Abstract Environmental statutes that initiate devolution frequently contain provisions that allow tiers of government to control the final assignment of policymaking authority. These provisions may allow one tier of government to propose a re-assignment of authority and may give other tiers of government the power to veto the proposed transfer of authority. Using data from the devolution of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act in California, we empirically model a dual-selection process in which a lower tier government (i.e. a city) may assume policymaking authority from an upper tier government (i.e. a county), but only if the upper tier entity chooses not to veto the petition. Using simulation methods, we compare the consequences of this policy with those of two alternative devolution policies. Each devolution policy results in the setting of different levels of public goods across tiers of government. Each policy also produces markedly different levels of compliance with state environmental standards.