Wooden it be Treemendously Great for Your Rights to be Given Back by the State

[XLFD]

"I know no method to secure the repeal of bad or obnoxious laws so effective as their stringent execution."   Ulysses S. Grant

Remember a recent post published mid-October entitled First They came for the Tree Fines,,,, a surrealistic story of a local government going crazy on some would-be Christmas tree farmers in Wayne County.  Two brothers believed they were exercising a state and local exemption for farming when they cleared their own land, but city officials arrived on-site and signaled immediately their intention to levy big fines in excess of $700,000 for removing a few acres (less than 15) of trees without their permission and payment of an arbitrary tree tax.

Local government officials frequently lose sight of the State and Federal Constitutions they supposedly swear to protect when they take their oath of office.  Fortunately, state officials have often stepped in to address the excess when the city or township halls take a walk on the tyrannical side.  In Michigan, this has happened with such things as paper bag ordinances, soda pop taxes, and short term rentals (although the latter has stalled in committee for over a year, due to municipalities and hoteliers lobbying against it).  

The state legislature is once again stepping up with bills starting in the lame duck session sponsored by an outgoing legislator attempting to thwart local governments from being tree nazis.  Sponsoring Senator Tom Casperson (R-Escanaba) says this is about letting people decide what to do with their property.

“Where does this stop? At what point do the local units of government stop demanding or taking through ordinances personal property rights?” he says.

Senate Bill 1188 would enact the "Vegetation Removal Preemption Act" (VRPA) to do the following:

-- Prohibit a local unit of government from adopting, maintaining, or enforcing an ordinance, charter provision, or regulation that restricted, or require mitigation for, the trimming or removal of any vegetation other than a heritage tree, located on private property with an agricultural, business, commercial, or industrial zoning classification.
-- Specify that an ordinance, charter provision, or regulation that did any of the above would be void.
-- Specify that the Act would not require a local unit of government to refund a fee, fine, or costs received by the unit before the bill's enactment date as a result of enforcement of an ordinance or regulation.

Six other bills would amend certain acts to comply with the VRPA.  The main bill will face opposition from environmental groups, who say regulating trees should be allowable because they provide community benefits like helping with storm water, and local government groups, who say local government often uses tree requirements to help address neighbor concerns about new developments. 

The bill passed the State Senate by a 23-15 vote, with all Democrats voting against it and a handful of Republicans.  It now will go to the House, and if the bill is still satisfactory on return to the Senate, it could get enrolled and sent to the governor.   

If passed, it may make certain parts of the recently passed Ludington Tree Ordinance less enforceable, and rein in the power of city officials to enforce what you do (or don't do) with trees located on your private land.

[Freedom Seeker]

It wood. And what's more ... I'm personally getting tired of the dictates of this young administration in Ludington making a new law, ordinance or fine at every whim whichever way the wind blows. Might as well live in a homeowner's association that will command the color you can paint your house and how long you can keep your garage door open. People loved Ludington because of its quaintness and many come and return for its quaintness .. they leave Detroit. Let's not make Ludington into a west coast Detroit.

[Willy]

As I read the bill it does not include limiting government control over trees on private residential property. It would be prudent to add any privately owned real estate.

[XLFD]

I also wondered why they expressly left out residentially zoned areas; about the only thing I can think of is that they don't want the resistance against it by municipalities to be any stronger than it is, for they wield some clout and would mobilize quickly against a fast-tracked lame duck bill which would take away too much of their municipal power over private individuals.  

The best bet to reign in municipal powers is to get people in your community who firmly believe that these powers must be limited to run for local office and help them succeed against inertia going the other way.

[XLFD]

Fresh story out of Traverse City showing how local governments see gold in those trees on your property.  Some relevant passages:

"the original proposal would limit removing protected, landmark or shoreline trees of certain sizes or larger. There would be various triggers and replanting requirements for residential and non-residential zoned properties...  A development like Costco, for example, could incur a roughly $1 million fee [just for tree removal]."

[Willy]

Traverse City is full of transplanted aliens. I imagine they far out number native northern Michigan residents. Conservatives can expect more of these types of freedom grabbing laws and ordinances. Locals had better stand up and voice their opposition to all of this new progressive legislation or they will forever live under the heavy hand of an out of control Government.