Summer in Michigan is finally heating up, and so are clashes between local governments and property owners over short-term rentals.

State law preempts local zoning and land use control over many different types of land uses. One of the most important protections is for commercial agricultural operations under Michigan’s Right to Farm Act (RTFA). Local governments often face difficult issues about whether they can enforce their ordinances with respect to farm animals, accessory buildings, and farm market sales.

The Michigan Townships Association 66th Annual Educational Conference will be held at DeVos Place in Grand Rapids from April 1 through 4, 2019.

In 2018, the State passed several new laws which affect local zoning and other local ordinances. Some of these may require changes to your local ordinances.

When preparing to take action in response to a complaint of an ordinance violation (zoning or otherwise) for which a formal hearing is required, here are some helpful tips ordinance enforcement officers should follow to ensure your civil infractions are upheld in court.

Over the past few months, the Court of Appeals has issued three opinions in cases involving successful claims against the Delta College Board of Trustees, for alleged violations of the Open Meetings Act (“OMA”), in connection with closed session meetings. One of the three opinions, Vermilya v Delta College Board of Trustees (July 31, 2018), is published, and therefore establishes state-wide precedent concerning the procedures that must be followed when entering a closed session.

Three recently enacted laws, Public Acts 323, 324 and 325 (the “Acts”), which took effect in July of 2018, will create an asset management framework for Michigan’s water, energy, transportation, and communications infrastructure and create interrelated councils to coordinate planning for those infrastructure systems at local, regional, and statewide levels. Among other things, the Acts place requirements on local municipalities, and sewer, water and road authorities to develop and adopt asset management plans.

On March 13, 2018, the Michigan Court of Appeals issued a published opinion in Lockwood et al v Township of Ellington et al, affirming the authority of public bodies to ratify, or not ratify, decisions made in violation of the Open Meetings Act (“OMA”) at their discretion.

While financing public infrastructure improvements through the use tax increment financing by downtown development authorities, local development finance authorities, and corridor improvement authorities is not new in Michigan, those entities will be established and will operate under a new statute as a result of legislation approved by the state legislature and signed by the Governor earlier this year.

The Michigan Townships Association 65th Annual Educational Conference will be held at the Grand Traverse Resort from April 23 through 26, 2018.

Unlike most laws or ordinances, zoning ordinances are unique in that they attempt to apply a uniform set of regulations to properties which can be very different in terms of topography, access and existing uses or buildings.

In a recent opinion, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit sitting En Banc, ruled that the practice of the Jackson County, Michigan Board of Commissioners of offering a prayer before commission meetings does not violate the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution. The case, Bormuth v County of Jackson, arose when a “self-professed Pagan and Animist,” took offense to the Jackson County Board of Commissioners custom of opening its monthly meetings with Commissioner-led prayers. Typically, following the call to order, the Board’s Chairman requested Commissioners and the public to stand. On a rotating basis, one of the Commissioners then offered a prayer based on the dictates of his/her own conscience, which was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, and then county business.

2017 was a busy year in regards to the laws governing firearms within the State of Michigan. Republicans in the Michigan House of Representatives have identified “defending second amendment rights” as being among their action plan items for the 2017-2018 legislative session, which has led to a flurry of bills being proposed. Among bills proposed during 2017, there were multiple bills which would seek to alter the rights of individuals to possess firearms within traditional gun free zones, such as schools.

On June 23, 2017, the United States Supreme Court, in a five to three opinion, upheld, against a takings challenge, state and local regulations preventing the use or sale of adjacent lots under common ownership as separate building sites unless they have at least one acre of land suitable for development. The case, Murr et al. v. Wisconsin et al., dealt with two adjacent lots along the lower portion of the St. Croix River in the town of Troy, Wisconsin.

The Michigan Supreme Court recently issued two important decisions involving Intergovernmental Contracts for the Conditional Transfer of Property, which are commonly known as “Act 425 agreements.” The two cases are Clam Lake Township v Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, and TeriDee, LLC v Haring Charter Township. Attorney Ronald M. Redick, of our firm’s Local Government Practice Group, successfully represented the townships in these lawsuits, and, as explained below, scored an important victory for all advocates of local control. To understand the significance of these decisions, it is helpful to first review what an Act 425 agreement does, the benefits such agreements provide, and how the State Boundary Commission has historically limited the effectiveness of such agreements.

A recent unpublished per curiam opinion of the Michigan Court of Appeals found that emails sent between members of a public body were in violation of the Open Meetings Act.

Previous editions of this Newsletter have discussed the proliferation of short-term rentals through social media companies like Airbnb, and the myriad of challenges the home-sharing phenomenon is causing for communities across Michigan. Many municipalities have taken steps to limit short-term rental activity through zoning regulations and general police power short-term rental ordinances. A recent Bill introduced in the Michigan House, however, seeks to strip local governments from being able to limit short-term rentals in their communities.

Uber, Lyft, and other ride sharing services continue to develop a more significant presence throughout the State of Michigan, providing convenient access to transportation opportunities in regions where transportation services were limited. However, ride sharing services have also provided headaches for local leaders, as they work to determine the most appropriate manner in which to regulate such services.

Thank to all those that attended our Michigan Townships Association Reception on Tuesday, April 11 at Troppo in Lansing.

In a previous edition of this publication, we highlighted the Michigan Court of Appeals 2016 Opinion in the case of Cramer v. Oakley, where the Court held that a public body’s duty to “grant” and “fulfill” a FOIA request were distinct concepts. Under that Opinion, municipalities were only required to respond to a FOIA request within the statutorily prescribed five (5) business days, but could “fulfill” the request (i.e., actually provide the records) at a later date as long as there was no inordinate delay. This is no longer the law! On April 5, 2017, the Supreme Court vacated the decision rendered by the Court of Appeals in Cramer v Oakley. The repercussions of the Supreme Court’s Order are that municipalities can no longer rely on the concept that granting and fulfilling a FOIA request are distinct or separate from one another.