Legislation watch
- Home
- Create an account
- Advanced searches
- Scorecards
- Links
- About
2007 Senate Bill 978: Require certain trail development priorities
Public Act 229 of 2008
Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Sen. Tony Stamas (R) on December 6, 2007, to require the Michigan natural resources trust fund board to give particular consideration to the acquisition of land and access rights enabling the creation of recreational trails that intersect the downtown areas of cities and villages.
- Referred to the Senate Commerce & Tourism Committee on December 6, 2007.
- Reported in the Senate on June 4, 2008, with the recommendation that the bill pass.
- Referred to the Senate Commerce & Tourism Committee on December 6, 2007.
- Passed 37 to 0 in the Senate on June 5, 2008.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the House on June 5, 2008.
- Referred to the House Natural Resources, Tourism, and Outdoor Recreation Committee on June 5, 2008.
- Referred to the House Commerce Committee on June 10, 2008.
- Reported in the House on June 24, 2008, without amendment and with the recommendation that the bill pass.
- Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 27, 2008, to require the Michigan natural resources trust fund board to give particular consideration to the acquisition of land and access rights enabling the creation of recreational trails that intersect the downtown areas of cities and villages.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on July 15, 2008.
Most Recent Comments
1) Stop It! by Anonymous Citizen on June 26, 2008Are you guys insane? Nobody uses those stupid trails except for a few granola eaters. You are pandering for votes in the wrong place moron.
Reply
Rail trails are popular and well-used recreational assets. They make communities more livable for residents, and attract tourist dollars. Placing emphasis on development of connectors between these trails and city or village downtowns spurs completion of the network to make it more accessible and attractive.
And what with the cost of motor fuel these days ... any policy that boosts alternative, non-motorized transportation and recreation opportunity should be viewed as a good thing for the citizens of Michigan.
Reply
Considering the little use these actual trails get-and the hassle it puts local residents through, this is a special interest bill that does NOTHING to develop jobs or help our economy!
While you folks are having a green-dream, we're in bad shape out here! Just who is your constituency? Apparently, its not us.
Reply
View Full Conversation
