national response to disasters and


emergencies. It establishes a comprehensive, national, all-hazards approach to domestic incident response. The National Response Plan was replaced by the National Response Framework effective March 22, 2008. A federal/state/local working group of experienced professionals should be convened to periodically review the National Response Plan (NRF) and make adjustments based on lessons learned from previous responses to disasters. A periodic review of the NRF is necessary and must include state and local stakeholders. Furthermore, the "Incident of National Significance" should be clarified, and the Principal Federal Official (PFO) position is not needed and repetitive, as the Stafford Act gives the Federal Coordinating Officers those responsibilities. Federal Coordinating Officers (FCOs) should be given decision-making authority and access to all Department of Homeland Security assets to respond to and recover from disasters.

The development of a national credentialing system is a fundamental component of the National Incident Management System (NIMS). The NIMS states that "credentialing involves providing documentation that can authenticate and verify the certification and identity of designated incident managers and emergency responders" to ensure that response personnel "possess a minimum common level of training, currency, experience, physical and medical fitness, and capability" for the respective role that they are tasked to fill. NACo supports accelerating the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Incident Management System (NIMS) Integration Center's establishment of qualifications and credentialing for people who serve in public safety disciplines. Past catastrophic events in 2005 demonstrated that qualified and credentialed field, supervisory, and management personnel would have ensured greater competence in responding to and recovering from past events. There must be qualified people in field, supervisory, and management positions that are qualified and competent to order, use, and manage resources.

Catastrophic Disasters—Major changes are not needed to refine the Stafford Act. The law served Congress well with flexibility in response to Hurricane Katrina and a separate system should not be developed for catastrophic disasters, as Congress has the ability to consider each disaster's needs on a case by case basis. Any changes to the Stafford Act must fix some issues related to the last overhaul in 2000, and must be fully vetted with state and local governments. The Catastrophic Disaster Preparedness Program should be authorized and appropriately funded to include planning, training, exercise, and action plans to implement lessons learned. State and local governments must be partners in catastrophic disaster planning.

Recovering Emergency Management Costs for Private and Common Carrier Transportation Accidents—County emergency response personnel routinely responds to airline, railway and other private and common carrier transportation accidents.

Fire, police, road crews, medical and mental health personnel, medical examiner/coroner, environmental, emergency medical service personnel, emergency management personnel and a host of private businesses frequently join together in massive recovery and cleanup operations.

The cost of recovery and cleanup operations are substantial, but the refusal for reimbursement from private insurance carriers may require counties to prepare itself for a legal battle that could cost hundred of thousands of dollars and years to resolve.

Past history demonstrates that in addition to the personal loss of families, local governments have suffered financial losses regarding recovery and cleanup operations; including airline accidents which resulted in financial loss to local governments in Dade County, Florida (Value Jet), Suffolk County, New York (TWA 800) and Monroe County, Michigan (COMAIR Flight 3272).


The National Association of Counties (NACo) maintains that the ultimate financial responsibility for recovery and cleanup should be placed on the transportation carrier and/or its insurance provider, not that of local, state or federal government and that it could be in itself disastrous to the financial stability of local governments.

NACo supports federal legislation that would provide financial relief from transportation carriers for all costs incurred by local government during and after a private and common carrier transportation accident.

Fire Prevention and Control—The fact that U. S. casualties and losses per fire are below average compared to other countries is a tribute to the capability of our local fire suppression services. However, the high incidence of fires and the high cost of suppression indicate a need for more fire prevention programs, fire protection planning, and public education to prevent this large number of fires from occurring.

NACo strongly opposes federal efforts to decrease funding to the DHS' Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program, and urges the federal government to fully fund this grant program.

The National Commission of Fire Prevention and Control has indicated that fire prevention could have an impact on reducing fire losses and recommended that national leadership be provided to assist local governments in reallocating resources to fire prevention activities. The Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 created the U. S. Fire Administration to provide public education on fire prevention, technology development, and fire protection planning assistance, and to establish a National Academy for Fire Prevention and Control and a National Fire Data Center. Congress should continue to appropriate funds to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for these activities, with continued assistance to state and local governments for combating the nation’s fire problem.

County Government’s Responsibilities—Municipal governments traditionally have had the major responsibility at the local level for fire suppression efforts. With the growth of suburban areas and the increasing need for fire prevention through fire code enforcement, early detection and suppression, education, and fire protection planning, the role of counties has greatly increased. Considering the limited revenues of local communities, it is important that county governments help identify both the acceptable level of risk and the level of service that are commensurate with the needs and resources of the responsible community. The level of service must include not only suppression activities, but prevention, education, inspection, and administrative activities as well.

Most county governments support fire suppression activities and related support services, such as communications, emergency medical services, investigation, code enforcement, and training. However, the fragmentation of fire prevention and control and related functions among many fire services and districts within the county creates severe problems in financing and administering the fire services that are needed to reduce fire losses to an acceptable risk level for all areas of the county.

Local governments should enter into mutual aid and other intergovernmental agreements with counties to consolidate and coordinate fire services whenever feasible. Rural communities are especially in need of multi-jurisdictional agreements to provide adequate training, purchase and maintenance of equipment, code adoption and review, public education, communications, and emergency medical services. The Rural Communities Fire Protection Program in the U. S. Department of Agriculture should be expanded to assist rural areas.

Research and development and technology transfer can improve public fire protection and should be supported by the U. S. Fire Administration in coordination with the Department of


Homeland Security’s Science and Technology Division, the President’s Office of Science and Technology Policy, the National Science Foundation, the National Academy of Sciences, and other research organizations. County officials should have input into the development of federally supported technology research and development priorities, and they should participate in the dissemination of fire protection and control information.

Arson—Arson is a serious criminal problem that can involve networks of fraud and conspiracy that cuts across insurance, housing, banking, and commercial industries and penetrates local public and private organizations. It is essential that a comprehensive strategy be devised to combat this crime.

Federal agencies should coordinate and give high priority to identifying and analyzing factors that contribute to arson and then identify, encourage, and fund programs that will help counties reduce arson. Training in arson prevention, investigation, and prosecution should be provided, and national arson criminal files should be established for use by state and local investigators, fire marshals, prosecutors, and law enforcement officials. County governments should adopt policies that encourage local public and private organizations to cooperate in the investigation, prosecution, and prevention of arson.

Civil Disturbances/Acts of Terrorism—County programs should be developed in advance for the effective handling of civil disturbances and acts of terrorism, recognizing that law and order must be preserved and also balanced with individual constitutional rights of speech and assembly.

To accomplish this, counties are encouraged to establish appropriate training programs, appropriate emergency laws, and mutual aid pacts with surrounding jurisdictions. The federal government and the states should provide financial assistance to counties to pay the costs resulting from such disturbances. Regional agreements and working relationships between counties to promote efficiency and economy through existing regional structures in each state should be encouraged.

Furthermore, counties are encouraged to become familiar with the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC), and we urge Congress and the Administration to work with states to improve and strengthen EMAC as the primary vehicle for delivering interstate mutual aid. States are encouraged to establish and continue formal and effective mechanisms for identifying and deploying local assets as an integral part of the EMAC process. Congress should adopt an annual $4 million appropriation for EMAC.

Emergency Management/Homeland Security Funding—Recognizing that local governments, despite their diversity, perform comparable emergency functions; and that local jurisdictions may face multiple risks:

• Recent disasters have proven that effective local emergency management is a key element in a viable disaster response and recovery.

• Local jurisdictions have resource shortfalls in personnel, equipment, training and funding for emergency management, emergency services, disaster response and recovery.

• The vast majority of disasters in the United States are not federally declared, but are the sole responsibility of the state and local governments.

• Effective emergency management results directly in fewer human fatalities and injuries, reduced property damages and more rapid restoration of public services.


The National Association of Counties favors rapid federal response and reimbursement at rates authorized in the original language of the Stafford Act; and encourages The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to apply all regulations and policies on a consistent basis in all presidential declared emergencies and disasters around the country. NACo encourages DHS to apply all regulations and/or policy changes on a prospective basis based on the declaration date of the emergency or disaster; and supports DHS’ leadership in reducing excessive paperwork and overly restrictive and bureaucratic regulations.

NACo supports federal legislation or requirements that would improve homeland security grant programs by streamlining application and planning requirements, promote flexibility and provide first responders and county governments with additional resources in an expedited fashion. Priority funding decisions should be based on a regional and/or a multi-jurisdictional planning and collaborative effort between state and all levels of local governments.

Congress should exempt Office of Grants and Training homeland security grants from the Cash Management Act of 1990 to allow funds to be provided to state and local governments in advance of expenditure for up to 120 days. Concurrently, states and communities should revise appropriate regulations to allow notice of federal grant awards under these programs to serve as the basis for procurement and spending commitments absent the "cash in the bank" and to institute a process for by-passing some administrative processed in matters relating to national security and the expenditure of these funds.

State governments, in coordination with county, municipal and tribal governments, should establish equipment acquisition services and/or purchase critical homeland security related equipment in bulk and distribute same to county, municipal and tribal communities in a manner consistent with the State and Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies.

DHS, in coordination with state, county, municipal and tribal governments should establish national standards for the management of grant funding.

DHS, in coordination with state, county, municipal and tribal governments should develop an automated grant tracking system that would allow for the real time tracking of the distribution and use of homeland security-related funds."

DHS, in coordination with state, county, municipal and tribal governments should identify, collect and distribute [homeland security] best practices.

Recognizing that state, county, municipal and tribal governments of all sizes and resource levels are eligible to receive funding, DHS in coordination with representatives of state, county, municipal and tribal governments, should develop minimum staffing recommendations for grant and program management personnel -- this may require increasing the DHS' Office of Grants and Training three percent allocation cap on management and administrative expenses.

DHS should continue to expand and enhance the level of training and technical assistance provided to state, county, municipal and tribal officials involved in the management of homeland security-related grants."

Congress should establish deadlines for the obligating of grants, when applicable from one level of local government to another level of local government.

Congress should expand the approval of State Homeland Security Grant Program (SHSGP) funds so as to allow state, county, municipal and tribal entities to better address short term issues attributed to terrorist threats." For instance, counties "should be able to use funds provided through SHSGP to offset incremental operational cost including overtime and other personnel costs incurred as a result of threat specific security operations of pre-defined duration.


DHS should work closely with all levels of government to establish a comprehensive risk assessment methodology to support the identification of high-risk, high consequence critical infrastructure and major events.

The federal government must provide adequate funds for local governments to meet federal seaport security mandates, without impacting traditional seaport funding sources for capacity and other critical projects, including eligibility to use homeland security funds for operational costs.

DHS, the Department of Defense, Congress and other relevant federal agencies must reassess our total national homeland security effort to ensure strategy and execution are targeted to provide for the highest return on investment and provides the broadest set of capabilities to address the full range of national risk - natural, human-caused and technological; review and update the Defense Production Act to improve its usefulness in supporting national efforts to address 21st Century asymmetric threats, including how it can transition to support non-military government organizations that provide critical direct services for defending and protecting the homeland; ensure an immediate collaborative baseline review of target capabilities to identify needed adjustments based on lessons from actual events, advancements in capabilities or changes to our understanding of threats and establish a firm timetable to provide the necessary resources to support advancement; rapidly implement a nationwide credentialing process involving all relevant federal, state and local government, and private sector organizations to enhance the ability for inter-state mutual aid, and where possible, to reduce reliance on direct federal personnel support in some areas; provide technical and financial support to identify, resource type and package local, state, non-profit and private sector assets for rapid and sustained deployment (e.g. nationally credentialed recovery teams that include expertise in fields such as public works, local government management, law enforcement, EMS, fire, health and information technology); and establish a cross cutting logistics and surge management capability that unites local, state, federal and private sector coordination and support to impacted local communities.

NACo urges Congress to provide maximum funding for the Emergency Management Performance Grant Program (EPMG) and to maintain the programs all-hazards focus. EPMG is the only federal all-hazards emergency management preparedness program in support of capacity building at the local level. As a result, NACo urges Congress to maintain EMPG as a separate account in the DHS budget, and to maintain the current 50- 50 match structure of the EMPG formula for all-hazards preparedness. The EMPG formula should not be linked to any other homeland security grant reform package, and all permitted use polices and the flexibility of the program must be retained. Voluntary performance metrics based systems (such as the Emergency Management Accreditation Program) should be used to measure the capacity being built by EMPG, rather than homeland security-specific measurables.

Since many of the states are on bi-annual program and budget cycles and all states require time to adjust to change funding formulas if they are determined to be appropriate, the National Association of Counties urges that a transition period of not less than two full fiscal years be provided for the states to accommodate to agreed changes. The National Association of Counties urges the Secretary of DHS to take aggressive action to ensure states maintain, at previous levels, the percentage of EMPG funds which are passed through to local governments and to ensure that maximum flexibility be maintained regarding eligibility, particularly with respect to use of funds for personnel.


The National Association of Counties supports the establishment in every state of an Emergency Preparedness, Mitigation Preparedness, Mitigation Response and Recovery Trust Fund. Proceeds from such trust funds in each state could represent significant funding at the local level for a wide range of emergency management and emergency services projects.

The National Association of Counties encourages the Secretary of DHS to recommend to the President that the federal government reward states that take the initiative to pass such trust funds to improve their emergency management capabilities and infrastructure. Such measures could include adjusting the cost share ratio in disaster assistance for response and recovery when disasters strike. The National Association of Counties urges the Secretary of DHS to not penalize states which establish a trust fund by counting the trust fund balance against the state in the recommendation to the President concerning a presidential declaration of emergency or disaster.

National Disaster Insurance System—The costs related to damages from natural disasters and emergencies such as hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, windstorms fires and floods have cost federal, state and local treasuries tens of billions of dollars in recent years. In some natural disaster-prone, high risk areas in the United States, insurance companies have established restrictions on or have ceased selling homeowners and fire insurance coverage because of their financial inability to absorb additional losses. As a result, this has limited or stopped property transfers in some real estate markets. Implementing effective pre-disaster risk reduction measures to both new buildings and existing buildings that will reduce losses from natural hazards is a major county priority. A system to reduce complete reliance on federally subsidized disaster relief by augmenting with a new private insurance system must be carefully analyzed.

NACo calls on the United States Congress to support sustained funding for the Flood Map Modernization Fund and urge Congress to support FEMA’s efforts to modernize flood plain mapping through digitalization; support FEMA’s efforts to promote community involvement and ownership in the mapping process; support FEMA’s efforts to enter into a relationship with “Cooperating Technical Communities” as a new partnered approach to flood plain mapping; and direct FEMA to share digitized flood plain mapping data with counties for GIS purposes.

NACo supports incentives to states and local governments to prioritize and to undertake pre- and post- disaster hazard mitigation to diminish future losses. NACo recognizes that state and local governments need to improve their emergency management planning and their predisaster planning and their first responder capabilities with the help of substantial federal assistance.

In addition, NACo strongly opposes federal efforts to eliminate the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and urges the federal government to restore the current program formula for HMGP back to 15 percent from the current 7.5 percent of disaster costs as changed in the FY2003 Omnibus Appropriations Bill.

State and local governments need to adopt and implement risk reduction or mitigation measures related to actual natural disaster risks.

Most states and local governments recognize their responsibility to adopt and implement responsible land use decisions to reduce future property damage and loss from natural disasters and emergencies.

The National Association of Counties urges the Congress and the federal administration to work with the states, local governments and the insurance industry and other stakeholders:


• to develop universal insurance and reinsurance programs which will make it possible for private insurers and re-insurers to make available affordable natural disaster insurance to cover damage and loss caused by natural and man made disasters and emergencies;

• to increase funding for research aimed at improving mitigation measures, which if followed, will reduce damage and loss caused by natural and man made disasters and emergencies;

• to provide incentives and education to encourage responsible pre and post disaster mitigation by states, local governments and individuals;

• to provide incentives to encourage the public and private sectors to construct new structures according to established technical construction standards and consensus safety codes;

• to provide incentives to encourage the public and private sectors to construct and/or retrofit existing structures to reduce future losses from natural and man made disasters and emergencies;

• to provide financial incentives to encourage state and local government and private property owners to locate new construction outside of high risk areas such as flood plains, coastal areas or on or near earthquake faults; and

• to authorize the Federal Emergency Management Agency to develop pre-disaster mitigation programs; and to fund pre-disaster mitigation.

COUNTY COORDINATION OF PRIVATE AGENCY PROGRAMS Federal and state financial assistance for such programs as drug abuse and juvenile

delinquency prevention to private agencies should be channeled through county governments in order to avoid duplication and to achieve better coordination of local governmental and private programs.

ROLE OF THE COUNTY CORONER/MEDICAL EXAMINER The county coroner/medical examiner, where appropriate, aside from determining the

cause and manner of death has responsibility for protecting the living through the performance of medical-legal investigations and by sharing information and research in traffic safety, environmental health, product safety, occupational safety, and public health.

The county coroner/medical examiner, therefore, should be an integral partner in the community planning process and in the development of public health policies.

Recognizing that in a number of states and counties death investigations are being performed by individuals who lack sufficient training and expertise to determine the cause and manner of death, NACo calls for the creation of a national research and technical assistance project to create or enhance statewide training and certification programs.

NACo recommends that the American Bar Association, working in close cooperation with coroners, medical examiners and organizations representing state and local governments undertake a major national study of medico-legal death investigation in the U. S.

Recognizing that experts at the Center for Disease Control (CDC) have estimated that about 1,700 county coroner's are seriously lacking in medical training to adequately perform the above stated responsibilities, and that the National Academy Sciences has called for the elimination of the coroner position, (citing the coroners lack of training in forensic pathology). The National Association of Counties calls on the National Institute of Justice to conduct a pilot


study in a minimum of at least 36 counties that have coroners or Medico-legal Death Investigators with advanced training. Such training is necessary to enable the death investigator to alert the forensic pathologist that an autopsy is required. The study should explore opportunities for state certification. It should be noted that a number of states require sheriffs after election, to comply with standards and training as required by State statutes.

VICTIM/WITNESS ASSISTANCE NACo recognizes that victims of crime have long been the forgotten element in the

criminal justice system. The victims/witnesses, upon whom the criminal justice process depends for its effectiveness, often find their problems and needs ignored in the administration of justice. Reform of the criminal justice system must include recognition of the rights, problems, and needs of the victims as well as the offenders.

The victims of domestic violence are as much ignored by the justice system as are victims of other violent crimes. Domestic violence is a widespread problem that concerns not only the families involved but also the community as a whole.

Solutions to this complex problem must involve criminal justice agencies and a variety of governmental and other agencies in a comprehensive approach to assist victims. As providers of a broad range of criminal justice, health, and social services, counties have a unique opportunity to coordinate these existing services to aid the victims of crime. Providing such basic services as counseling, emergency housing, transportation, medical services, and financial assistance, as well as information on court procedures, will ensure both a sense of wellbeing and a belief in justice for the victim. NACo urges federal and state governments to develop programs of assistance that will help counties create a cooperative network between social service providers and criminal justice agencies to meet the needs of victims/witnesses of crime.

RESTORATIVE JUSTICE The National Association of Counties supports the immediate, incremental and eventual

systemic shift toward a restorative community justice philosophy that:

Encourages the utilization of conflict resolution skills to affected citizens and creates conflict resolution mechanisms in its institutions;

Directly links the offender to the harm caused, holding said offender accountable to right the wrong through restitution, community service, and other appropriate means;

Provides options, choices, and opportunities for involvement for victims, allowing them to get questions answered and confront the offender in a mediated setting, if they so choose; and

Offers options for community involvement in the sanction setting and supervision process.

VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE The unique role of county government, as the primary provider of criminal justice, health

care, mental health and other social services, enables local elected officials to promote the coordination of services to best meet the needs of victims of domestic violence.

County governments are urged to develop a broad-based system of response to domestic violence including financial support for shelters, crisis lines, and other programs offering advocacy, support and counseling, public education and prevention activities, and emergency medical services.


County officials are also urged to examine the response of various criminal justice agencies to cases of domestic violence. Law enforcement and prosecutorial policies and practices should ensure the protection of the victim and reflect the serious criminal nature of acts of domestic violence.

In conjunction with direct intervention services and prevention activities, county governments are encouraged to provide safe, affordable housing, child care and employment training and job placement for victims of domestic violence.

County officials are also encouraged to develop and ensure access to these programs and services through cooperation with existing programs for victims of domestic violence such as shelters and safe home networks.

NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE Any proposed degradation of NWS services represents a threat to the well-being of

county governments, and presents immeasurable challenges to county emergency management and public safety personnel and operations.

Therefore, NACo urges Congress and the Administration to ensure that funds budgeted for NWS operations in support of local communities are protected from reallocation and that the operating hours of local NWS forecast offices which warn and advise county emergency managers regarding severe weather threats are maintained at current hours of operation.

EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES One of the most basic and vital services local governments can provide to its constituents

is immediate, life saving care for victims of singular or widespread emergency medical incidents. Federal programs that help develop comprehensive emergency medical service (EMS) systems are administered by the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, the U. S. Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Fire Administration.

These programs call for countywide or multi-county systems of emergency medical care which address the needs of specific geographical population groups. County governments generally provide the most efficient government format for the delivery of such comprehensive care systems.

Counties should examine their current roles regarding federal, state, and local efforts to develop EMS systems and should utilize existing resources to plan for and implement comprehensive countywide and multi-county EMS systems.

NACo urges Congress to continue its support and appropriations for implementation and development of countywide and multi-county EMS systems.

CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE DHS, Congress and other relevant federal agencies must strengthen efforts to provide

funding to state and local governments to protect and make more resilient our national critical infrastructure and subsequently our national economy, as well as accelerate steps to fully integrate the full range of federal efforts with the local, state and private sectors; assure that the actual protection of critical infrastructure systems remains a primary responsibility of local and state governments with the private sector and support these requirements with adequate federal resources and policy; improve collaboration between state and local, private sector and federal agencies working across all the sectors to enhance the planning, protection, and recovery efforts needed to address the inter-dependent nature of critical infrastructure systems; begin transitioning from the current tactical approach to critical infrastructure protection that favors


physical site protection, response and recovery to one of strategic continuum-based resilient critical infrastructure systems assurance against all threats and natural and man-caused hazards; include all stakeholders as equal partners in all aspects of creating national critical infrastructure protection policy and guidance; and strengthen information sharing initiatives to ensure timely sharing of critical infrastructure protection guidance/intelligence with those who need to have it.

PUBLIC HEALTH The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), DHS, Congress and other

relevant Federal agencies must improve efforts to enhance the full range of health and medical readiness to address trauma and exposure related injury and disease. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), DHS, Congress and other relevant federal agencies must also sustain funding that supports ongoing public health, medical and EMS preparedness to build and enhance medical surge capacity, promote training and workforce development, enhance technology for disease prevention, detection, and production of medical countermeasures and mass prophylaxis; review the nation's health care system to assess the impact of hospital diversion, medical and public health surge capacity (including workforce issues) and alternate standards of care on our ability to provide adequate medical care during times of national crisis; focus more federal preparedness activities on pre-hospital care and the role of public, private, career and volunteer EMS providers; integrate any new disease surveillance systems into existing state, local and federal systems; support the registration, credentialing, organization and deployment of volunteer health professionals through existing state and local systems such as ESAR-VHP, NIMS-EMS credentialing project, Medical Reserve Corps and EMAC; develop with input from non-federal stakeholders, an over-arching national policy regarding standards of care for use under extremis conditions such as with a federal declaration of national emergency and clarify the roles of federal agencies for leading national efforts to enhance health and medical readiness for disasters and acts of terrorism and specifically assure health and medical information sharing as part of broader information sharing initiatives.

PANDEMIC INFLUENZA Public health experts predict the occurrence of an influenza pandemic. This may arise if

the current avian influenza virus acquires an ability to be transmitted from human to human, or it may arise from another new virus. It cannot be predicted when such an event will occur, but it is important that counties anticipate and prepare for the enormous demands that a pandemic will place on both public and private sectors to respond.

The federal funds now available are insufficient to enable counties to complete all the necessary tasks of preparedness. Moreover, the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Homeland Security have not coordinated their pandemic influenza response activities in a way that reflects and supports the strong coordination among first responders, including public health departments, that already occurs at the county level. Federal direction now includes redundancy and contradictions in requirements for planning, exercising of plans, and reporting, and does not uniformly recognize that pandemic influenza response is an element of overall local emergency management planning and cannot occur in isolation from other county emergency and public health preparedness work.

As a result, NACo urges the Administration and Congress to recognize that pandemic influenza response is primarily local in nature, and to provide adequate funding, sound guidance, and support that will enable counties to prepare effectively for pandemic influenza in a manner that is consistent with local emergency management plans and that permits optimally efficient


use of local resources. Eighty percent of federal funds granted to states for pandemic influenza preparedness should be designated for use at the local level.

PUBLIC SAFETY TELECOMMUNICATIONS The objectives of public safety telecommunications are:

A. The general public should have access to public safety emergency resources when needed.

B. Public safety employees in high-risk activities should have ready access to emergency communications systems in their own communities that are compatible with communications systems in surrounding communities.

C. Public safety employees should have access to data necessary for the proper discharge of their duties.

Counties should develop comprehensive telecommunications policies that incorporate these objectives for available media, such as radio and microwave frequencies, cable television, emergency telephone such as 911, and computerized systems.

These policies should also seek to coordinate telecommunications among localities at a county or other appropriate multi-jurisdictional level. States should assist counties in developing comprehensive telecommunications programs through enabling authorities and financial and technical assistance.

The federal government should provide technical and financial assistance to counties for comprehensive programs and provide adequate communications frequencies and channels for public safety at the local level.

INTEROPERABILITY The development of data standards for the emergency response community will save

lives and reduce property damage by decreasing the time it takes our Nation's responders to respond to incidents of all sizes, including man-made or natural disaster. As a result, NACo supports the Department of Homeland Security's Office for Interoperability and Compatibility in its effort to carry out its statutory authority to support the creation of national voluntary consensus standards for interoperable communications. In particular, NACo supports the Office's development of data messaging standards in coordination with state and local representatives. NACo encourages Congress and the Department of Homeland Security to adequately fund this critical initiative in order to meet the needs of emergency responders across the nation.

DHS, the Department of Commerce, Congress and other relevant federal agencies must continue to promote coordinated development of governance, technology and protocols necessary to enhance minimal capabilities for interoperable communications (voice, video and data) among all levels of government and the private sector.

DHS, the Department of Commerce, Congress and other relevant federal agencies must establish incentives for private sector organizations to work with government to develop and maintain public safety communications systems at the local, regional, statewide and national levels; continue to promote, through policy and resources, efforts that create local, regional, statewide and nationwide operability and interoperability; allocate additional radio spectrum for public safety activities to ensure sufficient capacity exists to meet growing voice and data communications needs; clarify the conditions and protocols under which private entities will be required to vacate radio spectrum under their control during federally declared National


Emergencies; develop a clear shared definition, vision and implementation strategy for nationwide communications interoperability.


JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY RESOLUTIONS

Resolution in Support of Legislation to Establish a Nationwide 2-1-1 Dialing System Issue: Support for Calling for 2-1-1 Act, legislation that provides federal funds to states

starting or seeking to enhance their 2-1-1 systems. Adopted Policy: NACo urges Congress and the Administration to support The Calling

for 2-1-1 Act. Originally introduced as S. 211 and H.R. 211 by then Senator Hillary Clinton and Congresswoman Elizabeth Dole, the Act will provide the needed funding to states that are seeking to establish a 2-1-1 calling system or enhance an existing one.

Background: In times of disaster, community demand for the most up-to-the-minute information on road closures, evacuations, shelters, and recovery resources increases dramatically. This creates an additional burden on emergency response personnel and 9-1-1 telephone systems. In many counties, people can call 2-1-1 for the critical non-emergency information that they need, thus greatly reducing the burden on 9-1-1.

In addition to information during a disaster, 2-1-1 is the number for people to call for information and access to all health and social services in their respective communities. With the litany of programs and services throughout the country, many Americans do not know where to turn for help. 2-1-1 helps people navigate the system free of charge to anyone that calls.

As of November 2009, 2-1-1 systems throughout the country served over 241 million Americans (more than 80 percent of the entire population) covering all or part of 47 states (including 34 states with 90 percent+ coverage) plus Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico.

In California alone, people in over 85 percent of the state can call 2-1-1 to get connected to important human and community services, including rent assistance, food banks, affordable housing, health resources, child and elderly care, financial literacy and job training programs. Information is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, in over 100 languages.

Currently, 2-1-1 is funded differently in almost every county and state. A dedicated federal funding source is needed to enhance the capabilities and secure the viability of this dedicated community service for non-emergency disaster information, as well as assistance in accessing critical health and social services.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: TBD Adopted July 19, 2011

Resolution on Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program (42 U.S.C. 3750) Issue: Restoring funding for the Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program

and Byrne Discretionary grants. Adopted Policy: NACo strongly supports funding the Bryne/JAG program at FY10

levels. Background: The Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program was enacted into law as part

of the Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act. It consolidated the Edward Byrne Block Grant Program with the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program (LLEBG).

As the cornerstone of the federal crime fighting program, Byrne JAG supports a broad range of projects designed to prevent and control crime and to improve the criminal justice system in our communities. Byrne JAG funds are leveraged with state and local funding to support innovative and evidence-based initiatives that demonstrate new, and replicate proven, approaches to preventing and fighting crime, reducing recidivism and saving taxpayer dollars.


Although the Byrne JAG federal contribution is a relatively small portion of total state and local spending on criminal justice services, it is essential to our ability to bring these proven approaches into practice in law enforcement, the courts, the corrections system, prosecution and defense strategies, crime victim services, and crime prevention initiatives. State criminal justice planning agencies engage these components of the criminal justice system in statewide strategic planning to guide the use of the Byrne JAG funds. This planning process ensures that Byrne JAG funds, in concert with other federal, state and local funds, are used to address needs and fill gaps across the entire criminal justice system in a targeted fashion. In the FY11 Continuing Resolution, funding for Byrne JAG was reduced by 17 percent across the board, and further cuts are likely in 2012. A reduction of Byrne JAG funding below the fiscal year 2010 level greatly impair efforts underway at the state and local levels to improve collaboration among law enforcement agencies across jurisdictions and make available much needed programs to help at-risk youths lead productive lives and to help victims of crime put their lives back together.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: A reduction of Byrne JAG funding below the fiscal year 2010 level greatly impair efforts underway at the state and local levels to improve collaboration among law enforcement agencies across jurisdictions and make available much needed programs to help at-risk youths lead productive lives and to help victims of crime put their lives back together.


Resolution in Support of Strengthened FEMA Outreach and Technical Assistance for Flood Hazard Mapping

Issue: Flood Hazard Mapping and Strengthening FEMA’s outreach and technical assistance with counties.

Adopted Policy: NACo urges the U.S. Congress to fully support a transparent and fiscally reasonable process by which counties and residents can revise and amend FEMA’s Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Additionally, NACo urges the federal government to enhance flood hazard mapping outreach and technical assistance in local communities.

Background: In 2009, in an effort to modernize maps, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) issued an updated Flood Insurance Study (FIS) and Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) with major changes from the previous versions. The 2009 FIRMs significantly expand the Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) delineated within many counties, especially coastal counties. These changes will affect future land use and development on a number of private and public properties, and require affected property owners with home loans from federal lending institutions to purchase flood insurance.

FEMA has begun to work on further revisions to the 2009 Flood Maps. FEMA expects that the revised flood maps will be completed and become effective sometime in 2012 or 2013. The revisions will incorporate updated topographical data and hydraulic and hydrologic modeling. In this regard, FEMA anticipates that its new coastal hydrodynamic model of coastal areas such as the San Francisco Bay will account for tidal action, wave run up, and storm surge; and may ultimately raise the 100-year water levels by up to two feet. If so, this will further expand the limits of Special Flood Hazard Areas in the affected counties.

FEMA has published notices of new maps in the Federal Register and local newspapers in many instances. However, many counties have indicated that FEMA has not engaged directly with communities in a public process. As a result, direct community outreach and response to residents’ questions has been left to the local jurisdictions. This has especially been hard for the


affected communities, since the local officials do not necessarily have all the answers to questions on FEMA’s approach, analysis, and study assumptions in creating the map updates.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: There will be minimal federal costs associated with the adoption of this policy. The potential savings for county residents as a result of the commission’s work is expected to be substantial.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution in Support for the National Initiative on Cyber Education (NICE)

Issue: Support of the National Initiative on Cyber Education (NICE). Adopted Policy: NACo supports the National Initiative on Cyber Education. Background: Cybersecurity has been identified as one of the most serious economic and

national security challenges in the nation. Established by the Federal Government, the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE) is seeking to address this challenge head on with a strategy to build a cyber savvy nation through training and awareness. NICE has evolved from President Obama’s Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative, and extends its scope beyond the federal workplace to include civilians and students in kindergarten through post-graduate school. One of the goals of NICE is to establish an operational, sustainable and continually improving cybersecurity education program for the nation to use sound cyber practices that will enhance the nation’s security.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is leading the NICE initiative to ensure coordination, cooperation, focus, public engagement, technology transfer and sustainability. Additionally, the initiative is represented by the following four tracks:

Track 1: National Cybersecurity Awareness Lead: Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ;

Track 2: Formal Cybersecurity Education Co-Lead Department of Education (DoED) and Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP);

Track 3: Federal Cybersecurity Workforce Structure Lead: Office of Personnel Management (OPM); and

Track 4: Cybersecurity Workforce Training and Professional Development Tri-Leads: Department of Defense (DoD), Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Through collaborative partnerships between federal, state and local governments, industry, academia, non-government organizations and the general public, NICE hopes to educate raise and public awareness about cybersecurity so our nation is resilient to cyber incidents and cyber threats.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Urban and rural residents will benefit equally by increased awareness and education. Private partners and grants will supplement in-kind community member participation.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution in Support of Maintaining Funding for FEMA Grant Programs

Issue: Maintaining funding for FEMA grant programs. Adopted Policy: NACo urges the U.S. Congress to fully support a fiscally reasonable

approach to maintaining critical grant programs that enhance the local and thereby the national ability to respond to existing and emerging risk to public safety. While it is recognized that prior funding levels may not be sustainable, NACo urges the US Congress to reduce the Fire Act and


SAFER grant programs by the lowest reasonable margins and to maintain these vital programs permanently.

Background: Recent weather events prove that the local and state ability to respond to catastrophic events can be easily overwhelmed requiring federal assistance. By strengthening the local and state ability to respond the Federal Government is meeting its obligation for preparation for such events.

The Department of Homeland Security & FEMA have in place certain grant programs that have been extremely beneficial in assisting localities in preparation for emergency response and maintenance of fire service abilities to meet existing and emerging risks, specifically the Fire Act and SAFER grant programs. With looming budget deficits at the federal level there are various proposals to cut levels of funding for these programs and even elimination in 2016.

The primary goal of the Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) is to meet the firefighting and emergency response needs of fire departments and nonaffiliated emergency medical service organizations. Since 2001, AFG has helped firefighters and other first responders to obtain critically needed equipment, protective gear, emergency vehicles, training, and other resources needed to protect the public and emergency personnel from fire and related hazards.

The Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Grants (SAFER) was created to provide funding directly to fire departments and volunteer firefighter interest organizations in order to help them increase the number of trained, "front line" firefighters available in their communities. The goal of SAFER is to enhance the local fire departments' abilities to comply with staffing, response and operational standards established by the NFPA and OSHA (NFPA 1710 and/or NFPA 1720 and OSHA 1910.134).

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: There will be a net reduction in federal cost associated with adoption of this policy while maintaining a critical program with proven success in improving the emergency services ability and preparation nationally allowing a more fiscally responsible approach to the essential provision of public safety services.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution in Support of Revising FEMA’s HMGP Program

Issue: Removal of flood damaged structures from the flood plain immediately following a federally declared disaster to reduce the impact of future flooding.

Adopted Policy: NACo proposes changes to the Robert T. Stafford Act to allow FEMA to reimburse local governments at 100 percent of assessed value for structures that are substantially damaged due to flooding during the first 90 days of a federally declared disaster.

Background: Following the Great Midwest Flood of 1993 Congress, through FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, (HMGP) increased the federal share of this program from a 50 percent match to a 75 percent match and encouraged local communities to begin removing structures from the flood plain as a means to reduce costs of future flooding. This has proven to be very beneficial program, returning $3 for every $1 invested.

The county’s interest in this is to get the residents relocated as quickly as possible alleviating a long drawn out process of waiting for the approval of the HMGP funding. It is also in the county’s best interest to remove as many structures as possible reducing the impact on the public infrastructure in future disasters providing a tremendous cost saving.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Removing structures from flood plains is a good investment for counties. Some are concerned about lost revenue from real estate taxes but studies have shown that the cost of maintaining infrastructure along with disaster response is


more than offset by the lost revenue in real estate taxes. In addition to the monetary savings, the impact to a community is immeasurable.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution in Support of the Reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 as Amended

Issue: Support for the reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) as amended.

Adopted Policy: NACo supports the reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) as amended. Federal juvenile justice grant funds should go directly to counties, with the following requirement: leadership from all entities working to prevent, reduce and control juvenile crime must collaborate in the preparation of a comprehensive plan. Elements of such a plan shall include, but not be limited to (1) strategies, programs, services and supports designed to prevent delinquency through provision of resiliency factors which offset risk factors; (2) strategies, programs, services and supports designed to intervene early and effectively when delinquent behavior is encountered utilizing the least restrictive approach; (3) strategies, programs, services and supports which protect the community, hold offenders accountable to individual victims and the community, and which remedy the skill and competency deficits of offenders.

Background: Originally created in 1997, Congress created the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant (JAIBG) program and appropriated new federal funds through the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). In 2002 and 2005 JABG was again reauthorized, and program purpose areas for JAIBG were expanded, and the program was eventually renamed the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant (JABG) Program.

The JABG program authorizes the Attorney General to make grants to states and units of local government to strengthen their juvenile justice systems and foster accountability within their juvenile populations. Specifically, JABG funds support the following sixteen program purpose areas and counties can use the funding for any of the following activities:

1. Establishing drug court programs to provide continuing judicial supervision over developing, implementing, and administering graduated sanctions for juvenile offenders.

2. Building, expanding, or operating juvenile correction and detention facilities, including staff training.

3. Hiring juvenile court judges, probation officers, and court-appointed defenders and special advocates, and funding pretrial services (including mental health screening and assessment) for juvenile offenders, to promote the effective and expeditious administration of the juvenile justice system.

4. Hiring additional prosecutors to increase prosecution of cases involving violent juvenile offenders and to reduce case backlogs.

5. Providing funding to enable prosecutors to address drug, gang, and youth violence problems more effectively and for technology, equipment, and training to assist prosecutors in identifying and expediting the prosecution of violent juvenile offenders.

6. Establishing and maintaining training programs for law enforcement and other court personnel with respect to preventing and controlling juvenile crime.


7. Establishing juvenile gun courts for the prosecution and adjudication of juvenile firearms offenders.

8. Establishing drug court programs to provide continuing judicial supervision over juvenile offenders with substance abuse problems and to integrate the administration of other sanctions and services for such offenders.

9. Establishing and maintaining a system of juvenile records designed to promote public safety.

10. Establishing and maintaining interagency information-sharing programs that enable the juvenile and criminal justice systems, schools, and social services agencies to make more informed decisions regarding the early identification, control, supervision, and treatment of juveniles who repeatedly commit serious delinquent or criminal acts.

11. Establishing and maintaining accountability-based programs designed to reduce recidivism among juveniles who are referred by law enforcement personnel or agencies.

12. Establishing and maintaining programs to conduct risk and needs assessments of juvenile offenders that facilitate effective early intervention and the provision of comprehensive services, including mental health screening and treatment and substance abuse testing and treatment, to such offenders.

13. Establishing and maintaining accountability-based programs that are designed to enhance school safety.

14. Establishing and maintaining restorative justice programs. 15. Establishing and maintaining programs to enable juvenile courts and juvenile

probation officers to be more effective and efficient in holding juvenile offenders accountable and reducing recidivism.

16. Hiring detention and corrections personnel and establishing and maintaining training programs for such personnel, to improve facility practices and programming.

In 2009, the public law that authorized the JABG’s program expired. Thereafter, House and Senate Members of Congress introduced legislation to reauthorize the JABG program, but efforts stalled. Congressional appropriators did however fund the program at varying amounts from 2009-2011; and the program continued to support state and local juvenile justice systems.

In 2011, the President’s budget request provides no funding for JABG. Congress will likely reintroduce legislation to reauthorize the JABG program, but has not yet done so.

All in all, JABG provides funds to states and units of local government to enhance efforts to combat serious and violent juvenile crime, and strengthen juvenile justice systems.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Additional $500 million to fund primary prevention initiatives.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Supporting Funding for the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Reauthorization and Improvement Act

Issue: NACo supports continued funding for the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Program.


Adopted Policy: NACo supports continued funding for the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Program as a separate line item in the Department of Justice (DOJ) Bureau of Justice Assistance State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Account.

Background: The nation's local jails are increasingly becoming the dumping grounds for the mentally ill. Of the 10 million people entering county jails each year, it is estimated that 24 percent are displaying a pattern of symptoms that are indicative of psychotic behavior. Most of these individuals have committed only minor infractions, more often the manifestation of their illness than the result of criminal intent.

The MIOTCRA program provides assistance to states and communities to create new programs or expand existing programs that can both reduce costs and help mentally ill offenders return to productive lives. State and local governments can use these grants for a broad range of activities, including establishing jail diversion programs, mental health courts, creating or expanding community-based treatment programs, or providing in jail treatment and transitional services. In addition, grant funds may be used to enhance training for criminal justice system and mental health system personnel who must know how to respond appropriately to this population.

In 2008, Congress reauthorized the MIOTCRA program for an additional five years at $50 million annually; however, Congressional appropriators have never fully funded the program. Adding to the uncertainly about MIOTCRA program grant funding is the President’s FY12 budget request proposes to consolidate the MIOTCRA program into Department of Justice’s Drug, Mental Health, and Problem Solving Court Initiative. While this initiative has merit, this proposal change would not include many of the key elements of MIOTCRA and many of the law enforcement initiatives funded under the program will be lost.

Implementing a wide range of community-based services is infinitely more preferable to jail in terms of addressing the multiple issues facing this population. By keeping the mentally ill within the health and human services system, counties are better able to monitor their condition, provide treatment and dispense medication if needed; public safety is improved, long term state and local costs are reduced, and MIOTCRA assists in helping mentally ill offenders return to productive lives.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Promoting demonstration programs will in the long-term reduce the financial burden on both rural and urban counties.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on National Criminal Justice Commission Act

Issue: Support for S. 306, the National Criminal Justice Commission Act of 2011. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the National Criminal Justice Commission Act. Background: On February 8, 2011, Senator Jim Webb (D-Va.) reintroduced the

National Criminal Justice Commission Act of 2011 (S. 306). The legislation establishes a Commission which will undertake a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system, encompassing federal, state, local, and tribal criminal justice policies and practices, and make reform recommendations for the President, Congress, state, local, and tribal governments. The bill authorizes $14 million over two years.

The bill was first introduced on March 26, 2009, and was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee on January 21, 2010, with 39 bipartisan cosponsors. On July 28, 2010, it passed the U.S. House of Representatives, with the support of Rep. Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.) and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), now Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. However, despite strong bipartisan support, the bill was blocked in the U.S. Senate last year.


The National Criminal Justice Commission Act of 2011 outlines the topic areas that the Commission will review and the areas for which recommendations will be made. The Commission will have eighteen months to prepare and submit a final report to Congress and the President.

The Commission will consist of eleven members, and they must have expertise in areas like law enforcement, social services, public health, criminal justice and other relevant areas. A state and local government perspective is one of the itemized expertise areas, and establishing the Commission will assist in improving the public safety, cost effectiveness, administration of the Nation's criminal justice system.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: There are minimal federal costs associated with the adoption of the National Commission on Criminal Justice Reform. The potential savings for counties as a result of the commission's work is expected to be substantial.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution in Lowering Jail Recidivism and Reinvesting the Savings

Issue: Federal legislation to help counties lower jail recidivism and reinvest the savings. Adopted Policy: Congress should lower jail recidivism and reinvest the savings, by

reauthorizing the Second Chance Act and adopting companion legislation, the Criminal Justice Reinvestment Act, which would help reinvest the savings from lowering jail and prison populations into such areas as prevention, housing, education, job training, and substance abuse treatment.

Background: The Criminal Justice Reinvestment Act (S.2772/H.R. 4080) was sponsored by Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.); and Congressmen Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Dan Lungren (R-Calif.) during the 111th Congress. The House and Senate versions of the legislation were identical and were simultaneously introduced on November 26, 2009. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved S. 2772 in March 2010, but the full Senate or the House of Representatives failed to enact the legislation. During the 112th Congress, Members will likely introduce legislation to reauthorize the Second Chance Act and reintroduce the Criminal Justice Reinvestment Act.

According to the U. S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, there are approximately 13.5 million admissions to county jails each year. Of that number, approximately 740,000 individuals are committed to state prison. An estimated 64 percent of jail inmates are in “pretrial status,” meaning they are being held without conviction at a great cost to local taxpayers. Further, statistics show that of all the un-convicted inmates, the majority (65 percent) are nonviolent offenders and are prime candidates for effective pretrial services programs.

NACo had a significant role in developing the re-entry and re-investment legislation and making the case for strong local government involvement and an expansion of pretrial services. Counties spend more than $70 billion each year on criminal justice and billions more on health and human services, so even a small reduction in recidivism could produce billions of dollars in cost savings.

The bills would authorize the U. S. Attorney General to make grants to counties and states to help jurisdictions (1) analyze criminal justice trends to understand what is driving the growth in their local jail and prison populations; (2) develop tailored policy options to reduce corrections expenditures and increase the effectiveness of current spending and reinvestments that can make communities safer; (3) implement the proposed policies and programs; and (4) measure the impact of these changes and develop accountability measures.


Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Lowering recidivism and reinvesting the savings will save counties many millions of dollars.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on the Youth Promise Act and Gang Abatement Act of 2011

Issue: Support for the Youth Promise and Gang Abatement Act. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the basic concepts and principles contained in the Youth

Promise Act and urges Congress and the President to promptly enact the Youth Promise and Gang Abatement Act.

Background: In the 111th Congress, Congressmen C. “Bobby” Scott (D-Va.) and Michael Castle (R-Del.) and Senators Robert Casey (D-Pa.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) re-introduced the Youth Promise Act (H.R. 1064/S. 435). The Youth Promise Act is grounded in more than thirty years of research and supports communities facing the greatest youth gang and crime challenges. Rep. Scott worked with Senator Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) in merging their very different crime preventing bills in December, and the legislation was renamed the Youth Promise and Gang Abatement Act.

Under the Youth Promise Act, communities will form Promise Councils that include representatives from county government, law enforcement, court services, schools, social services, health and mental health providers, and community-based organizations, including faith-based organizations. Promise Councils will develop a comprehensive plan (Promise Plan) for implementing evidence-based prevention and intervention strategies in their local community, reflective of the particular opportunities and challenges confronting the community. Finally, the Act will provide critical training and technical assistance to local law enforcement to help them more effectively and positively engage youth, and respond effectively and appropriately to risky or unlawful youth behavior.

The funds authorized under the Act will be given directly to units of local government or Indian Tribes and subject to local control. The strategies supported by the legislation will be targeted at young people who are at-risk of becoming involved or are involved in delinquent and criminal gang activity. The legislation redirects them toward productive and law-abiding alternatives. In addition, the proposed Act will strengthen the coordination of all federal prevention programs and further national research on evidenced-based and promising practices in delinquency and crime prevention. The legislation is supported by NACo, the National League of Cities and the U. S. Conference of Mayors.

Coordinated efforts of stakeholders in the juvenile justice system in a local community, together with other organizations and community members concerned with the safety and welfare of children, have a strong record of demonstrated success in reducing the impact of youth and gang-related crime and violence. Every dollar invested in prevention and early intervention programs can yield up to $13 in criminal justice costs-savings. In addition, investments in prevention and intervention programs for children and youth has been shown to lead to decreased youth arrests, decreased delinquency, lower recidivism and greater financial savings.

On December 2, 2009 the House Judiciary Committee voted to report the bill favorably to the whole House of Representatives by a vote of 17-14. In late December, Senator Feinstein attempted to convince members of the Senate to adopt the legislation by unanimous consent. The newly merged bill substitutes the Promise Act language for the Feinstein language devoted to crime prevention and intervention strategies while authorization levels were changed to “such


sums as necessary.” The U. S. Department of Justice has expressed its support for the new legislation.

While the legislation was not adopted by 111th Congress, lawmakers will likely reintroduce the legislation in the 112th Congress.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The prevention strategies outlined in the Act will save counties many millions of dollars.



LABOR & EMPLOYMENT


The National Association of Counties believes that county governments have a critical role to play in the planning, management and implementation of labor and employment laws, programs that govern county workplaces, and programs designed to prepare people for the world of work. Therefore, NACo supports the following principles.

● Local Authority: The federal government should not usurp or undermine the

authorities, responsibilities and obligations that are generally reserved to the states and localities with respect to labor and employment law.

● Workforce Development: The federal, state and local governments must work together to maintain an effective national workforce development system that addresses the workforce needs of job seekers, incumbent workers and employers, the appropriate alignment of resources and is designed, governed and implemented by a public-private partnership made up of local elected officials and local business leaders.

● Labor-Management Relations: County governments should continue to pursue positive labor-management relations in order to ensure that counties provide their workers with safe and meaningful employment and county workers contribute to the overall goals and objectives of the county for which they work.

● Employee Benefits: County elected officials should strive to develop employee benefit plans that are affordable, responsive to the needs and desires of county employees and reflect the values of the community, such as enhanced health care programs, adequate pension and retirement systems, long-term health care insurance, employee assistance programs, and other services that meet individual employee needs.

LOCAL AUTHORITY The Constitution of the United States sets out those responsibilities specifically given to

the federal government and those retained by the states and the people. When appropriate, the federal government should legislate on the labor, employment and workforce development needs of the nation. However, the federal government should refrain from pre-empting those aspects of labor law that remain the responsibility and obligation of states and local governments.

WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT The National Association of Counties supports a consolidated national workforce

development system that is funded by the federal government through a single block grant to states and localities. The alignment of these resources should be decided by state and local officials and business leaders working through a public-private partnership. In the event of an international crisis, NACo believes that full funding for workforce development programs will be critical to ensure economic viability through the duration of the crisis.

Access to workforce development programs should be universal without respect to economic circumstance, gender, race, ethnicity, or national origin. Local governments should have the authority to implement these programs and to determine the range of services provided and the priority populations that should receive these services. Particularly during times of


increasing job loss and difficult budgets, local elected officials must have the authority to bring resources together at the local level to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the workforce system. NACo believes this alignment can only effectively occur with local elected officials at city and county levels.

NACo also encourages the federal government to provide a stable funding mechanism to make available long-term skills training for every worker dislocated due to industry shut downs and businesses that relocate off shore.

Local workforce development areas and states should be granted broad waiver authority to creatively respond to the employment, economic development and welfare issues confronting states and localities. Requests for waivers should be developed jointly by local elected officials and workforce development boards, should be limited to the delivery of program services and the allocation of funds to different activities and must receive the approval of governors and state workforce boards before they can be enacted.

The principal goals of the national workforce development system should be to enhance business and economic development, to reduce local unemployment rates, increase local workforce participation rates, enhance incomes, and ensure that all individuals obtain a livable wage.

Workforce development programs should be developed, implemented and overseen at the city, county or multi-county levels by city or county elected officials and local workforce investment boards. The latter should be appointed by the chief local elected official or officials for the local workforce investment area based upon recommendations from representatives of the business community, and should be comprised mainly of business community representatives. Regardless of population, counties and cities or consortia of counties and cities with histories of effective workforce development activities should be eligible for automatic designation.

County governments should have the flexibility, through their local planning process and in cooperation with local workforce investment boards, to merge Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) programs and local Workforce Investment Act (WIA) programs into a single entity.

The national workforce development system should integrate and consolidate the disparate federal, state and local training and employment programs into a single program whose services are delivered through a locally established and governed one-stop delivery system. Workforce development programs, and programs included in the one-stop delivery system should contribute to the development and implementation of the national workforce development system through direct contribution; state collected and allocated resources, or direct congressional funding.

The federal and state governments should not operate training and employment programs or provide direct client services, such as those offered under the Wagner-Peyser Act. The federal government should interpret federal law through regulations and when necessary arbitrate disagreements between state and local officials. It should also supply sufficient resources to ensure that states and localities are able to achieve the goals and objectives of the law. Funding across the states and workforce development programs should be equitable and based upon a formula that reflects state and local fiscal needs. New federal training and employment programs, additional funding or additional program guidance to should be done as part of the block grant program, and should retain and utilize existing governance structures to avoid program duplication and confusion.


State governments in partnership with local workforce investment boards, should develop plans and strategies that address the states’ broader economic goals and align state resources to support local delivery of programs and services.

Local workforce areas should be given the authority to develop programs that meet the needs of employers and employees alike. This should include the flexibility to develop sector-based, incumbent worker, and other specialized training services that respond to local economic development policies and business needs. Local workforce programs should assist structurally and cyclically unemployed individuals acquire marketable job skills that lead to employment and economic self-sufficiency; young people obtain those skills necessary to make the transition to work; and business and industry meet their needs for qualified and skilled workers. Local workforce programs should be permitted to provide public sector employment during periods of high unemployment or long-term unemployment.

Local workforce development programs should maintain high standards of accountability and responsibility and rely on “return on investment” and “customer satisfaction” strategies as well as appropriate regression models to determine program benefits and ensure that special populations are adequately served. Local elected officials and local workforce boards should be given the authorities needed to ensure that these programs maintain high standards of accountability and responsibility.

Each local workforce development area should be under the direction of one or more local elected officials and a local workforce development board appointed by local elected officials. At a minimum, local elected officials should:

● Appoint and certify local workforce development boards; ● Participate in the development and approval of local workforce development plans

and programs in partnership with local workforce development boards; ● Approve all grant recipients including those designated to provide one-stop system

services; ● Oversee and evaluate all workforce development and one-stop system programs in

partnership with their workforce development boards; and ● Manage fiscal resources, in co-operation with local workforce development boards.

At a minimum, local workforce development boards should: ● Be comprised primarily of representatives of the private sector and labor; ● Be chaired by a representative of the private sector; ● Involve public partners in an advisory capacity; ● Develop, with elected officials, fiscal management procedures; ● Develop the local workforce development plan and programs in partnership with

local elected officials; ● Establish and oversee the one-stop career center system within their workforce

development area; and ● Perform oversight, evaluation, and return on investment studies.

States should have a limited, but important role in the delivery of workforce development services. States should:

● Provide local labor market information; ● Provide technical assistance and guidance; ● Develop a statewide workforce development plan that can guide local workforce

development areas as they develop their plans;


● Provide capacity building services; ● Develop, operate and support a statewide information management system; and ● Develop performance standards that may be used as the basis for rewards to or

sanctions of local workforce development programs.

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS A. Collective Bargaining—NACo opposes national legislation that would require states

and localities to bargain collectively. Each state legislature should decide this issue based upon local conditions and circumstances.

NACo urges all state legislatures to enact labor-management legislation that would: ● Grant public employees the right to organize and freely choose their representatives; ● Require public employers to meet and negotiate with public employees through their

bargaining unit; ● Protect the rights of public employers, public employees and the public at-large; ● Cover all permanent, non-supervisory employees of state and local governments; ● Exclude temporary, supervisory, managerial, confidential and elected employees; ● Grant public employees the right to bargain collectively for wages, hours, fringe

benefits, and related conditions of employment; ● Establish procedural mechanisms that ensure that the broadest and most

comprehensive bargaining unit is identified through secret ballots, under adequate supervision that can address impasses;

● Prohibit strikes but provides for reasonable means to resolve disputes; and ● Grant localities the right to pass appropriate ordinances in the absence of state laws.

B. Equal Employment Opportunity—NACo believes that county governments have a vital and continuing interest in the development, maintenance, and extension of vigorous and effective civil rights policies within the workplace. Therefore, counties are:

● Enforcing and applying all laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race,

gender, sexual orientation, disability and age; ● Removing all barriers to the recruitment, selection, hiring, compensation, provision of

pensions and benefits, promotion, transfer, or discharge of employees that have no relationship to standards of performance;

● Developing and carrying out affirmative action programs for minority groups, disabled persons, and women; and

● Establishing employment programs that benefit disadvantaged county residents.

NACo supports equal pay for equal work and urges all counties to undertake a thorough review of their various job classifications and pay scales to ensure that they are equitable, justifiable, and fairly account for positions historically dominated by women.

C. Occupational Safety and Health—NACo supports efforts to establish state and local occupational safety and health standards. States should retain regulatory and enforcement responsibility, but counties and other units of local government should be allowed to play a larger enforcement role.

D. Fair Labor Standards Act—The National Association of Counties believes that the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is not relevant to the modern workplace, and has a profoundly


negative impact on local governments with respect to the management and operations of county employees and operations. Initially, the FLSA and regulations did not apply to state and local governments. However, the Supreme Court did rule in the Garcia decision that the FLSA does apply to state and local governments.

Implementation of the FLSA at the state and local level has been problematic. While the FLSA recognizes the unique working conditions required for some public safety employees, it does not recognize the unique working conditions required for others like emergency medical technicians. Furthermore, recent court decisions have upheld the applicability to local governments of the FLSA, without consideration for the fiscal integrity of county governments.

NACo urges Congress to enact legislation that would: ● Eliminate any retroactive financial liability resulting from FLSA claims from

management employees for overtime pay; ● Require that the Secretary of Labor develop a separate set of regulations for the

public sector; ● Amend the salary basis so that consideration is given to the accountability of public

officials for tax-financed salaries; ● Apply the same time and attendance requirements governing all federal employees to

state and local employees; ● Grant the “7k” exemption to all emergency medical technicians regardless of their

connection to fire departments; ● Permit states and localities to discipline “salaried” state and local employees by

suspending them for less than one week without losing their overtime exemption; and ● Allow public employees to volunteer their time and services of their own free will

during periods of natural disaster without being subject to overtime rules.

E. Davis-Bacon—The Davis-Bacon Act was designed to ensure that workers on federally-subsidized construction projects receive the prevailing wage for a specific construction job whether they are part of a union or not. NACo believes that federal implementation of the Davis-Bacon Act has caused construction costs to soar, and to make county construction projects substantially more expensive than they need to be.

Therefore, NACo urges Congress to make the following reforms to the Davis-Bacon Act:

● Regular county workers should be exempt from Davis-Bacon coverage; ● Determination of the prevailing wage should be based upon a 50 percent or majority

rule, rather than the current 30 percent rule. ● Allow state and local governments to employ “helpers” in the same ratio used in non-

Davis-Bacon Act construction; ● Utilize county boundaries, generally, when determining local wage rates; ● Prohibit the use of urban wage data in rural areas, and vice versa; ● Raise the $2000 threshold to $500,000, and index this threshold based upon the

consumer price index; and ● Waive Davis-Bacon regulations in states where there are state established labor rates

for public construction projects.

EMPLOYEE BENEFITS A. Social Security and Medicare—NACo believes that participation in Social Security

and Medicare should be optional for state and local public sector workers and should be based on


the efficacy and soundness of state or local public employee retirement systems. Efforts to fund and improve Social Security and Medicare should not rely on the mandatory participation of state and local workers.

Further, NACo believes that there should be no federal restrictions on the maintenance or initiation of separate or supplementary retirement, health or disability systems.

B. Pension and Retirement Benefits—NACo believes that all counties should provide all county employees with adequate pension and retirement benefits that are governed by county elected officials and which are exempt from tax and regulatory burdens. County pension plans should be required to fully disclose all plan information.

NACo also believes that counties should implement strong fiduciary standards, prudent investment practices, sound funding procedures, and equitable vesting requirements. NACo supports the continuation of deferred compensation (457) plans for county employees. County employees should be able to utilize these plans to adequately provide for their own retirements.

NACo supports full portability of retirement benefits between all types of retirement plans and opposes any policy that would eliminate or limit the special features of state and local governmental retirement plans.

NACo supports pension reforms that would: ● Simplify county compliance with Section 415 of the Internal Revenue Code; ● Increase IRA limits and catch-up contributions to public sector plans; ● Allow for tax-free withdrawals for charitable purposes; ● Continue employer-sponsored 457 deferred compensation plans for county employees

and increase benefit and contribution limits; ● Simplify rollover procedures between all types of plans; and ● Permit the purchase of service credits in governmental defined benefit plans.

C. Workers' Compensation—Workers' Compensation laws must remain the prerogative of individual state legislatures.

D. Employee Assistance Programs—NACo supports employee assistance programs that are designed to reduce absences from work and increase worker productivity. Employee assistance programs may address, but should not be limited to, alcohol and drug abuse, financial hardship, divorce, dysfunctional family relationships and dysfunctional employees.

E. Leave without Pay—NACo supports family and medical leave programs that permit county employees to attend to family and medical matters without the threat of the loss of one's job or the loss of benefits or seniority. NACo also supports leave programs for county and other elected officials so that they may attend to their elected official duties without fear of termination, deductions from existing leave accounts, poor performance ratings or loss of other benefits.


LABOR & EMPLOYMENT RESOLUTIONS

Resolution in Support of Allocating Maximum Funding to Local Workforce Areas Issue: Allocate maximum funding to local areas and not divert funds from formula

programs. Adopted Policy: DOL should allocate as much funding as possible to local workforce

service areas (including states) with strict guidelines for re-allocating funds from states who are under-spending.

Background: DOL is taking a percentage of Workforce Investment Act (WIA) formula funds and putting them into a special fund for targeted projects to be allocated via a competitive process. While competition is good, the diverting of formula funds during the time of extreme demand for services through the youth, adult, and dislocated worker programs leaves many citizens unnecessarily un-served. It also deviates from the intent of the formula funding.

If states have not spent/obligated/accrued/accrued 80 percent of their formula funding within one year, the difference between the under-expenditures and the 80 percent baseline should be re-allocated to states that are over the 80 percent threshold.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: Preventing the diverting of funds from formula funds to special projects provides more funding to individuals served through the WIA programs whether they’re in rural or urban areas. Areas that are under-spending their allocations could have those funds re-allocated.


Resolution in Support for Public Health Workforce Programs Issue: Public Health Workforce Programs. Adopted Policy: NACo supports workforce policies and funding priorities for public

health workforce programs, which are responsive to both the supply of public health workers and the demand for their skills in urban and rural areas, to ensure that programs are appropriately tailored to the unique configuration of needs and resources in each state and in each local jurisdiction.

Background: Today our Nation faces a widening gap between challenges to improve the health of Americans and the capacity of the public health workforce to meet those challenges. Health care workers represent roughly 12 percent of the American labor force. While these workers strive to provide high quality care and make important contributions, there are growing concerns that the U.S. does not have a sufficient supply of health care professionals to meet the demands of a changing and aging population.

As the population continues to age, a shortage of health care workers will become increasingly problematic. According to the Health Resources and Services Administration, the number of American's over age 65 is projected to increase by 50 percent, between 2005 and 2020. During the same period, the number of physicians is projected to grow only 16 percent. An inadequate physician supply will not only affect the elderly, but also the 20 percent of American's who live in underserved communities and already struggle to obtain access to medical care. Currently, one in five American's lives in a primary medical care Health Professional Shortage Area (HPSA). Left unresolved, the workforce challenges will undermine the ability of this important and dedicated workforce to protect the public's health.

As America's workforce system is shifting from responding to the needs of the individual job seeker to responding to workforce needs in the local economy, and skills demanded by industry, local workforce boards have made continuous strides--despite decreased funding--to


address the public health workforce shortage through recruitment and retention programs, pipeline development, and training through apprenticeship and curriculum based programs.

Workforce Investment Boards have worked in partnership with area hospitals, nursing homes, community health centers, home health programs and community colleges to develop recruitment and retention programs that would bring new public health workers into the pipeline by advancing training programs through fast-track training, career coaching, support services, and targeted outreach to youth and older workers. Local workforce agencies have also increased education and training programs that will enable public health workers to sustain the skills and competencies to perform in an evolving public health environment

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Today our nation faces a widening gap between challenges to improve the health of Americans and the capacity of the public health workforce to meet those challenges. Workforce policies and funding priorities for public health workforce training must be responsive to both the supply of public health workers and the demand for their skills, to ensure that programs are appropriately tailored to the unique configuration of needs and resources in each state and in each local jurisdiction.

Ultimately, a comprehensive approach to the shortage is needed. Implementing federally funded student loan repayment and scholarships programs, coupled with additional investments in leadership development, recruitment, and training and education would constitute a major and much- needed step in the right direction.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution in Support of Streamlining the Department of Labor’s National Emergency Grant Process

Issue: Streamlining of National Emergency Grant (NEG) process . Adopted Policy: The Department of Labor (DOL) should provide decisions to applicant

agencies within 30 calendar days—and at the minimum adhere to current policy of providing decisions to applicant agencies within 30 business days; Issue Notice of Obligations (NOO) within 3 business days of issuing the NEG; and Streamline the application and reporting requirements and share information across agencies.

Background: DOL has policies in place regarding the timing of issuing their decisions on National Emergency Grants. It’s vitally important to have those decisions made as quickly as possible in order to serve clients seeking services. Equally important to the timing of the decision is the issuance of the NOO to the applicant(s) as the document provides the official parameters of the grant as approved by DOL.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: Any area that’s an applicant – whether urban or rural – would benefit from a faster turnaround of the NEG decisions and issuance of NOOs.


Resolution on Funding for Workforce Development Programs Issue: Fully fund Workforce Investment Act Programs. Adopted Policy: NACo strongly urges Congress to continue its support of the local

workforce system by funding Workforce Investment Act (WIA) programs for fiscal year 2012, at least at 2006 levels, adjusted for inflation.

Background: The percentage of unemployed workers in many of our counties has more than doubled in less than a year, and has, in fact, tripled in some counties. These figures, which represent more than 13. 8 million unemployed Americans, clearly indicate an economy in crisis.


This issue coupled with an aging current workforce and unemployment rates as high as 58 percent among the Nation’s youth ages 16-24 do not bode well for America’s economic future.

More than ever, workforce funding is needed to retool and retrain America's workforce to prepare unemployed and dislocated workers to meet the demands of America’s evolving business and industries. Additionally, cuts in workforce funding over the past 10 years have resulted in the availability of inadequate resources to support meaningful programs for our youth – connecting them to occupations and careers that will provide them with an opportunity to earn a living/family wage.

WIA funds at the local level are critical so that local workforce areas can maintain programs and restore the innovative services developed in response to the business sector, whose demand for highly skilled workers continues to grow and to the millions of workers impacted by job losses. This program acts as the procurer of intelligence and services, leveraging resources across a variety of partners and programs at the community level, to meet the demands of America’s business sector as well as economic development efforts. Continued disinvestment in this system is undermining the best laid plans of many counties and regions across the Nation.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: As the unemployment rate remains high and the time spent unemployed is one of the longest since the depression, the demand for WIA services will continue to increase. A decade of cuts to the funding streams for local workforce programs have severely restricted the access of job seekers to employment and training services and are making it even more difficult for businesses to secure the skilled workers they need to thrive in this global economy; thus having a negative impact on local economies.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act

Issue: Reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act. Adopted Policy: NACo urges Congress to modify the Workforce Investment Act (WIA)

to ensure its continued effectiveness in addressing the needs of all of America's workers this congressional session. NACo believes that modifications to WIA should be minimal and efforts to reform the Act should be limited to those issues likely to enhance and maintain the program both for employers and workers.

Background: Congress has the option of reauthorizing the Workforce Investment Act during the 112th Congress. It is imperative that Congress finish reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act this session so as not to sacrifice the congressional expertise and experience represented in the House and Senate. NACo believes that modifications to the Act should be minimal. The Act was first adopted in 1998 and was only fully operational as of program year 2000.

The purpose of the Act was to create a seamless single local delivery system with workforce services delivered through a system of co-located one stop centers and eliminate duplicative programs across numerous federal agencies. During this time, local areas have worked hard to develop and implement programs that would respond to the needs of workers and employers alike. According to independent researchers like the General Accountability Office, workforce programs are making substantial progress in this regard.

To minimize any negative impacts on workforce development efforts at the state and local levels, NACo believes that the following principles should be adhered to during the reauthorization process:


1. The local public-private partnership as established under current law should be maintained. Decisions about how the partnership should be implemented at the local level should be left to local elected officials and local workforce boards in consultation with states.

2. The federal-state-local relationship currently established by the Workforce Investment Act should be maintained to ensure the appropriate levels of planning authority and accountability.

3. Appointment of the local workforce investment boards should remain the province of chief local elected officials. Governors should continue to certify local workforce investment boards, but only after local elected officials, working with representatives of the business community, identify the appropriate individuals to serve on the board.

4. Local one-stop centers should remain under the guidance and jurisdiction of local chief elected officials and local workforce investment boards. These one-stop centers should be accountable to the local chief elected official for all monies spent to prevent the misuse of public funds.

5. The vast majority of funds allotted to states should be allocated by formula to local workforce investment areas. Where appropriate, the Congress should make adjustments to the formulae in order to achieve a more balanced and equitable distribution of funds. The reallocation authority currently given to governors should be retained.

6. The percentage of private sector representatives on the local workforce investment boards should be increased and the number and percentage of public sector representatives, especially the mandatory partners, should be reduced substantially or eliminated, though they may serve ex-officio, at the discretion of the local chief elected official. Representatives from these public agencies may be asked to participate in meetings when issues relevant to them arise; however, the decision-making authority on the local workforce investment boards should rest with the private sector. NACo believes that the public-private partnership is represented by the partnership that is forged between the local chief elected official and his or her local workforce investment board. Decisions made by these two entities represent the public-private partnership at work.

7. Local workforce investment area plans should be developed jointly by the local chief elected official and the local workforce investment board within broad policy and programmatic guidelines developed by the governor and the state workforce investment boards. Local workforce investment areas and states should be granted broad waiver authority to creatively respond to the employment, economic development and welfare issues confronting states and localities. Requests for waivers should be developed jointly by local elected officials and workforce investment boards, should be limited to the delivery of program services and the allocation of funds to different activities and must receive the approval of governors and state board before they can be enacted.

8. Separate and distinct funding for the local one-stop system should be provided at the national level or from each of the mandatory partners. Where the state collected the latter, these funds should be collected by the states and all of these funds should


be distributed to local areas based upon the formulae used to distribute program funds.

9. Youth programs for in- and out-of school youth should continue to be developed and funded by local workforce investment boards acting in consort with their local chief elected officials. Funds for these programs should continue to be allocated to local areas. They should be used in part to address the needs of students making the transition from school to work and to assist those students no longer in school develop the skills they need to enter the world of work.

10. The performance standards and measures should be modified substantially and should focus on program outcomes and customer satisfaction.

11. The American Graduation Initiative and any other workforce development initiative that should come under the WIA system, with guidance and oversight of local chief elected officials, and local WIB board members.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: WIA is guided by the private sector, with a proven track record for the development and implementation of innovative services that connect people to work, careers and business and industry to the talent pool necessary to prosper.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on State WIA Plans

Issue: State Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Plans. Adopted Policy: NACo urges the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Department of Labor to

ensure that state governors adhere to the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) statutory and regulatory requirements regarding renewal of state and local WIA plans.

Background: In several instances, state governors have attempted to dilute or eliminate the role of the local workforce investment system through new waivers requests via the state WIA plans submitted to the Labor Department in 2005. These plans do not include the proper input or the process of consultation with local elected officials and local workforce investment boards as required under the Workforce Investment Act legislation. Therefore, these particular plans appear to be an attempt to circumvent the intent and letter of the law under WIA.

NACo urges DOL not to approve any state WIA plan submitted by a governor that circumvents federal laws and consolidates or eliminates any local workforce areas without meaningful input and support from the local elected officials. NACo further urges Congress and the Labor Department to uphold a state's current WIA plan in the event a state governor subsequently submits a plan that is contrary to the intent, policy and procedures of the Workforce Investment Act legislation.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Actions taken undermine and eliminate locals' authority and input into the workforce investment system. Potentially alienates local businesses and hampers the process of matching jobseekers with employers.


Resolution in Support of Improving the Department of Labor’s Response to Local Workforce Reporting Standards

Issue: Improving Department of Labor’s (DOL) responsiveness to local workforce issues such as reporting standards.

Adopted Policy: DOL should simplify and clarify its fiscal reporting system and allow monthly data to be submitted.


Background: DOL has unclear guidelines about the definitions of the various fiscal categories (expenditures, accruals, obligations, encumbrances) that local workforce areas and state agencies are to use. The lack of clarity in turn makes it a challenge for agencies at any level to be consistent in what they report to DOL; thus the agency does not have a clear picture of the fiscal realities at local or state levels.

Additionally, since DOL only sees quarterly financial reports, they don’t have a clear understanding of local workforce areas’ fiscal status. Many local areas submit monthly fiscal reports to states.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: By having consistent definitions, and more accurate data, DOL will be better situated to understand fiscal realities facing urban and rural areas and allocate funding appropriately.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Supporting the Goals of NACo’S Veterans and Military Service Task Force with Respect to Job Training and Access to Employment Services

Issue: Veterans access to job training and employment services. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the goals of the NACo Veterans and Military Service

Task Force (VMSTF) to develop county best practices and policies that serve to promote job training and employment services to veterans and military service members.

Background: NACo has convened a Veterans and Military Service Task Force (VMSTF) to engage and highlight county best practices and policies to promote innovative programs, services and benefits for our nation’s military, veterans and their families. Among the key objectives is to highlight best practices and policies in employment services and access to employment.

The goal of the NACo Veterans and Military Service Task Force (VMSTF) is to engage NACo and its members to develop and highlight county best practices and policies to promote innovative programs, services and benefits for our nation’s military, veterans and their families. Program integration will include coordination with veterans’ service organizations and appropriate federal and state government agencies to highlight key NACo objectives, including the County Government Works campaign.

In order to include veterans and military service issues in health and human service planning, delivery, coordination and outreach, the Task Force will focus primarily on best practices and policies in four subject areas:

1. Physical and mental health, substance abuse, suicide prevention; 2. Housing and homelessness; 3. Employment services and access to employment; and 4. Justice including law enforcement, courts and probation.

The U.S. Department of Labor, Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS) offers employment and training services to eligible veterans.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Increasing access to job training and employment services for veterans and military service members.



Resolution on Infrastructure Funding for Local One-Stop Centers

Issue: Dedicated infrastructure funding for local One-Stop Career Centers. Adopted Policy: NACo supports providing dedicated infrastructure funding for the

facilities and operations of Local One- Stop Career Centers. Background: The primary way for one-stops to pay for infrastructure costs is by taking

allocations of programs and negotiating with local partners. The reality of this is that it takes funding away from intended program recipients. Additionally, the allocation approach can create disincentives for partnerships.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: All areas would benefit from the dedicated funding. Adopted July 19, 2011


PUBLIC LANDS STATEMENT OF BASIC PHILOSOPHY

NACo, its Western Interstate Region, state associations of counties and individual county governments have a critical role in policy development, planning and management of federal land.

The federal government has long recognized and accepted that federal land holdings are a burden on local governments, and that funding is necessary for local governments to provide the types of services needed to access and use those lands.

NACo believes that environmental and socioeconomic values must be balanced and supports a philosophy of management which allows diversity of activities on public lands and local economies.

Federal agencies must coordinate their management of public lands consistent with local land use plans or management policies. I. FEDERAL LAND MANAGEMENT

A. FEDERAL LAND OWNERSHIP Federal real property holdings should be appropriately managed. Congress should provide adequate and appropriate funding to support staffing, maintenance, research and operational needs of the federal land management agencies. Acquisition of new land by any federal agency should be subject to consultation with the county in which the land is located. Extension of jurisdiction outside established management area boundaries such as integral vistas or buffer zones should meet the same criteria. Criteria for the transfer, sale or acquisition of public lands shall include consideration of fair market value, consultation with appropriate counties and jurisdictions, and public values. Counties should be fully involved as affected partners in any process to consider the disposal, transfer or purchase of public lands or acquisition of private lands to become public within a county's jurisdiction, and counties should be given the opportunity to participate in the development of terms and conditions of any such proposal before it is carried out.

B. SPECIAL USE DESIGNATIONS Congress and Federal agencies shall consult and confer with affected counties as early as

possible when considering special land use designations that impact the use and status of public lands. Counties should be fully involved in the drafting and development of any bills pertaining to wilderness designation within any affected county's jurisdiction. Public hearings must be held in the counties affected by the proposed designation. There must be compliance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NACo opposes legislative efforts to require inventoried roadless areas (USDA Forest Service) to be managed in accordance with the 2001 Roadless Area Rule (January 12, 2001). NACo opposes Federal land management agency actions that limit access and multiple use of lands that otherwise would be available to the public (i.e. defacto wilderness).

C. ACCESS NACo supports maintaining and enhancing public access to public lands; and opposes

road closures, road decommissioning, moratoria against road building and other limiting policies


and practices without coordination and consistency with county land use plans or management policies. NACo recognizes the importance of the system of roads and rights-of-way across federal lands established under R.S. 2477. The current Administration does not have authority to make binding administrative determinations about county RS 2477 rights. Instead, the Administration should work cooperatively with local officials to obtain Judicial or Congressional recognition of county 2477 rights of way claims on federal land. This road recognition process should be clear and consistent and give high priority to public safety, private property and public access. We oppose any federal action designed to change or diminish the scope of these rights.

D. WATER NACo believes in state primacy in water resources administration, management, and

allocation. Before any decision is made to continue drawdowns, removal or breaching of dams, a full review of all the relevant scientific and socioeconomic implications of such actions should be made and affected counties consulted.

NACo supports changes in current federal policy to provide the option to use mechanized equipment for maintenance of dams within designated Wilderness areas and Wilderness Study Areas (WSA).

E. DOMESTIC LIVESTOCK GRAZING NACo supports the enhancement of a viable rangeland livestock industry as an essential

component of our country's economy and as vital to affected communities. Good grazing practices are beneficial to maintaining rangeland health and assist in reducing potential fire danger by keeping fuel loading to a manageable level. NACo supports the development and implementation of alternative grazing allotment management procedures including categorical exclusions for “no change of use permit” renewals on transfers to streamline the process and reduce cost to the taxpayer associated with rangeland management decisions.

NACo expresses disapproval of certain civil actions brought against the livestock industry and federal land management agencies that are intended solely to prevent livestock grazing on public lands when final decisions are made by the appropriate federal agency regarding grazing allotments after cooperative efforts to determine best land-use practices have been made.

F. WILD HORSE AND BURRO MANAGEMENT The National Association of Counties urges support for the BLM in its management of

wild horse and burro populations to achieve appropriate management levels (AML) as authorized by the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 (as amended). Further, NACo supports the sale, adoption or humane slaughter of excess animals as viable options to achieve populations consistent with established appropriate management levels.

G. MINERAL, OIL, AND GAS DEVELOPMENT NACo supports comprehensive mineral, gas and oil development laws that address the

needs of the extraction industries, the affected counties and the environment.


H. FOREST AND RANGELAND HEALTH NACo supports forest health initiatives to address the threat of catastrophic events to our

public forest and rangeland resources. Federal Land Management agencies shall utilize an appropriate mix of management practices, and increased private, local, and state contracts and partnerships for pre-fire management, effective fire suppression, and restoration of federal forest and rangelands.

I. NOXIOUS WEEDS NACo calls for a coordinated, integrated weed management effort by federal land

agencies, states and counties.

J. MILITARY INSTALLATIONS Recognizing the value counties and military installations bring to each other and their

complex and sometimes competing needs, NACo supports establishment of open, consistent and long term joint planning processes to help both communities co-exist and continue to thrive together. Early engagement, close cooperation and joint coordination of community and military development plans are essential to minimize potential impacts. Affected counties shall be entitled to cooperating agency status for military initiatives under NEPA, while counties shall seek similar input from military installations.

II. FEDERAL LAND PAYMENTS

A. PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES (PILT) NACo supports the full funding of the PILT program at its yearly authorized level and

supports legislative and/or administrative efforts to modify the program to make payments to counties on a basis equitable to both the Federal and local taxpayer that are non-discriminatory in nature.

Because this program does not compensate counties for military lands that are also exempt from local taxes, a new and separate system of payments-in-lieu-of-taxes should be created for such facilities to compensate the affected counties.

B. RESOURCE REVENUE SHARING PAYMENTS Counties must share in the benefits of economic activity on public lands through statutory

formulas, which guarantee a percentage of all gross receipts to be returned to the counties where the activity occurs. NACo opposes any attempts to lessen the revenue sharing receipts.

NACo supports amending the Federal Mineral Leasing Act so that an additional five percent from the Federal portion (50 percent) of mineral lease revenue is returned to the county from where the mineral was extracted, and the historic balance of the 50/50 split be restored.

C. SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY SELF-DETERMINATION ACT

NACo supports the reauthorization and enhancement of the Secure Rural Schools program (PL 110-343). Reauthorization should maintain coupling between payments to counties and active natural resource management; and the connection between sustainable natural resource management and the stability and well being of forest counties and communities.


D. Compensation to Counties by Concessionaires Operating on Federal Lands NACo supports federal policies that directs Federal land management agencies to provide

that all concessionaires, or enhanced-use -lease lessees who operate businesses on Federally owned land, compensate local taxing jurisdictions equal to the property taxes that are otherwise paid by any other commercial business in the county.

III. FEDERAL LAND USE PLANNING A. COMMUNITY BASED LAND MANAGEMENT

NACo supports community based conservation initiatives and calls on the agencies to implement such initiatives. Federal land management agencies should use broad based vegetation management practices, in conjunction with community based partnerships for ecosystem management, to enhance the health of the public lands.

B. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT NACo recognizes the importance of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as an essential

safeguard for America's fish, wildlife and plants and therefore supports updating and improving it to better achieve its goals.

C. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Improvement NACo supports the revision of NEPA to strengthen the involvement of local government

in the federal decision making process, to increase public involvement for local communities, to expedite project analysis and to make those decisions in a timely but effective manner. NACo supports requiring federal agencies offer to coordinate with and offer cooperating agency status to local governments, and negotiate mutually agreeable MOU’s.

D. GATEWAY COMMUNITIES NACo recognizes counties as gateway communities to our nation’s federal lands and that

the economies and ecologies of county, state and federal governments in gateway regions are interwoven. NACo believes that diverse recreation and tourism opportunities are critical to counties and their communities. Furthermore, NACo recognizes that federal policies frequently drive significant impacts to gateway communities and the services they provide to visitors to ensure their pleasure, safety and comfort.

E. CURRENT FUTURE FEDERAL LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY LAND

MANAGEMENT PLAN REVISIONS Federal Land Management Agencies should coordinate with local government officials

and maintain maximum consistency with local plans and policies when undergoing current and future revisions of RMPs and Forest Management Plans. Counties should be full cooperating agencies in such processes and be provided meaningful opportunity for involvement in the revision process from start to finish. Once land management agency plans are approved management practices or policies, new agency actions should not contradict those plans.


PUBLIC LANDS RESOLUTIONS Resolution Opposing Delay in Issuance of Oil and Gas Drilling Permits

Issue: Issuance of drilling permits in gulf area and waters. Adopted Policy: NACo strongly supports domestic energy production and recognizes that U.S. independence from foreign oil also requires expanded alternative and renewable resources and U.S independence from foreign oil. NACo urges the Obama Administration to safely and thoughtfully release permits in a timely fashion, so as to begin to overcome the devastation to our economy. Background: The devastating BP Gulf oil spill has wreaked havoc on the gulf area economies, the oil and gas industries, the seafood industries and indirectly the nation’s ability to gain greater independence from foreign oil and gas. Immediately following the BP oil spill, the Obama Administration placed a moratorium on all oil and gas drilling in the gulf area and waters. This caused an already struggling economy to dive into a deeper recession, and forced many operators to close or relocate. After much urging the administration finally lifted the moratorium, but delayed the issuance of any new permits, effectively continuing the moratorium. President Obama stated plainly that the U.S. must do everything in its power to reduce our nation’s dependence on foreign oil, and pursue and encourage alternative and renewable resources and energy. NACo strongly agrees, but understands that this cannot be achieved in any meaningful proportion overnight, and its delay only contributes to our dependence on foreign oil. Current U.S. oil and gas reserves and untapped deposits if developed, would immediately lower our dependence on foreign oil and lower the cost of fuel. This would save our citizens billions in extremely high fuel costs. NACo feels that every effort to support and encourage alternative and renewable energy and resources should be pursued, while at the same time taking advantage of the available oil and gas that exists within our own country. This serves to strengthen our independence from foreign oil and gas. NACo urges the Obama Administration to safely and thoughtfully begin releasing permits in a timely fashion, so as to begin to restore the devastation to our economy.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The oil and gas industries are critical to the Gulf States and their economies and have a direct impact on the nation’s economy, in terms of inflated fuel prices, unemployment, and dependence on foreign oil and gas.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Calling for the Membership of the Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board to be Expanded to Include a County Elected Official Issue: The Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board does not have a county elected official as a member. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the expansion of the membership of the Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board to include an elected county official from a county directly impacted by the policies governing the management of wild horses and burros on public lands. Background: The charter of the Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board states that the objectives and scope of the board is to:

• Assist and advise the Secretary of the Interior, through the Director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the Secretary of Agriculture, through the Chief of the Forest Service, on wild horse and burro policy formulation and oversight of the Wild


Horse and Burro (WH&B) Program administered under the provisions of the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act (16 U.S.C. 1331-1340) (Act).

The membership of the Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board (WHBAB) currently is comprised of individuals representing Wild Horse and Burro Advocacy, Livestock Management (2), Humane Advocacy, Veterinary Medicine, Wildlife Management, Wild Horse and Burro Research and Public Interest. On October 7, 2009, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar announced an initiative “proposing to develop new approaches that will require bold efforts from the Administration and from Congress to put this program on a more sustainable track, enhance the conservation for these iconic animals, and provide better value for the taxpayer.” Bureau of Land Management Director Bob Abbey announced on June 3, 2010 that the BLM “is taking the Federal Wild Horse and Burro Program in an unprecedented new direction, and is seeking in-depth public comment on a Strategy Development Document implementing Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar’s Wild Horse and Burro Initiative.” The press release also noted that the “BLM is seeking public input over a 60-day comment period.” This period expired July 31, 2010. A Wild Horse and Burro Draft Strategy workshop was held in Denver on June 14, 2010 seeking questions and comments from the public and various stakeholder groups. The manner in which wild horses and burros are managed has, like other public land management policies, a direct impact on counties where these animals live. Counties support the maintenance of sustainable, healthy populations of these “symbols of the American West” on public lands. However, these herds must be managed in a manner that does not harm the resource or negate the multiple use of these lands. It is apparent that the Bureau of Land Management, in order to comply with Secretary Salazar’s initiative, will be making changes to the policies that govern the Wild Horse and Burro Program. It is vital that counties have a voice in the formulation of these new policies. Fiscal/Urban/Rural/Impacts: The adoption of well-intended but misguided policies for the management of wild horses and burros on public lands that lead to restrictions on other uses of these lands would negatively impact the counties in which these animals exist. Recreational activities on public lands as well as agriculture and livestock operations could be limited or eliminated creating harm to both the economy’s and quality of life of rural counties. Adding the voice of an elected county official to the Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board, the Board responsible for assisting and advising the Director of the Bureau of Land Management on the development of the management policies, is critical and necessary to achieve sound policy regarding the management of wild horse and burro populations.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Federal Forest Carbon Sequestration Revenues

Issue: Revenues from the sale of carbon sequestration projects on federal lands are a potential source of revenue diversification, especially for hard hit timber counties.

Adopted Policy: If Congress enacts climate change or cap and trade legislation, legislation should include carbon sequestration on federal forest lands as a new source of revenue through revenue sharing to counties.

Background: Federal forest lands in Oregon cover almost 50 percent of the state. Under federal statutes, counties in Oregon receive a share of timber harvest revenue to fund local schools, roads, and provide support to discretionary funds. With the dramatic decline in timber harvests in Oregon resulting from the downturn in the timber economy, there has been continued


uncertainty with regards to replacing historic revenue levels that drove state and local tax policy, provided employment security, and provided a vast array of public services.

Since the late 1990’s a variety of federal acts have attempted to replace timber revenues. With each passing Congress, the efforts to secure this funding become harder and harder, and the amounts authorized for counties becomes less and less. This has resulted in severe local budget cutbacks and threatens the ability for counties to remain solvent.

Concurrent to the downturn in federal harvest levels, there has been an increasing recognition for the role forests play in terms of moderating planetary climate change. Indeed, private forest landowners are increasingly engaged in the effort to sell the carbon sequestration ability that their lands embody. In advance of a regulated carbon market, private landowners have engaged in ensuring that forestry offsets are a formal part of proposed cap and trade efforts, whether on a regional or national basis. They have also been involved in efforts to establish strict protocols for forestry offsets, such that investors are secure in that they are receiving value for their dollars. Offset protocols serve to standardize and equalize the offset market. Currently, forestry offset protocols are almost completely silent as they pertain to federal lands. The expectation is that enabling legislation is required prior to agencies being provided authority to develop and sell forestry offsets.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The fiscal impact of the sale and revenue sharing of carbon offset projects on federal lands has not been well studied. The carbon market in the United States is largely voluntary, and the impact of offsets expected to come into play due to establishment of a regulated marketplace that would include federal forestry offsets is largely unknown.

The importance of such revenue, however, may be in that serves to diversify the limited revenue sources available to counties.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution in Support of Changing Forest Service Employee Supervision

Issue: Chain of command for Forest Service Law Enforcement Personnel Adopted Policy: NACo supports a change in Forest Service personnel organization to

place law enforcement officers under the direction of Forest Supervisors. Background: Several decades ago, there was reported abuse of Forest Service

procedures, allegedly involving Service line officers. As a response, and at the urging of, among others, the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, the law enforcement branch of the Service was “stovepiped”, meaning that these officers no longer were supervised by local or regional authority, but answered instead directly to the Washington Office. As a result, there can be little to no interaction between enforcement officers and the local supervisors and line officers.

As timber harvest has dramatically declined, there is no longer a reason to isolate these enforcement officers from the chain of command. In fact, the loss of interaction has resulted in adverse public relations between the Forest Service and forest communities. When new personnel are transferred into areas without an understanding of the area’s culture and the agency’s interdependence upon the community, all too often the result is public conflict. If there is direct supervision and accountability to local Forest Service officials, there is a much greater opportunity for such conflicts to be resolved before it becomes a community issue. A positive influence on public relations for the agency would be of great benefit for all parties involved.


Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: No fiscal impact, with a positive impact on rural communities’ relationship with the Forest Service.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution in Support of Ongoing Sage Grouse Management Efforts and in Opposition to Listing of the Sage Grouse at this Time

Issue: Whether U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service should place the Greater Sage Grouse on the Threatened/Endangered Species List, or are ongoing sage grouse management efforts adequately protecting the sage grouse and its habitat?

Adopted Policy: Ongoing sage grouse management efforts of state and local governments, stakeholder working groups, and BLM Resource Management Plans (RMPs) throughout the Eleven Western States are protecting and restoring sage grouse habitats and reviving sage grouse populations. Therefore, NACo opposes listing the Greater Sage Grouse as a T&E species at this time.

Background: Over the past decade, there has been an unprecedented grass-roots conservation effort in the Eleven Western States to protect the Greater Sage Grouse. Hundreds of stakeholders representing a large cross section of Western interests - ranchers, environmental organizations, industry groups and government agencies - have joined together to form dozens of local working groups to collect and process scientific data about the sage grouse, identifying key conservation priorities and forging partnerships with federal land management agencies for conservation purposes.

This effort has produced best management practices for protecting the Greater Sage Grouse in harmony with other multiple uses. These best management practices are being followed in BLM RMPs throughout the Eleven Western States. NACo supports this locally driven commitment to conserve the Greater Sage Grouse while preserving other important multiple uses. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service should not list the Greater Sage Grouse as T&E species at this time as such action is not necessary. NACo urges continued application of best management practices by state, federal and local land management agencies, which will continue to make sage grouse populations stabilize and thrive throughout the West.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: There will be significant and unwarranted impacts to other public lands multiples uses, if the Greater Sage Grouse is listed as a T&E species at this time.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Distribution of Federal Royalty Payments for Renewable Energy Projects on Public Lands

Issue: Federal revenue sharing payments to counties from Alternative Energy Development and federal Stewardship Contracts on Public Lands.

Adopted Policy: NACo supports the sharing of federal leasing and rights of way revenues from renewable energy development (wind, solar, and geothermal) and federal Stewardship Contracts on federal lands with state and county governments where that development and contracts occurs. Revenue sharing should not negatively impact the Payment in Lieu of Taxes program.

Background: The enactment of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 provided comprehensive and much needed changes to domestic energy policy. One such provision included an amendment of the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 and modified how Federal revenues from geothermal development are shared with state and local government. Under the Act, county


governments share 25 percent of geothermal revenues to support county departments impacted by local geothermal development and production. The recent passage of the FY 2010 Interior Appropriations bill effectively redirected the county geothermal revenue sharing funding back to the United States Treasury.

Numerous county governments have benefited from past geothermal revenue sharing receipts, and in turn, have been indispensible advocates for the development of alternative energy production in the United States. Currently, all of the rental income from federal rents for rights of way for wind, solar and geothermal energy developments on federal lands currently goes to the Federal Treasury. None is currently distributed to States or Counties.

As this nation moves closer to securing a balanced domestic energy portfolio, elected county officials are committed to working with the Federal government as equal partners in the promotion of alternative energy development. The expansion of green energy industries will lead to the creation of high paying jobs and sustainable economic development. NACo will continue to advocate for Federal legislation (including S. 2607) that provides revenue sharing from the development of solar, wind, and geothermal energy on public lands.

Counties are working with federal land management agencies on the development of large-scale forest restoration projects utilizing stewardship contracting authority. Unlike timber sales, counties do not receive revenue generated from stewardship contracting authority. NACo is advocating for a modification of the formula to ensure that revenue generated from stewardship contracts be provided to counties. NACo supports a formula based that would direct 25 percent of revenue to counties.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Revenue sharing payments would contribute to the delivery of critical county services and the development of much needed capital improvement projects such as road maintenance, public safety and law enforcement, conservation easements, capital for leveraging federal and state resources, and the critical stabilization of operations budgets in tough economic times.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Hazardous Fuels Emergency

Issue: Accumulation of biomass. Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties calls on Congress to grant a

Governor authority to declare a state of emergency when the severity of fire danger from fuels on identified federal lands within that state poses a significant threat to public health and safety.

Background: Change in federal policy regarding harvest of timber from our National Forests has created an unhealthy forest. Many National Forests are clogged with diseased trees that are dead and many lodgepole pines have reached their expected life span and are dying. Overall temperatures are rising in the west and we are experiencing a prolonged drought. Conservative estimates show that perhaps 140 million acres of National Forest timberland in the west is in ecological condition Class 3 or 2: meaning it is ready to burn or soon will be. Much of the west chokes each summer as smoke fills the air and breathing becomes difficult. With the loss of the timber industry, tourism was supposed to save us from economic calamity but with smoke filled skies tourists are not interested in putting their families in unhealthy situations.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Healthy forests, carbon sequestration, air quality, improved local economies, support for innovations in alternative fuels and renewable forest products.



Resolution on the Federal Definition of Woody Biomass

Issue: Federal Legislation needs to establish that renewable biomass from both Federal and non-Federal Lands can be applied towards the existing renewable fuels standard and any renewable electricity standard.

Adopted Policy: NACo supports the definition of biomass from Titles I & III of the 2008 Farm Act (Farm Bill), which states that renewable biomass is:

- For Federal Lands: Materials that are byproducts of preventive treatments (e.g., trees, wood) that are removed to reduce hazardous fuels, to reduce or contain disease or insect infestation, or to restore ecosystem health; would not otherwise be used for higher value products; and are harvested from National Forest System land or public lands in accordance with public laws, land management plans, and requirements for old-growth maintenance.

- For Non-Federal Lands: Any organic matter that is available on a renewable or recurring basis from non-Federal land or land belonging to Indian tribes, including renewable plant materials (feed grains, other agricultural commodities, other plants and trees, algae), waste material (crop residue, other vegetative waste material including wood waste and wood residue), animal waste and byproducts (fats, oils, greases, and manure), construction waste, and food waste/yard waste.

Furthermore, the Environmental Protection Agency should encourage the development of renewable biomass energy by not regulating greenhouse gas emissions from biomass energy under the Clean Air Act, specific to the EPA Tailoring Rule and Boiler MACT.

Background: There is broad national agreement on the need for more renewable energy, however the participation of public lands in the delivery of renewable energy faces a potentially serious constraint.

Currently, the existence of multiple, and sometimes conflicting, definitions of renewable biomass in major energy policy legislation will seriously constrain the energy use of sustainably harvested woody biomass from public and other lands unless the definition is improved. In current law and legislation the definition varies greatly.

Our nation needs and deserves a consistent, easily understood definition of renewable biomass in legislation that allows sustainably harvested woody biomass to be utilized, no matter where it comes from.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Forest county communities would realize increased employment and the reduction of a potentially catastrophic fire threat. Urban areas would benefit from reduced local taxation intended to support neighboring distressed rural communities. The nation would benefit from reduced greenhouse gas emissions, greater quantities of lower priced domestic motor fuel derived from a renewable source, increased employment, and an increase in the national treasury derived from the sale of material from public lands.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Opposing Proposed Forest Service Planning Rule

Issue: Withholding Support for the U.S. Forest Service Proposed Planning Rule as Published in 76 Federal Register 8480.


Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties urges the U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Forest Service to not adopt the Forest Service Proposed Planning Rule in its current version (see 76 FR 8480 (36 CFR Part 219)), until it is substantially revised to prohibit de facto wilderness management and instead provide for (1) coordination and cooperation with elected county officials, (2) consistency with local government plans and policies, (3) forest planning and decision making at the most local level of the Forest Service agency structure, (4 sound discretion and practical judgment on the part of local unit forest supervisors, (5) active management to reduce fire regime condition class to local government desired levels, (6) active management to reduce invasive species and insect infestation, (7) enhanced economic and social sustainability, (8) emphasis on habitat management over species management and (9) emphasis on multiple use management and commodity production.

Background: National forests have gone from healthy, commodity producing, biologically diverse habitats to fire prone, disease laden, bio-mass choked mono-cultures, all due to failed de facto wilderness planning and management practices over the past 20 years. The U.S. Forest Service needs the planning tools to produce revised Forest Plans which enable a return to the desired conditions of the past, when National Forests were properly managed to produce timber, grazing forage, jobs, healthy habitat and recreational opportunities, free of undue fire risk and undue risk of insect infestation. This is possible only through a proper Forest Service Planning Rule which meets the policy objectives listed above.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The active management of our National Forests to accommodate beneficial multiple uses is essential to the public health, safety and economic vitality of communities across the United States. Revenues generated from such multiple use activities support critical state and local government services and loss of such revenues would further cripple the economies of local communities and place unnecessary new burdens on State and local government and school budgets.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution to Rescind Bureau of Land Management’s “Master Leasing Plan” Oil and Gas Reform Leasing Reform

Issue: Rescind the BLM Master Leasing Plan Instruction Memorandum and Related Guidance.

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties strongly urges DOI Secretary and National BLM Director to immediately rescind BLM Instruction Memorandum No. 2010-117 and all related guidance, because they attempt to implement so-called “Master Leasing Plan” reforms that unlawfully override duly established BLM Resource Management Plans (RMPs) without local government input.

Background: Many local BLM Field Office RMPs were revised and updated during the past decade through the investment of much time, money and effort on the part of local governments and other cooperating agencies. RMPs are the only legally valid framework for determining the availability, conditions and stipulations for oil and gas leasing and drilling activities in the respective BLM field office planning areas.

DOI and BLM are trying to do an end-run around these RMPs and greatly restrict the extent of oil and gas leasing and drilling activities which these RMPs have approved, through the top-down ordering of so-called Master Leasing Plans, secretly negotiated with extreme environmental groups, and forced upon BLM field offices through BLM Instruction


Memorandum 2010-117 dated May 17, 2010 (IM No. 2010-117). State and local governments were left completely out of any process to develop these Master Leasing Plans.

These Master Leasing Plans are really master lease cancellation and restriction plans. These Master Leasing Plans violate FLPMA and NEPA by circumventing the Resource Plan and Plan Amendment Process, and in many instances they promote and enforce a de-facto wilderness policy in violation of FLPMA and the RMPs. They are top-down dictates issued with no local government input, done at the behest of extreme environmental groups who threaten crippling legal action unless BLM complies with their wishes. And they (the Master Leasing Plans) largely prop up the archaic “wilderness-at-all-costs-and-in-all-corners” vision of these extreme environmentalists who try to interfere with reasonable oil and gas development on the public lands.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The active management of America’s Public lands to accommodate beneficial multiple uses such as responsible oil and gas exploration and development is essential to the public health, safety and economic vitality of communities across the United States. The cutting off of mineral development access on Public lands by overriding duly established RMPs prohibits activities vital to the nation, including mineral exploration and harvesting. Revenues generated from such activities support critical state and local government services and loss of such revenues would further cripple the economies of local communities and place unnecessary new burdens on State and local government and school budgets.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Historic and Recognized Land Uses from Renewable Energy Development Projects Occurring on Federal Lands

Issue: Renewable energy projects, particularly large scale solar development, remove large blocks of land from the federal estate from historic multiple use activities, including dispersed recreation, livestock grazing, and general public access.

Adopted Policy: NACo requests the Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service adopt policies that provide real and substantial consideration of historic uses in the project plans and environmental documentation, and commit project developers to providing mitigation for their loss.

Background: As renewable energy development expands, the potential exclusion of historic permitted uses on Federal public lands becomes more apparent. Some projects may be benign, such as wind energy on ridge lines. Other developments such as solar on flat accessible land, remove huge areas which have historically been essential parts of grazing allotments, contained the access routes to back country, or provided areas that BLM designated as “open” for OHV recreation. Ancillary facilities and safety closures, however, for all projects, may remove areas and access from previous uses. Some uses, such as grazing, can be mitigated through compensation or buy-out, though the effect will be a reduction from past use. There may be offsetting economic value from the energy project, but it is essential that benefits and losses both be weighed in the NEPA process and the process commit the developer to providing such mitigation.

Access through project areas cannot be addressed by the market. Development plans must provide alternate access routes. OHV open areas, if such has been legitimately provided in BLM or FS land use plans, should be similarly mitigated for, by designation of other appropriate areas or the acquisition of areas by the developer for such dedication and designation. Failure to provide at least a degree of mitigation can result in sprawling of dispersed uses to areas of


private land, encouraging trespass, and requiring engagement of law enforcement at high cost to both the land management agencies as well as local government.

NACo does not oppose development of renewable energy on public land, but wishes to assure that the NEPA process and plan of development explicitly address historic use and commit the developer to mitigation.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Renewable energy development may or may not have positive impacts on the land and the area. Projects normally result in total exclusion of the public, but their output will provide energy, employment, and increase renewable portfolios required by many states. Mitigation for impacts and use loss may add to project costs. Providing such mitigation may have an overall positive impact since the area may benefit from the new use plus retain of all or part of the current use. Providing such mitigation will also reduce the effect on local law enforcement to control trespass use that could occur if mitigation is not provided.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Supporting S.1061 & H.R.1996 “The Government Litigation Savings Act” Issue: Accountability and transparency regarding payments made under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). Adopted Policy: NACo supports S.1061 & H.R.1996 as the passage of these bills would:

1. Continue to provide a mechanism to assure fair and equal access to public funds for individuals, small businesses and non-profit organizations with limited financial resources to assure their ability to participate in the justice system of these United States.

2. Help restore accountability and transparency on how federal funds are being spent by reestablishing a provision for reporting to Congress on expenditures under the EAJA.

3. Restrict the amount of Equal Access to Justice Act dollars that can be applied for to reimburse successful individual and small entities for legal expenses in actions brought against the Federal Government.

4. Restrict the eligibility to apply for reimbursement of legal expenses for those individuals and entities without the assets necessary to bring legal action against the Federal government.

5. Urge Congress to adopt an asset limit for applicants consistent with the congressional intent of the EAJA.

Background: Originally passed in 1980, EAJA was meant to provide fair access to legal remedies for individuals, small businesses and non-profits with limited means. The act accomplishes this by reimbursing attorneys fees for plaintiffs who sue the federal government if they win the case or settle out of court. The original legislation required annual reports to Congress on the amount and nature of EAJA payments. The reporting requirement ended in 1995. In recent years there have been complaints about the misapplication of the EAJA by certain well-funded interest groups that allegedly have received millions of federal taxpayer dollars in attorneys’ fees for settling or winning cases filed against federal agencies. In some cases, these lawsuits were based on procedural errors, or filed simply to delay or prevent authorized uses of public lands or federally authorized activities on private lands. Federal


agencies may have settled these cases rather than expend public resources to litigate. Often times these receipts are used to initiate subsequent legal actions by these same groups. Reporting requirements provide accountability and transparency in how federal funds are being spent. The Government Litigation Savings Act would help assure that federal funds are being used in a manner that is consistent with the original of the EAJA by requiring the federal government to create a publicly searchable database to include information regarding the disbursement of public funds under the EAJA. In addition, the Government Litigation Savings Act would require that the Comptroller General commence an audit of past expenditures under the EAJA and report the results of the audit to Congress. Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: Enactment of S.1061 and H.R.1996 would have a positive fiscal effect on urban and rural budgets by providing for proper justification of federal payments of taxpayer dollars when public land policy is involved.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution to Oppose Executive Branch Efforts to Create New “Defacto” Wilderness Areas

Issue: Providing accountability in the designation of national monuments and wilderness areas.

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties opposes Executive Branch efforts (such as Secretary Salazar’s Secretarial Order 3310) which call for the designation of defacto wilderness or management for non-impairment without congressional approval. NACo also supports legislation to amend the Antiquities Act (such as the National Monument Designation Transparency and Accountability Act) to provide transparency and accountability in the designation of national monuments. Federal consultation with state, county, and tribal government should be required prior to the development and designation of any national monument.

Background: Secretary Salazar Issued Order 3310 overturning the established policy on new wilderness inventories on public land, eliminating public process and violating the intent of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), as only Congress has the authority to designate lands as Wilderness. Secretarial Order 3310 directs the Bureau of Land Management to begin to inventory, designate, and manage Federal lands as Wilderness, independent of the United States Congress. It undermines the established public process for land use planning and expressly violates the intent of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, as only Congress has the authority to designate lands as Wilderness.

Counties should be fully involved as affected partners in any process to designate wilderness. Congress and Federal agencies should coordinate with affected counties when considering special land use designations that impact the use and status of public lands. NACo strongly opposes the actions by the Interior Department and maintains our members’ position opposing Federal land management agency actions that limit access and multiple use of lands that otherwise would be available to the public (i.e. Wilderness Study Areas, “Wild Lands,” or any other de facto wilderness designation).

In the Norton vs Utah settlement, BLM and Utah acknowledged that “management of Post-603 lands to preserve their alleged wilderness character is inconsistent with FLPMA’s Section 603 limited delegation of authority,” (par. 17 at p. 8) and that BLM “will not establish, manage, or otherwise treat public lands, other than Section 603 WSAs and Congressionally


designated wilderness, as WSAs or as wilderness pursuant to the Section 202 process absent congressional authorization.” (par. 5 at p. 12)

The Antiquities Act of 1906 (16 U.S.C. 431) was enacted as a response to concerns over theft from and destruction of archaeological sites and was designed to provide an expeditious means to protect federal lands and resources. It authorizes the President to proclaim national monuments on federal lands that contain “historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest.” The Act requires the President to reserve “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.” President Theodore Roosevelt first used the authority in 1906 to establish the Devil’s Tower in WY. Presidents have created 120 monuments, totaling more than 70 million acres (most of this acreage is no longer in monument status). President Franklin Delano Roosevelt used the Act 28 times and President Carter bestowed monument status on 56 million acres in Alaska. President Clinton used the Act 22 times to create 19 new monuments and enlarge three others to designate 5.9 million acres; most were done during his last year in office. He cited frustration with the slow pace of legislated land protection as a justification. Accordingly to a leaked memo from the Department of the interior, the Administration is considering using the Antiquities Act to designate or expand additional monuments in Arizona, California, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. Under current law, the President could use the Antiquities Act to designate millions of acres of land without first notifying Congress or the affected Governors, tribes, or communities involved. Moreover, there is no requirement to determine what the impact of the designation would be upon local communities.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The designation of federal land as defacto wilderness, national monument, or similar designation without input from local governments can lead to devastating reductions in economic activity the loss of jobs in resource dependent communities.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution to Promote Healthy Forest Ecosystems and Reduce the Release of Green House Gases Through Active Management of the Nation’s Forests

Issue: Active forest management. Adopted Policy: NACo urges Congress to enact legislation to direct and enable federal

forest management agencies to reduce Fire Regime Condition Class 3 (FRCC 3) to the standard of FRCC 1 in all federal forests by the year 2030, and to reduce FRCC 2 to the standard of FRCC 1 in all federal forests by the year 2050, through the means of active landscape scale management, fuels reduction, and immediate post-fire restoration.

Background: Federal Forests should be actively managed to reduce the threat of wildfire and the release of greenhouse gases. Restoration and conservation of our National Forest will insure a sustainable economic and environmental legacy for future generations. Each year catastrophic wildfires throughout the nation contribute to global warming, jeopardize the national treasury, threaten fish and wildlife habitat, degrade both water and air quality, and cause devastation to forest dependent communities through loss of life, property, jobs, and the nation’s timber resource.

Some 73 million acres or 38 percent of the nation’s federal forests are at “a high risk of ecologically destructive wild land fire” according to a 2007 report of the Inspector General of the USDA. An average of 7 million acres of forest has burned each year for the past ten years in the


U.S., primarily on federal lands. An estimated 47.5 Million Metric Tons of greenhouse gases were released last year in the US through forest fire. An Executive Order of October 5, 2009 directs federal agencies to “consider and account for … emissions of greenhouse gases resulting from Federal land management practices”. With this Proposed Resolution, NACo joins the White House in an effort to reduce greenhouse gases caused by forest fires on federal lands.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: The cost to taxpayers to fight these fires exceeds $1 billion each year. The value of the timber thus consumed costs taxpayers $10.5 billion every year. If Congress enacts this legislation, then directs federal land management agencies to implement the resultant policy, thousands of communities throughout the nation would experience significant social and economic recovery with the creation and return of forest based employment as well as the many other benefits of multi-use forest management. Urban areas would benefit from reduced taxation which now serves to support neighboring distressed rural communities. The nation would benefit from reduced greenhouse gas emissions, increased carbon sequestration and storage, improved fish and wildlife habitat, enhanced air and water quality, greater quantities of biomass based energy and forest products derived from federal lands serving to increase the national treasury, and an ultimate reduction in the cost of federal land management, half of which is devoted to fire suppression each year.

Federal fiscal savings realized from this effort could contribute to offsets required for “Secure Rural Schools” funding, so vital to the educational and service needs of over 700 counties and 4,000 school districts nationwide.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution to Revise Contract Cancellation Policy for FS Stewardship Contracts

Issue: Forest stewardship projects. Adopted Policy: NACo urges Congress to amend PL 108-7 to direct the Forest Service

to maintain a single source contract cancellation liability contingency fund within the agency of appropriations not obligated as opposed to current policy which requires such a contingency as a component of each stewardship contract awarded.

Background: The U.S. Forest Service has little incentive or ability to enter into much needed forest health stewardship contracts. This is so because a federal acquisition regulation (48 C.F.R. 17.04) requires Forest Service to set aside and essentially "freeze" huge amounts of money in a contingent liability fund at the time a stewardship contract is made, in order to pay a stewardship contractor for its un-recouped startup costs in the hypothetical event that Forest Service ever cancels the contract early.

Forest Service cannot afford to have such huge sums of precious budget dollars sit idly by against the hypothetical day that it may cancel a stewardship contract and incur cancellation charges, especially when the Forest Service's budget is strapped fighting catastrophic wildfires, many of which might not have occurred were the habitat properly managed under a stewardship contract. To break this ironic and vicious cycle, Congress should eliminate this regulatory requirement and look for other ways for Forest Service to pay cancellation charges if and when they ever fall due, and thus free up Forest Service to pursue more forest health stewardship projects.

Our national forests are succumbing to disease, infestation, destructive wildfires and other problems. Hundreds of forest management projects are needed to treat dense, diseased and disease-prone stands and understory. The Forest Service's own resources are too scarce to perform these projects alone. That is where stewardship contracts come in. Stewardship


contracts are multi-year projects between the Forest Service and private persons or other private or public entities to enhance and protect forest health while providing jobs and stimulating the local economy. But the Forest Service currently has little incentive or ability to do many stewardship contracts, for the following reason:

Stewardship contractors often have significant startup costs like plant and equipment relocation, special tooling, preproduction engineering, etc. These startup costs often take the entire life of the stewardship contract to recoup. If the Forest Service were to cancel a stewardship contract before its normal term, that could leave the contractor with significant un-recouped startup costs. Therefore, current law (41 U.S.C. 254c(a)(1)) requires the Forest Service to pay the contractor a "cancellation charge" for the amount of the contractor's startup costs not yet recouped due to a contract cancellation.

This is only fair. But what is unfair, and what is eating into the Forest Service's ability and incentive to do forest health stewardship contracts, is a regulation (48 C.F.R. 17.104(c)) that requires Forest Service to set aside enough money when a contract is made or renewed, to pay estimated cancellation charges should the Forest Service unexpectedly cancel the contract. This freezes up millions of dollars of precious budgeted funds that the Forest Service simply cannot spare.

Amending Public Law 108-7 (16 U.S.C. 2104) to override this regulatory requirement would allow the Forest Service to draw on money already appropriated but not yet obligated for stewardship services procurement, to pay contingent cancellation charges should they suddenly become due. This would incentivize the Forest Service to do the hundreds of stewardship contracts necessary to restore forest health.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Communities near national forests will benefit from sustained economic activity related to the ongoing stewardship contracts.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Urging Congress to Expedite a Commercial Oil Shale Leasing Program

Issue: Oil shale leasing program in Utah and Wyoming. Adopted Policy: NACo urges Congress to address in a timely manner, the regulatory

review process in order to facilitate a functioning, environmentally responsible commercial oil shale leasing program in Utah and Wyoming.

Background: Declining domestic oil production and increasing world demand leave our nation vulnerable to rising energy costs. With gas prices hovering near $4 per gallon and rising, businesses and households across America are struggling to get by. Our standard of living and national security are jeopardized as oil producing capacity shifts to other countries. Alternative energy development is laudable but will make only small dents in national fuel demand. Public outcry over burgeoning energy costs is quickly reaching a crescendo. It is time to develop our nation's vast oil shale resources.

The United States has more than 70 percent of the world's oil shale. Deposits are estimated at 1.5 to 1.8 trillion barrels of shale oil, 800 billion barrels of which are easily recoverable. That will supply 100 percent of America's current domestic petroleum needs for more than 100 years. The Intermountain West is truly the "Saudi Arabia" of oil shale. Industry has new technologies that will make oil shale extraction feasible, clean and efficient, with minimal and reclaimable disturbance.

The Oil Shale and Tar Sands Development Act of 2005 called on the Department of Interior to complete an environmental study and issue regulations for oil shale leasing


development on public lands. But last year Congress passed a law prohibiting BLM from completing those regulations. Also, BLM turned what should have been an oil shale leasing environmental study, into a mere resource allocation study, which makes more studies necessary before actual leasing may begin. America cannot afford years of delay to wade through these additional layers of bureaucratic review. Congress must streamline the overall process to quickly achieve a viable, functioning commercial oil shale leasing program. This is what Congress intended in 2005. Congress must allow completion of final oil shale regulations and streamline the regulatory process to pave the way for a commercial leasing program to begin. A multi-year delay in this process is untenable in the face of ever-rising gas prices rise and dwindling fuel supplies.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Oil shale development will go forward when the final oil shale regulations are in place, providing much needed economic opportunities for the revitalization of rural counties in the Intermountain West. Utah and Wyoming have workers who will benefit from the jobs created by oil shale development.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Japan Reconstruction Aid to Include Manufactured Wood Products Generated from Federal Forests in Accordance with the Northwest Forest Plan

Issue: Manufactured Wood Products to Japan as Reconstruction Aid. Adopted Policy: NACo supports including manufactured wood products from the

federal forests of the Northwest in any aid package offered to the Japanese government, or as a result of action taken by the United Nations, will assist in rebuilding domestic communities while assisting a key ally of the United States.

Background: As the United States and Japan determine what the course of re-construction activities will look like in order to rebuild those areas of Japan most affected by the March, 2011 tsunami and subsequent nuclear disaster, it is well understood that wood products will be a key building material.

Rather than simply sending aid in the form of cash, the government of the United States could instead purchase finished, manufactured timber products originating from federal forests in accordance with sales already scheduled under the NW Forest Plan. That timber would be milled in the NW to Japanese specifications, and delivered to Japan as a finished product as part of a United States aid offering. In effect, the government would purchase finished wood products to provide for reconstruction instead of the alternative of sending cash to the government of Japan, which may or may not turn around and purchase timber products from the United States. In doing so, they would ensure a benefit to private firms in the Northwest, along with communities that benefit whenever federal timber is sold.

NACo should ensure that this policy discussion is initiated within the Office of U.S Foreign Disaster Assistance or within the auspices of its membership in the United Nations.

Under today’s law, the NW Forest Plan is the guiding document for bringing timber to the marketplace. The Plan calls for 1.2 billion board feet to be made available annually, and due to the time and budget it takes to attempt a litigation-proof timber sale, the annual volume produced is just 300 million board feet. So-called “consult and confer” rules are especially time consuming and targeted by those wishing to derail the sale of federal timber.

Elimination of these rules could be part of a one time emergency aid package to assist in the reconstruction of Japan.


The Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) is the office within USAID responsible for facilitating and coordinating U.S. Government emergency assistance overseas. As part of USAID’s Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance (DCHA), OFDA provides humanitarian assistance to save lives, alleviate human suffering, and reduce the social and economic impact of humanitarian emergencies worldwide.

Japan has a wood-first policy for government-funded or sponsored buildings, with wood considered an environmentally friendly product, more capable of withstanding earthquakes than other building materials. About 70,000 buildings were damaged (the equivalent of 8.6% of Japanese housing starts, totaling 813,000 units in 2010). Canada is already reporting that Japanese orders for J-grade lumber and OSB are picking up for West Coast mills.

Immediately after the Indian Ocean tsunami, United Nations Environment Programme established a Task Force to respond to urgent requests for technical assistance from affected countries, including from Indonesia. Ministry of Environment and UNEP initiated environmental assessments in the tsunami-affected areas and mobilized assistance to strengthen environmental planning and guidance to the response and reconstruction process, including the development of procurement strategies for wood products from around the globe. It is uncertain at this point if a similar effort will be the approach for Japan, or if the United Nations will even intervene.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: In 1908 when the National Forest system replaced the Forest Reserve system, it was stipulated that counties would receive 25% of the revenue from harvested timbers, with each state having the authority to distribute those dollars to schools and roads as they deem appropriate. In Oregon, 75% goes to county roads and 25 percent goes to county schools. Thus any improvement in timber harvest from this change would benefit county revenue.

It may be important to note that as counties work on the reauthorization of Secure Rural Schools, timber harvest dollars are considered new dollars, and may be used to offset expenses related to the reauthorization of SRS.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Utilization of Federal Timber after Domestic Declaration of Disaster

Issue: Supporting federal law changes to increase the flow of federal timber for domestic reconstruction purposes (after the declaration of emergency) improves economies and community sustainability.

Adopted Policy: The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act should be amended to include provisions to require that reconstruction materials originate from federal forest lands, specifically sections 307, 315, 316, 323, 421, and 683. When federal dollars are allocated for disaster relief, changes to these sections would benefit schools and roads in counties with federal forest lands.

Background: Natural and human caused disasters are unavoidable occurrences that bring with them inordinate amounts of human suffering and the United States Government has established a framework of laws and assistance designed to assist those most affected. Rebounding from disasters typically involves new construction activities to house residents and rebuild businesses. Current law stipulates that efforts should be made to bolster local economies through the unique market demands that are created around this kind of reconstruction.

In that counties benefit from the harvest of federal timber from National Forests that exist within or sometimes adjacent to their landbase, and in that demand for housing is currently at historic lows, a triggering requirement that value added timber products necessary for


reconstruction of a particular area come from the National Forest system would provide additional benefit to a great many people.

The Stafford Act already provides for an expedited sale of timber from National Forests through the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture (42 USC 5188), but points to a repealed statute regarding sale procedures.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: In 1908 when the National Forest system replaced the Forest Reserve system, it was stipulated that counties would receive 25 percent of the revenue from harvested timbers, with each state having the authority to distribute those dollars to schools and roads as they deem appropriate. In Oregon, 75% goes to county roads and 25 percent goes to county schools. Thus any improvement in timber harvest from this change would benefit county revenue. It may be important to note that as counties work on the reauthorization of Secure Rural Schools, timber harvest dollars are considered new dollars, and may be used to offset expenses related to the reauthorization of SRS.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution Supporting Uranium Activities

Issue: Uranium activities and the Grand Canyon watershed. Adopted Policy: NACo agrees to the following:

1. NACo is aware that the Secretary of the Interior is considering a withdrawal of uranium mining on public lands in Northern Arizona.

2. NACo believes that mining activities should continue on these lands (except in Coconino County), as long as operators continue to abide by existing state and federal environmental laws, regulations, and standards, including reclamation.

Background: Under the authority of the 1984 Arizona Wilderness Act, uranium exploration and mining activities have occurred on BLM land in northwest Arizona known as the Arizona Strip and on similar U.S. Forest Service lands south of the Grand Canyon. A comprehensive review as part of the Department of Interior’s recent draft Environmental Impact Statement has assessed impacts to the Grand Canyon Watershed and determined that no significant impacts from mining exist and that any surface impacts which do exist can be mitigated. With U.S. Nuclear power generating stations now importing 90% of the uranium they use from foreign (Kazakhstan, Russia, Australia, Canada and elsewhere, this northern Arizona reserve of 326 million lbs equivalent could supply electricity to all of California’s 40 million people for 22.4 years according to the Nuclear Energy Institute. NACo believes it is irresponsible for America not to develop its own domestic resources in northern Arizona when it is known to be the highest grade ore body of known domestic uranium. (.6 to 3.5%) compared to Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Virginia average of .1% ore.

The Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-406) was the result of an extensive collaborative effort in Arizona that lead to a wilderness designation for 290,000 acres of BLM lands and 834,000 acres of Forest lands. The Act also directed the release of over 490,000 acres of BLM lands and 50,000 acres of Forest Service lands with the full understanding that this action would allow uranium exploration and mining on the Subject Lands.

NACo is unaware of any scientific study asserting that uranium exploration and mining activities have impacted the Grand Canyon or its Colorado River watershed, but NACo does not object to ongoing reviews of the known science in order to keep the public aware of any impacts on the environment in the area.


Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Southern Utah counties and Mohave County are aware of economic studies which estimate conservatively that some $29 billion in economic benefits due to mining will occur. The counties will benefit from sustained economic activity related to the ongoing uranium mining operations, which in turn will increase local government revenues for funding of road maintenance, access, law enforcement, fire suppression, search & rescue, tourist information, etc.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution to Support Increased Domestic Oil and Gas on Public Lands

Issue: Our national dependence on foreign fuel threatens the livelihood of America’s farmers and ranchers.

Adopted Policy: NACo supports the development and implementation of a comprehensive national energy policy, which includes conservation, efficiency, exploration and research and provides for the domestic production of traditional and renewable energy sources by removing the road blocks that require years to get an application to drill, mine or extract minerals from federal land, with concurrence with local government review and approval.

Background: High fuel prices greatly affect profitability in the agriculture industries. These businesses rely on diesel fuel for tractors and harvesters, and on gasoline for pickups. Natural gas and petroleum are used to manufacture fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides. Farmers and ranchers have little ability to pass these increased costs on to consumers.

Oil, gas and coal form the cornerstone of our nation’s energy base and will continue to do so for many years to come. Currently, 38.2 million acres of onshore public lands are under lease for oil and gas development, of which only 16.6 million acres are active while 21.6 million acres are inactive. To move our nation toward energy independence, we must continue to develop our conventional resources in the right ways and in the right places. Opening and using new sources of petroleum, along with existing and future home-grown fuels, should keep current and future generations of Americans safe from the economically devastating effects of our dependence on foreign energy.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: According to the USDA-Illinois Department of Ag Market News, the average price of farm diesel in Illinois rose from an average of $1.70 per gallon in March 2009, to an average of $3.56 per gallon in March 2011- a 103 percent increase in price over the past two years.

According to the USDA Economic Research Service (ERS), farmers can expect to pay almost 85 percent more than they paid in 2000 just to put their crops in the ground for the costs of seeds, fertilizer, chemicals, fuel and electricity, repairs and interest on operating capital. In 2011, corn farmers are experiencing cash costs that are 85 percent higher than their costs in 2000. Similarly, cotton farmers are seeing a 77 percent increase and rice farmers a 72 percent increase.

Natural gas accounts for 70 percent to 90 percent of the cost of producing anhydrous ammonia, a key source of nitrogen fertilizer. According to ERS, between 2000 and 2011 the fertilizer costs for corn increased by 197 percent, cotton by 175 percent, and rice by 125 percent.



Resolution Calling for Membership on Landscape Conservation Cooperatives Steering Committees to Include County Elected Official(s)

Issue: County membership on Landscape Conservation Cooperatives. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the expansion of LCC Steering Committees to include

at least one elected county official on each Steering Committee, and preferably one from each state in those eco-regions which are multi-state.

Background: Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) are being organized nationally by the Department of the Interior to coordinate natural resources and climate science and research, and to apply science to land and wildlife management, with particular emphasis on public lands. Steering Committees, and invitations to Steering Committees, have included the spectrum of State and Federal agencies, Indian Tribes, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). To date local governments have not been invited to attend or participate in organization or implementation of the program in the eco-regions.

LCCs began being organized in 2009 under the leadership of the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Subsequent leadership has been expanded to the Bureau of Reclamation in some regions. Nationally there are 21 eco-regions, 11 of which are important to public land areas in the West and Alaska. The stated intent is that these organizations is to coordinate climate change and other science among federal and state agencies and the universities, and to seek the application of science and research to natural resources decision-making. Some organization of the Steering Committees has been contracted to NGOs. The organization of several of the major LCCs to date has included long lists of invited agencies which have included all federal and state agencies involved in land, water and wildlife management, and assorted conservation-oriented NGOs, but has excluded local government. It is critical as science and natural resources research needs and results are prioritized and assessed, and as such research is considered to be applied to public lands and resources, that the views of local government be included and considered. Such input must be as a full partner as a governmental unit, and not as a mere “interest group,” or “stakeholder.” Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: It is important that local government views be considered by the larger group of assembled state and federal agencies related to science and research priorities and application. The direct cost of making such input are limited to the cost of participation in perhaps 3 to 4 meetings per year for selected representatives. Exclusion will result in counties still having to attend and participate in meetings to the extent they are held in public, simply to assure that local views are recorded. The concern of local governments is that research could be applied to public lands that will be adverse to local social or economic interests, which could result in local costs particularly to rural interests and businesses which have an interface or involvement with public land usage. Federal officials have tried to assure public interests that LCCs will not be decision-making in scope. Such assurances, however, do not assure that agencies will not apply research results to public land management decisions. Local governments must be part of any forum that assesses the future of public land management practices.



Resolution on Acquisition of Private Land for Wildlife Mitigation, Associated with Renewable Energy Development, with Subsequent Transfer to Federal Agencies

Issue: Acquisition of Private Land for Wildlife Mitigation. Adopted Policy: NACo requests the land and wildlife management agencies adopt

procedures that provide for project mitigation other than through land transfer from private to public ownership, unless supported by the effected county. When such transfers are deemed the only appropriate mitigation, and offsetting PILT will not occur, then agencies must provide that project developer would continue to pay the property tax on the transferred land, or fees in lieu of taxes, in perpetuity, unless the land were restored to private ownership at a future date.

Background: Wildlife agencies (State and Federal) have required the purchase of private land and its transfer to government agencies or non-governmental organizations (NGOs) as mitigation for projects that will occupy habitat or impact species with status under Federal or State law or regulation. Such acquisitions remove private land from tax rolls. When the land becomes Federal, many counties not only lose the property tax revenue, they fall outside the limit of Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) accounting. Large renewable energy development projects have exacerbated the situation.

The land and wildlife management agencies have sought land mitigation for impacted habitat for a variety of species, mostly those with listed status under the Endangered Species Act. Such mitigation often is required at a multiplied factor, e.g. 3:1, in which the project developer must “donate” a multiple of private land to the permitting agency or designated entity as mitigation. Such land is removed from the tax rolls.

Many projects are located in counties in which PILT payments are capped because of already large Federal estates; thus transfers may add to the Federal estate and counties do not receive additional PILT payment reflecting the expanded Federal estate. Further, since the acquiring agencies are usually BLM or the Forest Service, counties cannot receive PILT under Sections 6904 or 6905.

Most projects utilize significant parts of local government infrastructure, including the use of county roads for project development, operation and maintenance. In addition development may use other county services, including solid waste disposal, law enforcement, public health, and fire and emergency medical response during the life of the project.

Offsetting the loss of tax base must become an essential part of renewable project mitigation, even when mitigation land is transferred to a state agency or NGO. Mitigation should be accomplished by project developers depositing funds for use to provide other kinds of mitigation investment equivalent to the amount that might otherwise be invested in land acquisition.

Expand current PILT requirement that only additions to the Federal estate by NPS or in National Forest wilderness can receive payment under Section 6904. If such change were made, remove the 5-year limit on such payments.

Fiscal Urban/Rural Impact: While development may provide some positives to local economies, local governments should not be left with losses and costs associated with the project. The policy will assure a steady revenue stream regardless of mitigation requirements as well as funding for county infrastructure and services.



TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY

STATEMENT OF BASIC PHILOSOPHY Counties play a major role in the nation's communications system as regulators, service

providers, and consumers of communications services. County officials have a responsibility to ensure that the public interest is being served by communications providers, regardless of the delivery platform. The social goals and public good expected from our citizens must be ensured. This includes public, educational government access, public and homeland security matters, and protecting the interests of special needs citizens.

Expanding communication has become a critical component of a successful economic development policy as counties work to attract and retain skilled jobs and industries, and counties labor as first responders to homeland security threats and events. Homeland security has required a much wider role for counties in securing the Nation. Adequate communications systems and information access is vital to meet this growing responsibility. It is therefore imperative county officials play an increasing role in the future of communications policy.

Technology has changed the future of county governance, and the evolving opportunities for counties to utilize technology to provide timely and effective service are immense.

Faster computer networks, wireless Internet access, enhanced broadband services, new public safety systems, geospatial information applications and technologies not yet deployed, will make the county of the future more responsive and meaningful to county residents. County officials must be prepared to adapt to this changing environment.

POLICIES AND PRACTICES 1. Encouraging competition and development of new technologies: It is in the counties'

interest to encourage competition among communications and technology providers and to support the development of new technologies for government and public use.

2. Preemption of local authority: Counties need to be concerned about retaining authority as trustees of public property and as protectors of public safety and welfare. The 1996 Telecommunications Act acknowledges the balance between federal, primarily through the Federal Communications Commission, and state and local authority.

NACo opposes any actions that would undermine this shared responsibility and any federal or state preemption of counties' traditional powers in these areas. NACo opposes efforts to restrict or prohibit, at state and federal levels, county or municipal ownership of communications facilities when such services are unavailable or are made prohibitively expensive by the lack of adequate competition. Counties, however, should not use their economic capacity to unfairly compete with private sector providers.

3. Financial assistance for enhanced communications capacity: Communications play an important role in county government operations and the delivery of services. Counties use advanced telecommunication systems for a full range of public, and law enforcement services. Nothing in federal policy should undermine the ability of counties to develop such infrastructure through partnerships with network providers.

NACo believes state and federal governments should provide financial assistance for these initiatives and should encourage efforts to improve coordination across jurisdictions and systems, especially for public safety and homeland security issues. Access charges for


completion of calls on the local public switched telephone network need to continue in some form to assure rural counties retain adequate communications services.

4. Interoperability: Communications interoperability, for both voice and data, is critical to coordinate the response to disasters and joint law enforcement efforts. This is important between agencies of local government, as well as, the various local, state, and federal agencies. A broad interpretation should be made as to which entities should be included in an interoperability plan. NACo supports efforts to improve interoperability for public safety purposes, and believes the state and federal governments should assist counties with the costs associated with migrating to viable interoperability standards. Congress should provide funding to local governments, as part of a comprehensive strategy, to improve public safety and emergency management interoperability.

5. Wireless Communications Facilities Siting: Counties have a regulatory role regarding the siting of tower and antenna facilities. With the exception of decisions based on the health effects of radio frequency (RF) emissions, local authority is preserved with minimal limitations supporting nondiscriminatory, timely action. Even in the case of RF emissions the law clearly requires that the facilities operate in compliance with RF emission standards.

NACo believes any disputes between counties and the industry should continue to be resolved in the courts on a case-by-case basis. No federal actions should undermine local government's zoning authority.

Counties have an obligation to their constituents to ensure that, to the extent possible, the public health, safety and welfare are not endangered or otherwise compromised by the construction, modification or installation of broadcast towers. NACo believes nothing should preempt local government authority to reject new tower applications upon finding of adequate existing facilities.

NACo supports policy and/or legislation giving more consideration to public health and safety needs when locating cell towers on public lands in rural areas with little or no service.

6. Emergency Services Communications, cross ownership and local services: Counties' ability to communicate with citizens during a public safety emergency, whether natural or man-caused, is critical. Media consolidation, particularly in the radio sector, has raised serious concerns about the ability of local stations to meet their public safety obligations. The FCC should review the requirements on broadcasters to ensure the needs of local government to contact their citizens are met.

Along with concerns raised by media consolidation for public safety, county officials are concerned about the loss of local content, civic discourse, and advertising opportunities for local business. As a matter of economic development, local media outlets are important vehicles for promoting local opportunities and business. Local media outlets are an important component of the community and as so, should participate in the civic aspects of the community. County officials should work with media outlets to assure ample opportunity for public debate. Congress and the FCC should review limiting media diversity through cross ownership of media outlets including newspapers and their online offerings.


7. Rights of Way: Counties own substantial amounts of public rights-of-way, which many communication providers use extensively to construct their own communications networks. These are valuable local government real estate assets worth billions of dollars that are held in trust by local governments to benefit the local community.

Federal and state governments must recognize the authority of local governments to protect the public investment, to balance competing demands on this public resource and to require fair and reasonable compensation from communications providers for use of the public rights-of-way on a nondiscriminatory (but not necessarily identical) basis. Rights-of-way disputes between communications companies and local governments should be resolved in local jurisdictions.

In order to use the right-of-way, private communications companies should be required to enter into an agreement with local government which sets the terms and conditions of such use/access. Local governments must be able to require universal services that include nondiscriminatory pricing and equal access to all its citizens as a requirement.. Like services should be treated alike.

Because disruption to streets and businesses can have a negative impact on public safety and industry, local governments should have control over allocation of the rights-of-way and be able to ensure that there is neither disruption to other "tenants" or transportation nor any diminution of the useful life of the right-of-way. Local governments must have the right to analyze the legal, financial, and technical qualifications of any communications provider wanting to use the public right-of-way and shall have the right not to issue a franchise to an unqualified applicant.

8. Video Services: Counties have come to rely on video services as a vital communication link to constituents.

This includes cable, fiber to the home, IPTV and Internet services.

Under existing federal law is clear that counties may, through the franchising process, monitor the performance of existing cable television operators to ensure that the operators provide quality service to consumers in all sections of a franchise area. The ability of local franchising authorities should be enhanced through action by the Congress and Administration to protect the interest of consumers in quality, yet affordable, video services, and to enact laws which encourage greater competition for the video franchises and in the cable industry, and which encourage the availability of other technologies as rapidly and as widespread as possible.

Video franchising authorities must continue to have the ability to require through the franchise process the following components:

• Explicit approval to transfer a franchise. • The ability to deny a renewal application for cause, i.e., renewals cannot be

considered automatic. • The right to solicit competitive bids from other video service providers. • Immunities from monetary damages when local government actions are consistent

with the Cable Act of 1984. • The ability to terminate a video service provider for cause to ensure that it is not more

profitable for an operator to violate a franchise agreement than to follow it. • The ability to require cable operators to carry all local broadcast signals.


• The ability to define reasonable notice to subscribers of rate and service changes. • The ability to regulate the equipment or any transmission technology such as system

capacity, extent of use of fiber optic cable, homes per node, bandwidth for digital carriage, or amplifiers per cascade. While the FCC retains the authority to develop technical standards, Congress retained for local franchise authorities the ability to enforce these standards. Retaining this authority will go a long way to ensure uniform customer service and signal reliability in rural and suburban areas.

• Video service providers must lease cable to whomever wants to offer competitive programming.

• All programming which is available on cable must be available to other technologies such as IPTV, fiber to the home and satellite.

• The ability to require PEG (Public, Education, and Government) channels as part of the franchise agreement.

• The ability to require universal cable video service. This is particularly important to rural and low-income residents who traditionally have been denied service.

Franchise fees are, in part, the rent cable operators pay for the use of public rights of way. Operators should not pass through to basic subscribers those rental expenses associated with non-subscriber services. NACo also strongly opposes the pass through to cable video customers of "non-subscriber" revenue, such as advertising and other commissions, and opposes the itemization of franchise fees stemming from such actions.

9. Consumer Protection: Counties have a major role to play in protecting consumer interests, including a strong consumer protection process. Congress should protect consumers from monopoly pricing power in the absence of effective competition. Every effort should be made to promote competition between providers to ensure consumers are receiving an appropriate range of services at the lowest possible cost. Companies wishing to provide communications or video services, including traditional telephone companies or cable operators, must be subject to safeguards to protect consumers against cross subsidies. NACo believes counties have the right to review mergers and acquisitions when such activity might result in the reduction of competition in the local marketplace.

10. Broadband Deployment and Adoption: NACo strongly supports legislation and administrative policies that help counties attract broadband services regardless of population or technology used. This includes supporting legislation that provides tax credits to telecommunications providers that develop broadband in rural and under-served communities, and provides for broadened eligibility and additional federal agency loan authority or extension of credit to telecommunications providers that deploy broadband in rural communities.

In supporting expanded broadband service, NACo shall maintain a neutral position on the differing technologies and policy initiatives promoted by the various elements of the communications industry that are seeking to obtain a competitive advantage in retaining or expanding market share. NACo believes all levels of government should work cooperatively with the private sector, nonprofits and academia to develop robust awareness, adoption and use programs for broadband.

11. Universal Service: NACo supports the goals of national universal service to assure the affordability of communications service in parts of the country where it would otherwise be


more expensive. The Federal Communications Commission and state utility commissions should provide guidance as to what services, including broadband that should be eligible for support from the Universal Service Fund, and the sources of additional funding should the Congress find such that an expansion of eligible services is warranted.

NACo opposes any abuse of the Universal Service Fund by any level of government for non-eligible activities or projects. NACo opposes any federal actions to preempt state universal service programs.

12. On-line Privacy and Security: As counties expand their "e-governance" initiatives, more personal information will be collected, stored, and potentially, made available to the public. Consumers are becoming more aware of the potential uses of personal information for purposes other than those intended, and are becoming more concerned about how counties are going to respond. Because of security compromises in the private sector, constituents expect counties to protect their private information. County privacy policies should be reflective of community values, and should follow best available practices to meet those values.

NACo also supports initiatives and systems to secure personal and county information from "hackers" or other illegitimate uses. While every effort should be made to protect private information, NACo supports reasonable liability limits for counties if information that counties control is compromised. If information is compromised, counties should have procedures and policies for notifying affected individuals.

Third party vendors should be expected to conform to county privacy policies and practices to maximize the security of private information. Franchise and other agreements should allow for contractual requirements for maintaining privacy. At the same time, counties should consider policies that protect the public's private information from the misuse by public employees. Counties should also consider adopting "Freedom of Information Act" policies that provide for public disclosure without compromising private information.

14. Taxation: The Telecommunications Act of 1996 did not change or impair any state or local government authority to tax telecommunications providers. NACo needs to ensure:

• No actions are taken by Congress, the Federal Communications Commission, or the courts to preempt local authority on either fees or taxes or land use authority.

• Any federal action that affects communications fees or taxes must be revenue neutral to the locality generally, between providers, and allow for a growth in tax revenue as the service or industry grows.

• County tax policy should be technology neutral for like services. • Tax policy must recognize the cost to local government of the use of public property

or facilities. • Use of advanced communications services should not be a means of escaping local

taxation. • There must be recognition of local diversity in the taxation of communications

services. • Tax simplification should not be a vehicle used by the federal government to

undermine county government's ability to retain taxing authority and revenue streams. • Fees for specific uses, such as 911 centers and rights-of way should not be considered

taxes when considering modifications to tax structures.


15. Geospatial Information Systems: Geospatial Information Systems (GIS) are critical tools for county officials to make appropriate land use decisions, manage existing infrastructure, and maintain adequate linkages between the county's land base and its government and maximize the use of resources as first responders to homeland security threats and events. NACo encourages member counties, other local governments, states, tribal entities and the private sector to engage in a coordinated effort that will lead to standardized best practices and land record modernization as well as a solid digital infrastructure, in particular cadastral data.

NACo supports the effort of the federal government to coordinate the collection and dissemination of GIS data (based on common interoperable data standards) by the federal, state, local and tribal governments through programs. The common data standards should be designed to:

1) maximize the degree to which unclassified GIS data from various sources can be made electronically available; and

2) promote the use of GIS for better governance due to increased data sources and sharing of geographic data by all levels of government. Congress should provide funding to facilitate this effort.


TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY RESOLUTIONS

Resolution on Confidential Data Sharing Issue: Confidential Data Sharing. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the development of an act or provision that would

allow public agencies to share information in order to improve services to clients, increase efficiencies in service provision, and facilitate communication among service providers.

Background: Local governments that engage in the provision of public benefits, social services 12 programs, and/or housing programs for low-income, disabled, and/or qualified senior persons within their jurisdiction, are unable to share client data with internal departments or with other local government service providers. In 2008, through an inclusive community process with health and human services partners, 17 Boulder County developed a countywide Human Services Strategic Plan to serve as a guiding document for safety net services and to improve coordination among service providers. In 2009, the Boulder County Social Services Department and the Boulder County Housing Authority merged to create one department – the Housing and Human Services Department (HHS) – in order to streamline services and ensure that clients have access to the full array of public benefits for which they are qualified. In order to improve internal service delivery, Boulder County HHS established an “Any Door is the Right Door” approach to providing services to clients. Permission for local government data sharing will further advance these efforts by serving:

1. To improve the ability of local governments to provide efficient and high quality human services to persons eligible for assistance through more than one local social services and housing program;

2. To facilitate communications and information-sharing between program technicians and supervisors of various benefits programs regarding applicants and recipient beneficiaries of those programs;

3. To assist applicants for social services benefits in applying for all social services programs for which they are eligible;

4. To make the process of inter-programmatic verification of eligibility more cost-effective and efficient; and

5. To preserve the confidentiality of applicants’ and benefits recipients’ personal information within a local governmental entity that elects to utilize the information-sharing permitted under this (Provision/Act).

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: This Adopted Policy would be permissive for local governments and would not require the implementation of any data sharing measures or technical systems. No fiscal impact has been identified.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on the Use of Spectrum for Interoperable IP-Based Public Safety Communication

Issue: Use of D-Block spectrum for interoperable IP-based public safety communications.

Adopted Policy: NACo supports the use of D-Block wireless spectrum for interoperable IP-based public safety communications.


Background: The United States Senate has passed S.911 reallocating D-Block for public safety. The U.S. House has not yet acted. For many years public safety communications focused on voice over a traditional 13 mobile radio system. As technology moved forward, public safety agencies moved to “trunked” radio systems to facilitate voice traffic. Often these systems were exclusive to the agency using them, and not interoperable with other agency systems. With the experience of September 11, 2001, the inadequacy of the communications systems became readily apparent. The responding public safety agencies could not talk to one another and could not share data in real time in a meaningful way.

Nearly a decade later the technology has advanced sufficiently to allow public safety agencies to share information over Internet Protocol (IP) based systems, both for voice (IP-based radios), and data (mobile data terminals). What is needed is sufficient wireless spectrum to be dedicated to public safety uses, and on a sufficient scale to allow for national interoperable response.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: This would allow public safety agencies maximum flexibility to meet any natural or man-made disasters more efficiently.



TRANSPORTATION STATEMENT OF BASIC PHILOSOPHY

Our nation’s transportation network is a basic force molding urban and rural development. In that development, federal, state, and local governments each share a responsibility in providing a balanced and coordinated transportation system.

County elected officials represent all the county’s citizens in working toward a balanced transportation system, which includes highways, public transit, airports, waterways, and railroads. To achieve the goal of a coordinated transportation system, county officials should:

A. Take the lead in coordinating transportation planning for all units of local government below the state level;

B. Be recognized as the single point of contact in the local area in statutes and regulations of state and federal transportation agencies;

C. Provide leadership in developing regional councils of government or other regional institutions, with the elected county and municipal officials determining when multicounty planning and coordination are necessary. County representation and responsibilities of regional policy bodies must be weighed to reflect the county’s areawide responsibility; and

D. Make joint powers agreements, contractual agreements, or other cooperative arrangements with municipalities (and with other counties when suitable) to provide transportation facilities and services in the most efficient and economical manner.

Responsible local officials should be defined in federal and state law as those local officials who are elected and directly accountable to the public whom they serve and who have jurisdiction over matters relating to highways, transit, airports, railroads and waterways. Such officials have the capability to raise the required matching money for federal funds. These officials may delegate their authority to act to subordinates or to regional or state associations. Congress and the administration should review federal bureaucratic red tape and take decisive action to minimize the detailed federal surveillance of transportation improvement projects.

COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SUPPORT

To achieve an integrated and coordinated transportation system which meets basic community and statewide goals, local areas must develop a comprehensive community planning process which is continuous, cooperative, and comprehensive. The elected county official must actively participate in the process, so the plan has official sanction and can promptly be translated into realistic programs. Where such power is lacking, states should provide counties with powers to plan, as well as control, development through such devices as planning and zoning power.

The amount of funds devoted to comprehensive planning should be reasonably related to identifiable beneficial results through a benefit-cost analysis.

The transportation plan is an essential part of the comprehensive plan. It should include continuous evaluation and reevaluation of all transportation facilities and services on county or area highways, public transit, traffic control, parking, airports, and terminal facilities for waterways. The transportation plan should be fitted into comprehensive county or areawide development which includes other functional plans, such as land use, water supply, sewers, schools, fire control, and so forth.


The state should work closely with county and municipal officials and citizens in planning primary transportation projects under state control as part of the transportation planning process.

All levels of government should cooperate in setting minimum standards for highway improvements.

The local transportation planning organization, referred to as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), and other local transportation planning organizations should be made up of a majority of local officials. These local officials should be able to redesignate their local transportation planning organization, in consultation with the state, if such organization is not made up of a majority of local officials. In the arrangement or process of any MPO redesignation, the federal government should be strictly limited to a neutral third-party role.

NATIONAL HIGHWAY PROGRAM Since the transportation system provides mobility between destinations which may be

national, interstate, intrastate, or local, there should be a working partnership among all levels of government in developing a system of highways which will be national in scope. Each level of government has a clear and distinct role to perform.

Standards for Center and Edge Line Markings—Congress should repeal mandated standards for center and edge line markings and allow local governments to implement their own policies and procedures.

Federal Role—The federal government should primarily assist in financing improvement of a mutually agreed upon system of highways determined to be in the public interest. Congress should provide federal highway funding in a consistent, predictable manner to facilitate long-range planning on all levels of government.

State Role—States, with local governmental review and approval, should develop multiyear plans and programs for highway improvements. The federal review and approval process should be limited to these annual state plans and programs and not extend to review and approval on a project-by-project basis.

Regional Role—Regional planning organizations, in cooperation with state and local governments, should be limited to planning for services and facilities of regional significance only.

Local Role—The local government should be permitted to make a distinction between projects which are statewide and local in character, with requirements for the latter projects much less complex.

Increased Local Funding—To help meet the backlog of needs on the highways owned by local governments, Congress should reduce the amounts authorized for state highways only, in part because the interstate system is virtually completed. Congress should now increase the funds available to the other federal aid systems and “off-systems” in proportion to their needs.

Highway Trust Fund—Due to the significant impact of the automobile and highways on public health, land usage, air quality, and community environment, the highway trust fund should provide funds for a total public transportation program. It should not be limited to the financing of highways and roads, but grant local determination by locally elected officials for the use of such monies for other modes of transportation purposes.


A. The highway trust fund should be removed from the unified federal budget and be used solely for transportation.

B. The federal motor fuel taxes user fee should be increased and the user fee should be indexed, providing that the proceeds of such an increase are used only for highway, bridge and transit purposes.

Other Special Local Needs—Congress should fund some programs for projects off the federal aid or state aid system, such as:

A. Continue to provide increased funding for the replacement or rehabilitation of critically deficient bridges which may not be on the federal aid system. Particular emphasis shall be given to requiring the states, in cooperation with responsible local officials, to select critically deficient off-system bridges under county control, in connection with the state’s overall selection of bridge replacement projects; and

B. Authorize a major program to eliminate or grade-separate the most serious hazards among the 165,000 rail-highway grade crossings not on the federal aid or state aid systems.

County Self-Help Program—States and counties should provide technical assistance and training to upgrade and improve county and local highway management and engineering capability in those counties with greatest need and least resources.

Vehicle Size and Weights—Adequate federal funds should be provided to upgrade the interstate and local access systems to accommodate the vehicle size, weight and configuration mandated by the Congress.

Highway Resurfacing, Restoration, Rehabilitation—To help meet the nation’s backlog of highway maintenance requirements and to protect our nation’s highway investment, the Congress and the President should divert a greater percentage of the highway trust fund receipts into highway resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation.

Congress should not impose or mandate conversion to metrics for highway related construction projects and signage.

Intelligent Transportation Systems—The complete deployment of basic ITS services for consumers of passenger and freight transportation should be completed across the nation by 2005. As developed and deployed, ITS should be integrated, interoperable, and intermodal. The private sector should take the lead in the development and bringing to market reliable and affordable ITS; the public sector should lead in the deployment of core ITS to meet essential public needs, forming innovative partnerships with the private sector where appropriate.

HIGHWAY SAFETY Substantial progress must be made toward solving the nation’s highway accident

problem. Local initiative, channeled through county, municipal, and state governments, can provide leadership in reducing the carnage on our highways.

Augmented by funds available from the federal and state governments, local governments should provide programs in traffic engineering, driver education, traffic law enforcement, spot improvement projects, uniform laws and ordinances, uniform traffic control devices, countywide accident records systems, pedestrian safety programs, and those which foster increased use of safety belts, including safety belt programs for county employees. Eliminating drunk driving, in particular, continues to be a high priority issue which needs to be highlighted by county officials.

The governor of each state should give strong leadership in developing statewide safety programs, with full consultation and cooperation from local governments; each state should have


an advisory committee of county and municipal officials to assure that the programs are responsive to local needs.

The federal government should continue to require that all trucks have underride protection devices and that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration periodically review the adequacy of such regulations.

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Many urban and rural areas have generated a need for public transportation, due to

congestion of highways, air pollution, environmental concerns, and the mobility needs of the transportation disadvantaged, including the economically disadvantaged, the elderly and handicapped, and those people who cannot or prefer not to drive automobiles. Congress should provide funds, in partnership with state and local governments, to improve existing public transportation systems and to establish new transit systems where needs and benefits have been determined by local elected transportation officials. The federal government and states should more fully recognize the appropriateness of the county as a basic areawide government for planning and operating public transportation services and coordinating specialized transportation.

An effective public transportation trust fund must be continued. This trust fund should specify that a minimum of 50 percent be used for capital investment purposes. The public transportation trust fund should be apportioned annually on an equitable basis without cutback or delay.

Congress and the administration should develop a policy to ensure that all eligible projects in the states are reviewed before obligating most of the funds to one project in one state.

Interlocal Cooperation—States should enact legislation enabling counties and municipalities in metropolitan areas to join together to establish areawide public transit authorities. Enabling legislation should:

A. Specify the authority must be under the control of county and municipal elected officials and should reflect areawide needs; and

B. Permit interstate compacts where metropolitan areas cross state lines.

State Assistance—States should assume greater financial responsibility assisting counties to meet transit development and operating needs. States and counties should provide financial assistance to maintain and improve existing rail commuter services. States and counties should coordinate joint development of highway and public transit in the same rights of way wherever possible.

Formula Program—Congress should approve full funding of urbanized area formula grant at the historical levels for both capital and operating assistance.

Capital Investment Grants—Congress should approve appropriations for the capital investment grant program funds to support rail modernization, new start system development and extraordinary bus capital needs at levels fully consistent with income generated in the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund.

Operating Assistance—The Congress should stabilize operating assistance support at one-third of total local operating costs. The remaining two-thirds of public transit operating costs should be made up by state and local sources.


Public Transportation—Congress and the President should continue to strengthen the small urban and rural public transportation program by appropriating increased funding for this program.

Capital Funding Decisions—Federal decisions for capital funding should be based on a project’s cost effectiveness, its responsiveness to community transportation needs, and state and/or local financial support of the operations and/or maintenance of such projects and facilities.

Subsidized Transit Fares—The tax status of employer subsidized transit fares should be higher than that of employer subsidized parking.

AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT Increasingly, counties are assuming enlarged responsibility for meeting regional aviation

needs not only by providing airports serving U.S. scheduled airlines, but also commuter and general aviation airports. Federal and state governments should more fully recognize the ability of counties, as areawide governments, to plan and coordinate aviation with other modes of transportation and to control land use for future airport development.

Aviation Trust Fund—Long-range budget planning and programming are dependent on the steady flow of authorized funds from the airport/aviation trust fund without cutbacks or delays.

Therefore:

A. Congress and the administration should authorize an expanded program for airport capital development and thereafter annually obligate funds from the trust fund without delay.

B. States should better synchronize their funds with available federal funds in providing assistance to counties for airport development.

C. The airport trust fund should be removed from the federal unified budget. Congress should use the trust fund solely for its dedicated purpose and it should be allocated in an orderly fashion to eliminate the existing balance in the trust fund.

Federal Funding—Congress should increase the federal share on airport development projects to the greatest extent possible, to help local governments with inadequate local revenue sources to take greater advantage of available funds.

Local Control—Federal bureaucratic surveillance over the management and control of airports should be discontinued in the cases where the local governments are capable of operating and maintaining the facility. Subject to requirements for a national airport system plan, public airport sponsors should be given increased flexibility in dedicating available airport grant funds to finance projects determined to be of highest priority by the sponsoring county/community.

Military Airports—The federal government should work cooperatively with counties in developing joint use of existing military airports. Considerable public savings could result, since military airports usually have established controls over surrounding land use and have developed surface transportation.

Essential Air Service— The federal government should continue subsidies for assisting airlines serving small communities and fully fund the program from the $50 million in funds that comes from the international over flight fee and $150 million in appropriated funds.


Air and Noise Pollution Control—The federal government should vigorously continue research of air and noise pollution caused by civilian and military aircraft and enforce existing standards, rules, and regulations. Regulation by land use should be the last resort in noise pollution control and not be mandated by federal legislation that would diminish county authority in this area. Attention should be directed to the control of noise at its source, which is the aircraft itself, and through safe noise abatement aircraft operating procedures.

Airport Accessibility—All public airports should be open to all aircraft, except where segregation is necessary for general aviation aircraft with inadequate navigation and communication equipment or pilots with inadequate training and experience and in instances where the local government body has found it necessary to restrict the types of aircraft.

Municipal Bonds—The tax free status of bonds used in airport development should be continued with no imposition of additional restrictions on arbitrage and advanced refunding of bonds.

Off-Airport User Fees—Counties and other public airports shall continue to have the authority to set fees, rates and charges for the use of airport facilities by off-airport businesses, the proceeds of which shall be dedicated to airport development, capital financing and operations.

Airport Rates and Charges—Local governments and airport operators should have full authority to impose and enforce rates and charges and dedicate all airport revenue to airport development, capital financing and operations.

Local and Regional Airport Planning—Local and regional airport planning and local and regional self-determination with respect to scheduled passenger service must be preserved. The Federal Aviation Administration should be encouraged to defer to regional aviation plans whose participants perform the same function as a multi-airport proprietor serving a community or region, particularly with respect to scheduled passenger service at county airports.

Passenger Facility Charges—County and other public airports should continue to be able to levy Passenger Facility Charges of at least $4.50.

Airport Security—Congress and the administration should provide sufficient funding to both commercial and general aviation airports to guarantee adequate security and to ensure that no financial burdens as it relates to enhanced security and/or federal security requirements are imposed on local governments or public authorities that operate these facilities.

RAILROADS Because railroads provide an essential link in the transportation of raw goods, finished

products, and passengers, there should be a coordinated federal-state-local effort to return rail service to its appropriate place in a balanced national transportation system, including needed regulatory reform.

In this effort, long-distance passenger service should be expanded and improved, with service to more parts of the country and no abandonment of service in major urban centers.

In dealing with bankrupt freight lines, reorganization, rehabilitation, and modernization must be accomplished with minimal disruption of mainline service; light-density lines should be abandoned only after thorough cost/benefit analyses based on accurate data and appropriate methodologies which consider the social costs to communities affected and the national interest


in preserving service, including maintenance of service in areas where energy resources, such as coal, are located.

Specific concerns of counties which must be addressed in the reorganization of bankrupt lines include: the disposition of property taxes owed to counties by railroads in reorganization; the impact on county revenues of possible nationalization or federal ownership of rights-of-way, or of abandonment; the potential social and economic impact from possible abandonment of freight service; and alternative uses of rights-of-way of lines which are abandoned.

Counties and other local governments should have the first option to purchase all abandoned or proposed abandonments of rail rights-of-way to be used for riding and biking trails, busways, light rail and to meet other possible transportation needs.

Freight Rail Assistance—Congress should provide assistance to local governments, states, and railroads for the rehabilitation, preservation, and improvement of rail lines with the goal of maintaining and improving needed freight service.

Amtrak—Congress should continue to provide subsidies to Amtrak at a level consistent with maintaining a reasonable level of service and to provide necessary capital improvements with appropriate accountability controls. However, none of the transportation trust funds should be used to address Amtrak’s financial problems.

Short Line Railroads—Because the abandonment and deterioration of short line railroads adversely affects the economies of the communities they serve, Congress should enact legislation that would preserve and restore short line railroads in urban and rural communities.

High-Speed Rail—Efforts should be undertaken to improve and expand regional and national high-speed rail service to serve those counties and regions that would benefit from such service. The demand for faster and better rail service is increasing, the need to get more vehicles off the highways is reaching a critical stage, and current resources allocated to Amtrak are insufficient.

There should be a coordinated federal-state-local effort to return rail service to its appropriate place in a balanced transportation system. However, no funds from the Highway Trust Fund should be used for high-speed rail, there should be no preemption of state and local taxing authority, and no negative impact on any current commuter rail funding.

WATERWAYS Relief is afforded our overland systems by the transportation of millions of tons of

materials over inland waterways. These waterways and terminal facilities must be properly developed and maintained to protect one of our great economic resources. All levels of government should include this system in their transportation planning process. County officials should take the lead in developing effective measures for planning, developing, operating, and controlling the terminal facilities. A vibrant waterway transportation system is vital to our economy and provides our nation with the ability to meet the needs of the shipping public. Legislation should be supported that facilitates the revitalization, modernization, and maintenance of port facilities.

Passenger Vessel Development—To encourage the promotion and development of a United States flag cruise industry, the Passenger Vessel Development Act should be adopted by the Congress, including amendment to encourage owners of new cruise ships to employ a number of U. S. citizens.


Local Notification and Input Regarding the Foreign Sale of U. S. Ports—Legislation should be passed ensuring that state and local officials responsible for administration and security at U.S. ports are consulted and given an opportunity to provide input when sales of port facilities in their jurisdiction to foreign, state-owned entities are proposed.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The federal government, in cooperation with state and local governments and industry, should undertake more research and development for new transportation modes, by developing new technology, improving coordination of current research and development, providing funds for more demonstration programs, and providing funds for research to better integrate existing and new modes of transportation.

Federal highway research resources must be made available to develop reasonable, safe and cost effective low volume roads.

METROPOLITAN CONGESTION Provide additional federal funding to urban and suburban counties to address congestion

and grant more authority in general over how federal funds can be expended for congestion projects to local officials so that congestion can be attacked in a systematic manner by officials at the level of government most familiar with the issues and solutions.


TRANSPORTATION RESOLUTIONS

Resolution on High-Speed Intercity Rail for the 21st and 22nd Centuries Issue: High-Speed Intercity and Interstate Passenger Rail for the 21st and 22nd centuries. Adopted Policy: NACo supports a national dialogue to establish a new high

performance national standard for high speed intercity and interstate passenger rail and a corresponding vision and implementation plan for the 21st and 22nd centuries.

Background: Over the last several decades, the FRA has overseen the deployment of conventional diesel powered heavy passenger rail vehicles on freight railroad owned tracks with speeds typically averaging between 20 and 50 mph. While such a model can be successful for commuter rail applications in urban corridors of less than 100 miles, this is a very challenging model for intercity passenger corridors of 100 to 500 miles and longer. Slow average speeds and excessive travel times undermine the ability of intercity passenger rail to compete with other modes of transportation for ridership and revenue and mandate low fares in order to attract consistent ridership. When low fares and the resulting revenue fail to cover operating expenses, large annual operating subsidies are required at the local level. State and local taxpayer support for continued annual operating subsidies for poor performing intercity passenger rail systems is uncertain.

The USDOT through the FRA High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) grant program has awarded individual grants to states and encouraged states to develop their own intercity passenger rail programs. The majority of these programs rely heavily on freight railroad infrastructure which was never intended for high speed passenger rail operation in excess of 90 mph. As a result, participating states are moving forward with “Intermediate-Speed” or “Higher-Speed” passenger rail service with average speeds in the 40 mph to 60 mph range which may still require significant annual operating subsidies at the local level.

The USDOT has an opportunity to move high performance, high speed intercity and interstate passenger rail forward as part of a comprehensive 21st and 22nd century multi-modal transportation network for America, however it has not yet created a vision and plan for developing completely dedicated and grade separated electric guideways that are required for high speed intercity passenger rail operation in the 200 to 300 mph range. These speeds are necessary to compete with automobile and commercial air travel in long distance intercity corridors and will provide the ridership and fare revenue required to cover operational costs and sustain intercity passenger rail service well into the future.

The USDOT has an opportunity to set a true high speed intercity and interstate passenger rail national standard which will allow for the interoperability of high speed passenger rail systems between states and across the county. Federal leadership is necessary to create this exciting vision and develop an implementation plan that all states can strive to achieve.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: The creation of a new national standard for high speed intercity passenger rail is not likely to fiscally impact local governments directly; however federal policies could ultimately result in direct or indirect fiscal impacts to local governments. At this time it is difficult to quantify a fiscal impact to local governments.


Resolution on Railroad Relations Issue: Relations between local governments and freight railroads.


Adopted Policy: NACo supports a Congressional Budget office study that examines the imbalance of power between railroads and local government.

Background: The powers and duties granted to railroads during the Civil War create an imbalance of power in many regions of the country. That imbalance hinders the ability of local governments to develop modern commuter rail, address the nuisances caused by or on property owned by freight rail companies, and deal with abandoned and disconnected spurs.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impacts: Depends largely on how the imbalance of power is addressed. However, any progress in this area is better than what currently exists and thus likely to benefit local governments across the nation.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Safe Highways and Infrastructure Preservation Act (SHIPA, H.R. 1574/ S. 876)

Issue: Safe Highways and Infrastructure Preservation Act (SHIPA, H.R. 1574/S.876). Adopted Policy: NACo supports the Safe Highways and Infrastructure Preservation Act

(SHIPA, H.R. 1618/S. 779) and strongly opposes any legislation that seeks to increase truck size or weight beyond the current federal standards, thereby capacity of our road systems and putting highways, roads, and bridges at risk of increased damage or deterioration.

Background: There is concern that attempts are being made at the federal level to increase the federal standards for size, weight and allowable number of trailers beyond the capacity of existing road infrastructure. H.R. 1574 and S. 876 would maintain the current federal size and weight standards on the Interstate System and extend these standards to the National Highway System. Bigger and heavier trucks cause greater acceleration of the deterioration of states’ highways, roads, and bridges, putting further pressure on local taxpayers to fund infrastructure. Investments in our county, state and federal road systems have not kept up with the increased traffic levels. Current funding for roads and bridges across all government levels in the state is inadequate and investments by local governments have been curbed by cuts in municipal state aid, county state aid and a shrinking federal highway program fund. NACo, along with many county and municipal associations, strongly opposes all legislation that attempts to shift costs and liability of private business on to local governments and threatens local control of local roads

Longer Combination Vehicles, LCVs, have an 11 percent higher fatal accident involvement rate than single tractor trailers. Triples have poor stability performance and create a larger crash area when involved in an accident. Heavier tractor trailers have an increase risk of rollover because they have a higher center of gravity. Increasing truck weight likely will lead to brake maintenance problems and longer stopping distances. Larger trucks are harder to steer because of their extra axle. These trucks are responsible for close to 2.4 deaths for every 100 million vehicle miles which is a 50 percent higher rate than smaller trucks.

Fiscal/Urban Rural Impact: Maintaining current federal truck size and weight standards on the Interstate System and imposing similar standards on the rest of the National Highway System would limit the increased risk of damage or deterioration of highways, roads and bridges and the associated costs with maintaining state and local highways, roads and bridges in both urban and rural counties and limit the increased safety risks such as accidents due to rollovers, stopping problems, steering problems, and increased risks of deaths in accidents involving these vehicles.



Resolution on Commuter Rail Trackage and Operating Rights

Issue: Provision of Commuter Rail Service. Adopted Policy: NACo supports access for commuter and intercity rail providers to

freight rail tracks for the provision of commuter rail service in return for reasonable compensation and terms and recommends the Surface Transportation Board have jurisdiction therein.

Background: Many county and other local and state governmental agencies are interested in providing expanded or new commuter rail service in order to provide another alternative to commuters in the region and to reduce congestion on the highway system. One of the major impediments to offering more commuter rail service is access to freight rail tracks and the reluctance of the freight rail companies to make trackage available. The companies regard their tracks as private property, believe commuter rail will interfere with freight rail service, and have general concerns about the liability issues associated with commuter rail usage of their tracks.

For providers of commuter rail, it is unrealistic and cost prohibitive to purchase and develop rights-of-way dedicated only to commuter rail. It makes much more sense to use the existing tracks owned by freight rail companies and to develop cooperative relationships that address the companies concerns. Under federal law, Amtrak has access to the freight rail infrastructure and it makes sense for commuter rail to have the same access.

If commuter rail was granted similar authority, under this scenario a provider of commuter rail services would negotiate for track access with a freight railroad. However, if an agreement could not be reached, the commuter rail provider would appeal to the Surface Transportation Board, which then would have the authority to order that the facilities be made available and prescribe reasonable terms and compensation within 90 days.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Adoption of this change in federal law would allow any urban or rural county government seeking to provide commuter rail service on freight rail infrastructure to do so at a fair and reasonable cost.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Mitigation of Impact of Rail Mergers and Buyouts on Local Communities

Issue: Impacts on a county or other local government and its residents of a freight rail merger or buyout.

Adopted Policy: NACo supports a change in federal law requiring the Surface Transportation Board (STB), in a proceeding involving the merge or control of at least one Class I railroad, to consider the effect on the public interest, including the safety and environmental effect of the proposed merger on local communities, intercity rail passenger transportation, and commuter rail passenger transportation; prohibiting the STB from approving mergers if a cost-benefit analysis of their impact on safety, rail service and resulting public investments for infrastructure upgrades on all affected communities outweight the transportation benefits, and authorizes the STB to impose conditions to mitigate the effect of mergers on local communities.

Background: When freight rail mergers or buyouts occur, there may be substantial community impacts and a community's citizens may often look to county government to assist them. Often these mergers and buyouts result in significantly increased rail traffic which has a substantial affect on grade crossing and traffic as well as increased noise.


Given that county and other local governments have no regulatory authority over freight railroads and no standing in federal courts, there is little they can do to either challenge these mergers and buyouts or require mitigation of the community impacts. The result is that if any mitigation is to occur it must be done by local governments. This is often impossible due to the substantial costs connected with the improvement of grade crossings and the results are substantial negative effects on the local community in terms of traffic delays and congestion.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Adoption of proposed changes in federal law relating to mitigation of community impact of freight rail mergers and buyouts could result in substantial savings to both urban and rural county governments.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on the Rulemaking Establishing Minimum Levels of Retroflectivity for Pavement Markings

Issue: Establishing minimum levels of retroreflectivity for pavement markings. Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties (NACo) requests Congress to

repeal the mandated standards for retroreflectivity for pavement markings and would recommend that such issues be left to the user organizations that are most knowledgeable of the issues concerning pavement markings. NACo urges county officials to comment in opposition to any USDOT rulemaking on mandatory standards of reflectivity.

Background: Congress has required the Secretary of the U. S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) to establish minimum levels of retroreflectivity. Rulemaking was recently completed for minimum levels of retroreflectivity for sign faces and legend products.

Several years ago Congress passed an amendment requiring the U. S. Department of Transportation to establish minimum levels of reflectivity for highway signs and pavement markings. Counties believe they are performing adequately in this area without federal guidance and that sufficient information currently exists to allow states and local governments to provide reasonable and proper guidance, warning and traffic control for motorists.

Furthermore, minimum level of retroreflectivity cannot be assured in the various climatic regions of the country where frost, snow and other environmental elements negatively impact retroreflectivity. If implemented, this would be an unfunded mandate.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Significant but undetermined fiscal impact in both urban and rural counties.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Transportation Trust Fund

Issue: Retaining current budgetary treatment of the Highway Trust Fund and the Airport and Airways Trust Fund.

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties strongly urges the Administration and the Congress to retain the existing budget treatment of the highway, mass transit and airport programs that are funded through the mandatory spending of funds collected in the Highway Trust Fund and Airport and Airways Trust Fund.

Background: Congress enacted funding guarantees in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century in 1998 and the Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century in 2000 that ensured that taxes collected from users of the highway system and aviation system would be spent for the intended purpose of improving our nation's infrastructure. The guarantees in these laws, supported by NACo, made sure that funded deposited in these two Trust Funds


would not be used to off-set any budget deficit but rather be spent to support the programs they were intended to fund. Prior to these changes, highway, transit and airport spending was discretionary and subject to the annual appropriations process even though users of the system were told that they were paying a tax or fee to use and maintain the system.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Retaining the existing treatment of transportation Trust Funds would be of benefit to urban and rural counties by guaranteeing all funds collected are spent for their intended purpose.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on the Highway Trust Fund

Issue: Financial status of the Highway Trust Fund. Adopted Policy: NACo urges Congress to take the necessary steps to foreclose the

possibility that the Highway Trust Fund will reach a negative balance prior to the reauthorization of a new surface transportation law and also ensure that SAFETEA-LU is fully funded at its authorized levels for the life of the current program. However, Congress should not repeal the exemption from the federal fuel tax for state and local governments as a means of raising funds for the Highway Trust Fund.

Background: Due to the current recession fuel tax revenue flowing into the Highway Trust Fund has decreased with the result that it has become uncertain whether there will be enough revenue to support the fully authorized levels of the highway program until the time arrives when Congress reauthorizes the federal surface transportation program and includes either an increase in the federal fuel tax or another approach to bring in additional revenue.

There have been several infusions of general fund revenue that has resulted in a fully funded program but that may not continue if Congress is required to adopt additional short term extensions of SAFETEA-LU beyond the end of 2010. If the Highway Trust Fund approaches a negative balance and Congress has not acted, it seems likely that the Department of Transportation would make cuts to the obligation levels on its own. Such cuts could negatively impact many of the federal highway programs that counties are eligible for and create problems for the next reauthorization.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Counties could experience a reduction in federal highway funds, including a disproportionate cut to those highway programs that provide funding for county highway, bridge, and safety projects.


Resolution for Support of the Railroad Competition Act Issue: Support Railroad Competition Act. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the passage of the Railroad Competition Act. The

Railroad Competition Act would require railroads to quote rates to their customers. It would provide arbitration for certain rail rates, services, and other disputes. It would allow the Surface Transportation Board (STB) to identify areas that lack adequate rail competition, resulting in market remedies for rail customers in those areas.

Background: Under current regulations, the railroad industry has developed a monopoly on rail service leaving many industries as captive shippers with no competition for freight delivery. This lack of competition allows for exorbitant pricing and poor service and is a deterrent to economic development and has caused, in some regions of the nation, the loss of jobs. In 1980, the Staggers Act deregulated the rail industry. The intention of the Staggers Act


was largely met and successful. However, since 1980, when there were over 40 Class I railroads, mergers and consolidations have reduced that number of Class I railroads to seven. Four major railroads account for 95 percent of the railroad shipping.

The Staggers Act mandated protection of captive shippers. However, despite congressional intent, remedies for exorbitant pricing and the lack of access to viable competition do not exist. The Surface Transportation Board that administers the Staggers Act has produced rulings that have skewed the freight rail market place creating a federally-protected monopoly. The rail industry also enjoys exemption from federal antitrust laws. Today, whole states, whole regions, and whole industries are often captive to a single railroad.

In the 111th Congress, the Railroad Competition Act was introduced in the House and Senate with bipartisan support. The legislation has not been enacted.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Significant positive fiscal impact to most counties. Adopted July 19, 2011

Resolution Supporting Customs Fees Being Used for Port Infrastructure Development

Issue: Inadequate investment in the maintenance and improvement of coastal and inland port infrastructure.

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties (NACo) urges Congress to support a policy that would dedicate a percentage of the custom duties attributable to maritime port activity to improve the maintenance and development of coastal and inland ports and waterways.

Background: There are 126 public seaport agencies, established by state law, owned and operated by state, county, city governments and port authorities that develop, manage and promote the flow of waterborne commerce and act as catalysts for economic growth. These ports handle in excess of $600 billion in international trade and the volume of this trade is expected to double by 2020. In terms of employment, 4.9 million jobs accounting for $44 billion in personal income is generated by ports.

Further investment in port infrastructure, such as berths, intermodal connections, and channel dredging, is necessary to maintain this economic engine of the U.S. economy. During the past five years, the port industry has invested more than $8 billion in modernizing and upgrading facilities. However, much needs to be done and there is currently inadequate federal investment in these facilities.

Customs duties, based on the value of cargo, are a potential source of federal infrastructure investment. Generating $17.5 billion annually from seaport activities, none of these funds, paid by the users of the port system, are dedicated to infrastructure investment. Customs duties go directly into the general fund of the U.S. Treasury where a portion goes toward the promotion of agricultural exports and most goes toward deficit reduction and the funding of other federal discretionary spending.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Urban and rural counties and their economies would benefit from increased federal investment in port infrastructure.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution in Support of Short Sea Shipping Initiative

Issue: Promoting the use of the waterways as one method of easing traffic congestion and alleviating air pollution.


Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties (NACo) urges Congress to support the development of a robust short sea shipping system to aid in the reduction of greater freight congestion on our Nation's highway systems, with an additional benefit of reducing air pollution.

Background: International trade is projected to reach two billion tons within the next twenty years-twice today's level. This increase will place significant stress on an already overloaded landside transportation system. Nowhere is this stress more evident than at our major port gateways and coastal transportation corridors. According to some sources, absent major changes as many as 10,000 more trucks each day will end up on I-95 alone.

Water transportation, especially along our coasts and inland waterways is a sensible, economical, and environmentally sound solution to many of our congestion problems and the related issue of air pollution. Short sea shipping is defined as commercial waterborne transportation that does not transit an ocean. It is an alternative form of commercial transportation that utilizes inland and coastal waterways to move commercial freight from major domestic ports to its destination.

Short sea shipping creates a supplemental system to simply unloading a ship and placing the cargo on trucks, which will further congest our highways and increase deterioration. It takes advantage of the 25,000 miles of inland and coastal waterways in the United States. A single barge can carry the equivalent load of 58 tractor-trailers while 15 barge tows can provide the equivalent of 870 trucks.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Urban and rural counties would benefit from increased use of coastal and inland waterways to move freight and it would lessen the requirements for local investments in highways and reduce the costs associated with air pollution.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on the Reauthorization of the Federal Airport and Aviation Program

Issue: The Federal Airport and Aviation Program and the user fees that support it expired on September 30, 2007 and must be extended.

Adopted Policy:

• The new legislation must include a level of funding to meet future airport infrastructure development requirements, reflecting increased enplanements and congestion, and also reflect the need for a modernized air traffic control system.

• Airport Trust Fund revenue sources must be indexed yearly, to address the outstanding capital needs of airports and the current low balance in the Trust Fund.

• The Airport Improvement Program (AIP) must be funded at a level of no less than $4 billion annually, and guaranteed each year at the authorized level.

• Airport sponsors must be allowed to increase the Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) to a level of no less than $6.00, and the PFC maximums must be then indexed yearly.

• Airport sponsors must be given increased flexibility in allocating AIP and PFC funds to finance projects they determine to be a priority, including using such funds for safety improvements.

• General Fund contributions should be increased as a percentage of the FAA's operations budget and be used for a modernized national air traffic control system.

• A user fee based on air traffic control usage is counterproductive for General Aviation Airports because it will lead to lower use of such facilities and should not be


considered as a revenue source to either pay for FAA operations or a modernized national air traffic control system.

• Essential Air Service (EAS) must be re-evaluated and a sufficient and guaranteed funding source be identified to subsidize air service to eligible small and rural communities and should not include a local match requirement.

• Small Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP) must be continued with sufficient and guaranteed funding to meet the needs of small and rural communities to allow them to have the resources and flexibility to retain, expand, and attract air service.

• Airport sponsors must have authority to impose and enforce rates and charges and dedicate all revenue to airport development, capital financing and operations.

• Airport sponsors must have the flexibility to invest AIP and PFC funds and local rates and charges for the financing of intermodal transportation facilities, including but not limited to roads, interchanges and public transit that are an integral component to the growth and sustainability of the airport.

• To ensure that projects are completed in a timely and efficient manner, there should be a tiered approach to environmental permitting depending on the size and scope of the project and all federal agencies involved in permitting should coordinate and proceed concurrently.

• New sources of funds for Security//Safety programs must be provided to airport sponsors and no new federal security mandates or programs which impose financial burden shall be required of airport sponsors.

• Modify the AIP Block Grant program for GA airports currently in place in eight states to allow reliever airports to opt out and work directly with the Federal Aviation Administration.

• The new legislation must uphold the current federal standards for fire protection, which appropriately focus attention on airside safety within our nation's airports while respecting the diverse needs and resources of rural, suburban and urban airports.

Background: In 2011 the Congress has continued the process of reauthorizing the federal airport and aviation programs, which expired at the end of September 2007 and has now been extended numerous times. The House and Senate passed their respective bills in early 2011 and Congressional committees are currently attempting to work out compromises on various sections of the bills.

While these programs include the Federal Aviation Administration facilities and equipment program and operations of the air traffic control system, much of NACo's focus is on the Airport Improvement Program (AIP), Essential Air Service (EAS) and the Small Community Air Service Development Program. AIP currently provides about $3.5 billion annually in grants for capital improvements to commercial, cargo and general aviation airports and is funded primarily through the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, which gets most of its money from the air passenger ticket tax. AIP eligible airports include 558 facilities with commercial service and approximately 2556 general aviation airports. It is estimated that counties are involved in about one-third of the nation's airports, either through direct ownership or participation on airport authorities that govern many of these facilities.

There has been an ongoing concern since airline deregulation in 1978 to ensure that small and rural communities continue to receive air service. Essential Air Service has been the backstop for these communities. Despite many challenges to its survival, EAS has continued to


make subsidy payments to air carriers serving small communities and, in fact, has seen the number of communities served jump by 40 since 9/11 to approximately 150 smaller communities. Annual funding for EAS has been around the $115 million level for many years but was increased to $200 million in 2010.

In the 2003 airport legislation, Congress created the Small Community Air Service Development Program. Its purpose is to provide grants to small and rural communities to maintain and attract expanded air service through a variety of innovative techniques, including the marketing of the airports and air carriers and subsidy of service. Airports applying for the $10-$20 million in grants available annually can be no larger than a small hub.

Other issues of concern to NACo include Passenger Facility Charges, the viability of the Airport Trust Fund, and the contribution of the General Fund to aviation programs.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Reauthorization could mean substantial additional resources available to county-owned airports and increased service to small and rural communities.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution to Create a National Indemnity Liability Fund for Public Transit Agencies Authorities

Issue: National indemnity liability fund for transit agencies/authorities. Adopted Policy: NACo supports the creation of a national indemnity liability fund for

public transit agencies/authorities that wish to operate commuter rail services in freight rail corridors. NACo further supports an initial federal appropriation of $200 million that will be used to establish an initial reserve for this fund that will subsequently be managed and maintained by fund participants through premium payments and a professional risk management program.

Background: It is in the nation's interest to use freight rail corridors for commuter rail service. More communities are doing this in metropolitan areas as one approach to improve mobility and reducing congestion. This is normally far less expensive than purchasing a dedicated right-of-way. Freight railroads now require public transportation entities to purchase insurance to indemnify and hold freight railroads harmless as a condition for use of such rights of way for publicly sponsored and funded commuter rail service.

It is in the local and national interest that a national liability fund be created so that all public transportation entities who wish to operate commuter rail services could buy into such a fund and secure required coverage at rates less expensive than purchases of first dollar coverage by each individual transit agency.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: It would assist local governments keep down the cost of operating commuter rail services. It would likely continue inter-urban rail lines operable for years to come.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on the Timely Passage of the Airport and Aviation Legislation

Issue: The Airport and Aviation legislation expired on September 30, 2007 and needs to be reauthorized by Congress as soon as possible.

Adopted Policy: NACo strongly urges the Senate and House conferees to convene and quickly agree on a conference report for the Federal airport and aviation legislation that can be adopted by the full Senate and House and be sent to President Obama for his signature.


Background: The federal airport and aviation programs expired on September 30, 2007. Because Congress has been unable to complete action on this legislation, there have been a series of extensions passed by Congress to keep the programs operating. In the current Congress, the House and Senate passed their respective bills in early 2011 and Congressional committees are working to resolve the differences in the two bills. Reauthorization of these programs has been a Legislative Priority for NACo in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011, in part, because counties are estimated to be involved in about one-third of the nation's airports, either through direct ownership or participation on airport authorities that govern many of these facilities.

Much of NACo's focus has been on the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) that provides grants for capital improvements to commercial, cargo and general aviation airports, Essential Air Service (EAS) that subsidizes air service to small and rural communities and the Small Community Air Service Program that provides grants to small airports to assist them in attracting, retaining and expanding air service.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Reauthorization could mean substantial additional resources available to county-owned airports and increased and improved service to small and rural communities.


Resolution on the Future of the Federal Surface Transportation Program Issue: SAFETEA-LU, the federal surface transportation program and the user fees that

support it, expires on September 30, 2009, and must be reauthorized. Adopted Policy:

Metro Congestion • A new federal program should be created to reduce urban and suburban

congestion in metropolitan regions. • Each existing federal highway program should have a component that reduces

congestion. • A broad-based congestion plan needs to be developed in each metropolitan area. • Incident management must be considered a priority. An incentive grant program

should be created that funds counties/metropolitan region that implement a comprehensive incident management plan.

• Innovative approaches, such as short sea shipping, should be developed. • Each metro area needs to develop a plan to manage trucks, including a priority to

segregate freight. • Intermodal facilities should be developed to facilitate movement of freight by rail

to the extent possible. • There should be increased federal funding for grade separation improvements. • The Surface Transportation Board, in making decisions regarding railroad

ownership and expansion, must consider impact of grade crossings. • Congestion pricing should be promoted as a cost-effective way to reduce

congestion, more efficiently use existing and new capacity and raise additional revenue.

• A focus on decreasing congestion to reduce emissions should be emphasized.


Planning • The new legislation must require that state and local governments cooperate in the

planning and funding allocation process. Metropolitan areas should retain their independence in planning and allocation of federal funds. A guiding principle should be local discretion with accountability to federal goals and priorities. This process should establish project priorities for both state and local governments and include recognition of the fiscal capacity of all levels of government to finance improvement to the surface transportation system.

• All federal categorical programs should be allocated through the planning process.

• Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) in areas between 50,000-200,000 should have the same authority as the large urban MPOs.

• Additional funding should be made available to MPOs so they have the capacity to coordinate with state officials and do the necessary planning to address congestion.

• Local elected officials must remain a majority on any MPO. The method of allocation of votes within MPOs should be examined.

• In metropolitan regions, project reviews should reflect the goals of the federal Sustainable Communities partnership with a strong linkage with land use and include climate change impacts and the degree to which transportation projects are integrated with land use.

• Economic development, access to jobs and job creation should be included when a federal, state or regional agency is evaluating a project.

• There should be a standardization of what is an acceptable level of consultation in the rural consultation process, recognizing that one size does not fit all situations.

• The rural planning process needs to be upgraded and additional funding should be made available to rural local governments to assist them in the planning process.

• States and regional planning agencies must consider the economic development impacts of a proposed highway project in making a decision on whether or not to fund a specific project with federal –aid highway funds.

Highways and Bridges

Bridge Program • The federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP)

must retain its current structure to continue the progress being made to reduce the backlog of deficient bridges. It should continue to be a separate category with greater funding.

• The minimum percentage of funds dedicated to off-system bridges should be increased from 15 percent to 25 percent.

• No change to the sufficiency rating system that determines which bridges are eligible for federal funds.

• Enhanced maintenance should be an eligible activity when using federal bridge funds.

• Allocation of bridge funds among the state and local governments within a state should be data driven and reflect the number of deficient bridges for both the on-system and off-system programs.


• Federal funding for Forest Service bridges should not come from the off-system bridge program.

Rural Roads • Additional federal highway funds should be available for rural projects on county-

owned systems. • There needs to be a simplified system of project approval on rural and other

projects related to the cost, design and complexity of a project. • The High Risk Rural Road Program should be continued with at least $1 billion

annually in funding and an enhanced process developed for county officials to approve funding decisions. Funding for projects should be targeted toward proven and cost-effective safety improvements. Projects should be restricted to rural major or minor collector or rural local roads.

• Rural Set-Aside-In those states with a county road system, there should be a rural set-aside in the Surface Transportation Program and it should be restricted to county roads functionally classified as arterials or major and minor collectors that are administered by local governments.

• The Scenic By-Way Program should be continued as an economic development tool for rural counties.

National Highway System • The National Highway System (NHS) program should be continued to provide

federal funds to maintain and upgrade the major highway network of the nation.

Surface Transportation Program • The Surface Transportation Program (STP) should be continued with the goal of

providing maximum funding to county governments with a minimum of interference by state officials concerning spending decisions.

Enhancements • Funds should continue to be allocated for the Enhancement Program and shall be

used for transportation projects based on local government or MPO discretion.

Reservation Road Program • Reservation road funding should be continued for the improvement and

maintaining of roads that are used to transport children to or from school or Head Start programs on or near reservations.

Federal Lands Highway Program • The Federal Lands Highway Program should be amended to make it available to

fund improvements to any road that accesses or passes through federally managed forest lands, specifically including lands managed by the U.S Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.

Safety • Increase funding for safety projects aimed at reducing fatalities, especially on

those rural roads where fatality rates are the highest. • The Highway Safety and Improvement Program (HSIP) should be continued with

more funding. The HSIP program should be targeted to cost-effective safety improvements; there must be a greater access for counties to HSIP funding, clear


deadlines for project approval and the inclusion of county officials in each state's development of the Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

• Safety funding must be focused on those highways and roads with the highest incident levels.

• Transfer of funds from the HSIP to other federal categories should not be permitted.

• The Safe Routes to School program should be continued with additional funding. • Additional technology should be used to improve transportation safety. • Federal policy on truck weight/size shall not preempt local authority to regulate

trucks. A study of the impact of truck weight/size shall be undertaken. • Federal incentives should be created to reduce speeding and impaired driving.

Transit • The mass transit program must retain its separate identity. • The transit program should include the goals of improving metropolitan and rural

mobility, reducing congestion, conserving energy resources, reducing greenhouse gases and serving the needs of underserved populations.

• Funding for mass transit should be increased either through its existing share of the Highway Trust Fund or through the general fund.

• More flexibility should be given to the recipients of transit funding as to how the funds should be allocated, including whether funds are spent for operating or capital expenses.

• The Federal Transit Administration should distribute funds within six months of approval.

• Transit benefit subsidy should be equal to the subsidized parking benefit. • Before a transit system receives funds, at least a five-year strategic plan for that

system must be in place. • The project approval/development process must be simplified. • Indemnification of shared railroad rights of way-create a national indemnity

liability fund for public transit agencies/authorities that wish to operate commuter rail service in freight rail corridors.

• Streamline standards and processes for approving transit projects with the goal of increasing the speed at which projects can be built and decreasing the cost of projects.

• The Access to Jobs program should be continued as a means of supporting county programs that encourage economically deprived individuals to return to work and be funded from the General Fund.

• Connectivity should be included as a criterion in approving expenditure of federal funds on transit projects.

• The Transit in the Parks Program to permit operations and maintenance as eligible activities.

Financing • For the next reauthorization, the gas tax should remain a major source of funding. • There needs to be an immediate increase in the federal gas tax and indexing to

address the outstanding needs of the surface transportation systems. • The interest generated by the trust funds needs to be credited back to the trust

fund.


• The Federal-local match should remain the same. • User pay should continue to be the cornerstone of transportation financing. • There should be no devolution/turn back of current federal gas tax authority to the

States. • The revenue base for federal transportation programs should be broadened to

reduce the reliance on the traditional fuel tax and on fossil fuels. The current gasoline tax is not sustainable in the future due in part to increasing fuel efficiency, alternative fuels, and potential lower consumption of fuel due to increasing prices.

• The reauthorization needs to examine alternative sources of funding and should include pilot projects and research to address the future financing needs of the transportation system.

• All fuels should be taxed the same-if a fuel source powers vehicles, it should be taxed equally and deposited into the Highway Trust Fund.

• Additional revenue sources should be available in congested areas, such as congestion pricing.

• The movement of freight should be subject to federal taxes/impact fees that reflect the damage their weight imposes on the infrastructure.

• A national sales tax for transportation should be explored. • Tolling of interstate capacity should be permitted, including new capacity or

converted capacity on existing interstates, such as HOV lanes. Proceeds from tolling may be used for capital or operating costs. County governments should be reimbursed for any diversion of traffic due to tolling.

• Debt financing through a bonding/federal infrastructure financing authority proposal should be included that would complement the existing highway and transit programs and provide an additional source of funding for large projects, particularly those that reduced bottlenecks in the system, expedite the movement of freight and address congestion.

Funding • Federal funding for highways, bridges and transit needs is currently inadequate

and needs to be increased substantially to reflect the future needs of the surface transportation system.

• More funding needs to be directed to county-owned roads, either through a federal sharing formula or as a direct pass through.

• To eliminate delays in project implementation, a funding mechanism needs to be created that would allow projects below a certain funding level to bypass the states and come directly to county government.

Research • The Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP) and its 58 centers are the prime

source available to counties in training and technical transfer of best practices. Funding should be expanded to $15 million in FY2010 and gradually be increased to $20 million by FY2015.

• The Vehicle Infrastructure Integrations (VII) Initiative- should be supported with the understanding and assurance that no new federal mandates on local government are imposed.


• Substantial funding from the General Fund needs to be available for research into alternative fuels.

Accountability • Standard reporting forms must be used by state agencies in reporting to the US

Department of Transportation. • New requirement for detailed data collection. • A complete data base on all federal programs should be developed. • To measure success, performance measures need to be part of all federally funded

projects. • Allocation of federal funds within a state should be needs based using a rating

system.

Regulatory Process • While concerns about the environment should be part of the project decision

making, a balance needs to part of the process. • There should be a simplified and integrated approach to environmental permitting

related to the size and scope of the project and which focuses on saving time and dollars.

• To save time and money, timelines must be established for regulatory permitting review process.

• A "simple project" component must be developed that focuses on funding project improvement directly to local governments and has an outcome based accountability.

• Clear rules need to be created and agreed to by all agencies. Permitting agencies must coordinate and proceed concurrently to minimize delay in project approval.

• To resolve environmental impact statement and permitting issues, there must be a required point of contact within each state and on the federal level.

Mandates • All new federal mandates in the transportation area should have specific funding

streams attached. Current federal mandates attached to highway and transit funding should be reviewed.

• Land use regulation, a major consideration in transportation, should remain the responsibility of county and other local governments.

Workforce • Some level of local hiring preference should be permitted on highway and transit

projects to encourage employment of local workers on projects.

Background: There is a crisis in surface transportation and it is time to challenge the traditional approach to the authorization of the federal surface transportation program. The federal program must be improved to solve the congestion and safety challenges of the 21st century and the financial integrity of the financing system must be addressed. Counties are a key part of the nation's integrated transportation system and must part of the solution. A highway, bridge and transit program must be developed for the future that focuses on reliability, system preservation, innovative solutions and partnerships. An improved system of project delivery, flexibility and improved accountability will contribute to a better federal program.


Congress periodically reviews and considers new surface transportation legislation that provides for the authorization of the federal highway and transit programs. These programs are very important to county governments that own 1.8 million miles of roads, 256,000 bridges, and one-third of the nation's transit systems. The current federal program, SAFETEA-LU, became law in 2005 and provided $287 billion in funding for highways and transit over its 2005-2009 authorization period. It is primarily financed by the federal 18.3 cent fuel tax. Issues under consideration for the reauthorization include the adequacy of current funding in face of the substantial needs of the system; adequacy of the fuel tax as a future funding source; more funding for county-owned highways, bridges and transit systems; concerns about highway safety and the 37,000 fatalities each year on the system, a disproportionate number of which occur on two lane rural roads; increasing congestion in the nation's metropolitan regions, and the need to streamline the regulatory system so that projects can delivered more quickly and at a lower cost.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Reauthorization could mean substantial additional resources and regulatory relief to highways, bridges and transit systems owned by urban and rural county governments.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on the Federal Highway Bridge Program

Issue: Elimination of the Federal Bridge Program. Adopted Policy: NACo opposes the elimination of the federal highway bridge program

and the Off-System Bridge Set Aside as part of the surface transportation reauthorization. Background: It is possible that the surface transportation bills being drafted by the

House and Senate may recommend elimination of the federal bridge program as a separate program. Even if these bills continued making bridges an eligible expenditure in other highway programs, the absence of a bridge program or the requirement that a specific amount of federal funds be spent to bridges would have a negative impact on counties, which depend on the 15 per cent set aside in the current law, much of which goes to county governments. The bridge program has been in law since 1978 and was created in response to the recognition that there were many state and local bridges in poor condition. That continues to be an issue.

The Government Accountability Office has stated that more local rural bridges have been improved with federal bridge funds than bridges owned by state agencies, likely due to the off-system bridge set aside. Continued federal investment on county bridges is essential. Over one-third of the 283,000 bridges on non-Federal-aid highways are deficient. Over 80 percent of county bridges are on non-Federal-aid roads.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Counties are likely to lose a substantial amount of federal funds if the federal bridge program and the off-system bridge set aside are eliminated.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Flexible Transit Funding

Issue: Lack of flexibility that denies local transit operators from using federal funds to provide service for special events.

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties supports amending Title 49 and revising federal transit regulations to allow more flexibility for transit operators in the spending of federal transit funds when providing service for local special events.

Background: Transit operators are often constrained from providing certain types service when utilizing federal funds. Maximum flexibility would assist local transit systems in


better serving their communities and riders as long as there is a demonstrated public purpose such as significant traffic reduction, reduction of parking demands, sustainability, including lowering of fuel consumption, and the introduction of residents to public transit rider ship. The point is not to compete with charter bus services but to be allowed to provide service where there is a county interest and participation in an event, such as transporting citizens from a transit rail line to a county function or where a county is involved in a charitable event and wants to provide transit services to those participating.

Fiscal/urban/Rural Impact: Urban and rural counties would benefit from better transit service and counties would be able to spend federal transit funds where the needs exist.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on Maintaining Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Designation Threshold Levels

Issue: Maintaining current Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) designation threshold levels.

Adopted Policy: The National Association of Counties (NACo) opposes legislation or regulation directing the MPO population threshold to be raised from its current level of 50,000 people.

Background: Current law sets the MPO population threshold for designation at 50,000, and takes into account factors such as density and contiguity. There are those who are suggesting in the highway reauthorization legislation that a new threshold of either 100,000 or 200,000 be set. Others have recommended an increased threshold with a grandfathering of MPO’s under the new threshold or allowing an MPO to appeal to a governor or the US Secretary of Transportation for permission to continue as an MPO. If a policy was adopted to phase out MPOs with less than 200,000 population, this change would threaten approximately 200 out of the nation’s 382 MPOs, more than 50 per cent of all MPOs.

NACo policy has been for local elected officials through their MPO to play a greater role in the planning and project selection process, regardless of the size of the regions in which they are located. Any MPO that is currently between 50,000-200,000, or those that will reach this threshold due to the 2010 census, should not see their designation as a MPO changed nor should the designation be subject to approval by the governor of their respective state or by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation. Changing the threshold would disenfranchise local elected officials and further strengthen the role of unelected state department of transportation officials who do not necessarily consider or understand the transportation issues in all regions of a state.

Fiscal/Urban/Rural Impact: Counties could see a significant fiscal impact due to the transportation funding that will be redirected, if the draft proposals mentioned above are signed into law. In addition, counties could see a reduced quality in transportation services provided throughout incorporated areas of the county, and these impacts may be even more pronounced in the unincorporated or rural areas of counties.

Adopted July 19, 2011 Resolution on the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA)

Issue: Support expansion of the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) during reauthorization of surface transportation legislation.

Adopted Policy: NACo supports expanding the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) of 1998 which is a financing mechanism that allows local


jurisdictions that dedicate a portion of locally-based funding streams to infrastructure improvements to leverage Federal financing to speed the completion of eligible transportation projects.

Background: NACo policy supports financing incentives which allow local jurisdictions such as counties to leverage Federal financing for capital projects, including transportation improvements. Congress established the TIFIA program in 1998 to permit the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) to provide three forms of credit assistance – secured (direct) loans, loan guarantees, and standby lines of credit – which could be used as a means of accelerating the completion of transportation projects of national and regional significance.

TIFIA’s fundamental goal is to leverage Federal funds by attracting substantial private or other non-Federal investment in critical improvements to the nation’s surface transportation system. Each dollar of Federal funds can provide up to $10 in TIFIA credit assistance and leverage $30 in total transportation infrastructure investment. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Representative John Mica (R-FL), the respective chairs of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, have indicated their support for increasing the TIFIA program when Federal surface transportation legislation is reauthorized.

NACo urges Congress to significantly increase annual funding for the TIFIA program from its currently authorized level of $122 million per year, which will create additional financing options to complete transportation improvement projects. Resolutions supporting the expansion TIFIA and similar innovative financing mechanisms have been endorsed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the American Public Transit Association.

Rural/Urban/Fiscal Impact: Expanding TIFIA within the context of surface transportation legislation would allow local governments to leverage Federal financing to reduce the time needed to complete regionally significant infrastructure projects.


Date post:	22-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

The American County Platform and Resolutions cover page · American County Platform and Resolutions...

Documents