|
|
Eight years after a rallying cry to weaken environmental enforcement and "protect private property rights"
first took hold in Lansing, the movement appears to be losing momentum.
Twice this year the Michigan Supreme Court has affirmed the state's authority to enforce
environmental laws and rejected arguments made by property rights leaders. (See the Spring '98 issue of the
Great Lakes Bulletin.) The Legislature is showing more interest in protecting farmland and open space. Local
governments across Michigan -- temporarily frozen into inaction out of fear of "takings" lawsuits -- now are
enacting master plans and zoning ordinances to prevent sprawl.
But pockets of influence for the movement still exist, particularly in northern Michigan. In Manistee Coun-
ty, property rights leaders claimed two of the five seats on the Board of Commissioners and five of the seven
seats on the Planning Commission. The county now supports increased logging in the Manistee National
Forest, and opposes designating the Manistee River and its tributaries under the state Natural River Act.
A Tool for Limiting Government
In 1990 John Engler was among the first governors in the nation to embrace the idea that government
interference in any use of private property is an unconstitutional seizure or "taking" that merits ample
compensation. The property rights movement encompassed growing anti-government, anti-tax, and anti-authority sentiments, and proved to be an important tool in the Administration's work to limit the reach of state regulators.
Nowhere in the United States has the property rights ideology been more firmly embraced by state
government. And nowhere has it produced such expensive and dangerous outcomes. For example;
• Believing the property rights of mineral owners took precedence over the safety of residents, the state
refused to shut a natural gas well containing hydrogen sulfide concentrations of 43,000 parts per million in a
Manistee County neighborhood. Hydrogen sulfide, a poisonous gas, can kill at concentrations above 300 parts
per million. Manistee County Circuit Judge James M. Batzer, acting in a lawsuit filed by Filer Township,
criticized the state for "a total abdication" of its responsibilities, and in August 1998 ordered the well to be shut.
• In 1995 Gov. Engler convinced the Legislature to pay $94.85 million to oil companies and mineral
owners to settle a "takings" case they filed when the DNR prevented them from drilling in the Nordhouse
Dunes, a coastal wilderness area south of Ludington. It is the second-largest "takings" payment in the United
States.
• In 1997 DEQ Director Russell Harding issued a permit to Michigan Peat Co. to mine 2,000 acres of peat
moss in the Minden Bog in Sanilac County. Mr. Harding said he took this action because he feared the state
would lose a "takings" lawsuit the company filed after the DNR had denied the permit. The permit was the
largest Michigan has ever issued to develop a wetland.
Turning Point
A clear turning point emerged in the summer of 1996, when 11 people in Manistee Township were rushed
to the hospital after breathing poisonous hydrogen sulfide released from a natural gas well. DEQ officials were
slow to respond. They said the property rights of the oil companies had to be considered before they took
action. Public outcry forced the state finally to amend its position.
Since then public opinion polls have consistently shown that voters want the state's environmental laws to
be enforced. Indeed, the main reason the property rights movement is losing steam is that policy makers, land
owners, and citizens are discovering there is no justice in placing the absolute interests of one person or company over any consideration of the public interest. G
|
|
|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 
