Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 21.242 (2026)

State law causing reduction in state financed proportion of necessary costs.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

STATE DISBURSEMENTS TO LOCAL UNITS OF GOVERNMENT

Act 101 of 1979

21.242 State law causing reduction in state financed proportion of necessary costs.

Sec. 12.

A state law shall not be enacted, which causes a reduction in the state financed proportion of the necessary costs of an existing activity or service required of local units of government by existing law, unless the existing law requiring an activity or service is repealed.

History: 1979, Act 101, Imd. Eff. Aug. 3, 1979

Compiler's Notes:

Former MCL 21.242, which pertained to uniform method of payment to state employees, was repealed by Act 256 of 1964.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1980–2011 · leading case: Waterford Sch. Dist. v. State Bd. of Educ., 296 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Waterford Sch. Dist. v. State Bd. of Educ., 296 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs allege that this violated both the Headlee Amendment to the Michigan Constitution, Const 1963, art 9, §§ 25-34, 1 *661 and MCL 21.242; MSA 5.3194(612). 2 The named plaintiffs are the Waterford School District and seven individuals, each in their capacity as members of…”

Oakland Cnty. v. State of Mich., 566 N.W.2d 616 (Mich. 1997). · cites it 2× “§ 21.242; M.S.A. § 5.3194(612).] Section 3 defines "[s]tate financed proportion of the necessary costs of an existing activity or service required of local units of government by existing law" as the percentage of necessary costs specifically provided for an activity or service…”

Kent Cnty. v. State of Michigan (Mich. 2011). “234(5); see also MCL 21.242. Although I agree with the legal analysis of the Court of Appeals, and therefore concur with this Court’s order, I nonetheless write separately to observe that the state has embarked upon, and this Court has now affirmed, a procedure by which the…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.