Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the House on January 29, 2003, to require the Department of Environmental Quality (or in cases of agricultural wells the Department of Agriculture) to investigate and seek to resolve cases in which the owner of a “small quantity” well, such as the well for a residence, alleges that a nearby “large quantity” well, such as for a commercial or agricultural producer, has diminished his or her well’s normal supply. If the department determines that a large quantity well has caused such a groundwater conflict, this would trigger hearings and other administrative procedures. The department would have the authority to order a temporary reduction of the amount of water removed by the large quantity well, fines of up to $1,000 a day, reimbursement to the state of up to $75,000 in administrative costs, and compensation for neighboring small quantity well owners, including potentially the provision of a new water supply. Somewhat different procedures would apply to conflicts involving high capacity wells used in agricuture or by local governments. The state would be required to establish a state “hotline” to accept complaints regarding possible groundwater conflicts. See also House Bill 4097, which establishes a state water use protection fund to pay for the provisions of this bill

The vote was 69 in favor, 39 opposed and 1 not voting

(House Roll Call 20 at House Journal 16)

Click here to view bill details.

Reps. Zelenko, Hopgood, Farrah, Dennis, Accavitti, Kolb, Anderson and Condino, having reserved the right toexplain their protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement:
“Mr. Speaker and members of the House: I voted no on HB 4087 primarily because it creates a new program without including a sufficient and appropriate funding stream to implement the program. Although the bill attempts to solve a real problem and establishes a general framework to do so, it contains several flaws that should have been addressed at the committee level. In its current form, the bill: does not provide the resources for the Departments of Environmental Quality and Agriculture to solve the problems the bill attempts to solve; includes conflicting legal remedies that likely defeat the purpose of timely conflict resolution; and requires the implementing agencies to make determinations regarding matters they are not equipped to make. Michigan needs a statute to resolve groundwater conflicts. Unfortunately, the work has not been
done with the bill to provide a workable conflict resolution system. Michigan can no longer afford new programs without identified funding sources.”

Controlling our life sources in rural areas seems a bit intrusive.
Oppose intervention of Government upon safe water wells of residents of Michigan.

Rep. Law, having reserved the right to explain her nay vote, made the following statement:

"Mr. Speaker and members of the House:

Again I voted no on HB 4087 bill as the science is bad, the tools and funding are not provided, and although the concept is good and the need is great, this bill is not going to do it for us."