Introduced
by
To prohibit the use of eminent domain by state or local governments to take private property and transfer it to a private entity for the primary benefit of that private entity, rather than for “the use or benefit” of the public. This would establish in statute a standard similar to the state Supreme Court’s 2005 ruling in Wayne County v. Hathcock, which reversed its 1981 “Poletown” ruling, and held that a government taking is not justified just because a different use of the property might increase government tax revenues. Note: The 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. New London held that the U.S. Constitution does not prohibit such takings, but that states are free to prohibit them anyway. See also Senate Joint Resolution E.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation
Reported without amendment
With the recommendation that the substitute (S-3) be adopted and that the bill then pass. This version would give local governments more leeway to take private property from one person and give it to another than the introduced version, and possibly more than current law under the Hathcock decision. The version was defeated by the Senate "committee of the whole" and replaced with the substitute described below.
Substitute offered
To replace the previous version of the bill with one that makes specific the exemptions implied in the “takings” prohibitions proposed by the original version. Private property could be taken from one person and transferred to another, but not for purposes of “economic development” or increasing tax revenues. If property is taken for purposes of eradicating urban “blight” then the burden of proof would be on the condemning authority to demonstrate “by clear and convincing evidence” that this is a public use. In other cases it would only have to meet the less stringent “preponderance of the evidence” standard.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Passed in the Senate 36 to 2 (details)
To prohibit the use of eminent domain by state or local governments to take private property and transfer it to a private entity for the primary benefit of that private entity, rather than for “the use or benefit” of the public. Specifically, property could not be taken from one person and transferred to another for purposes of “economic development” or increasing tax revenues. If property is taken for purposes of eradicating urban “blight” then the burden of proof would be on the condemning authority to demonstrate “by clear and convincing evidence” that this is a public use. In other cases the authority would only have to meet the less stringent “preponderance of the evidence” standard. See <a href="http://www.michiganvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=41339">Senate Joint Resoluton E</a>.
Referred to the Committee on Government Operations
Reported without amendment
With the recommendation that the substitute (H-2) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered
To replace the previous version of the bill with one that is essentially a "work in progress," with further revisions incorporated into the Drolet substitute.
The substitute failed by voice vote
Substitute offered
by
To replace the previous version of the bill with one that contains the basic prohibition on taking private property for the primary benefit of a private entity, but leaves all the details for <a href="http://www.michiganvotes.org/2006-HB-5060">House Bill 5060</a>.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Passed in the House 103 to 0 (details)
To prohibit the use of eminent domain by state or local governments to take private property and transfer it to a private entity for the primary benefit of that private entity, rather than for “the use or benefit” of the public. See <a href="http://www.michiganvotes.org/2006-HB-5060">House Bill 5060</a>, which contains details of the prohibition, and <a href="http://www.michiganvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=41339">Senate Joint Resoluton E</a>, which will place the prohibition in the state Constitution if adopted by voters in November, 2006.
Substitute offered
by
To replace the previous version of the bill with one that places many of the details of the proposed takings limits in this bill as well as House Bill 5060.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Passed in the Senate 33 to 4 (details)
To prohibit the use of eminent domain by state or local governments to take private property for the primary benefit of a private entity, rather than for “the use or benefit” of the public. This would place in statute the same provisions that <a href="http://www.michiganvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=41339">Senate Joint Resolution E</a> will place in the Constitution if adopted by voters in November, 2006, including placing the burden of proof on a governmental entity to demonstrate that a particular property is being taken for a public use, or because it is "blighted," and requiring compensation of 125 percent of the fair market value if a private home is taken. The bill also would add to statute an explicit definition of "blight," which is often used as a justification for taking private property, but which is so loosely defined in current statutes that it can be used to condemn property that a reasonable person would not perceive as blighted.
Passed in the House 106 to 0 (details)
To concur with the Senate-passed version of the bill, which divides the House-passed provisions between this bill and House Bill 5060.
