We believe in the American free market system in which property is privately owned, managed, and operated for profit and individual satisfaction. Any erosion of that right weakens all other rights guaranteed to individuals by the Constitution.
We believe any action by the government diminishing an owner’s right to use their property, such as the Endangered Species Act or the Natural Rivers Act, constitutes a taking of that owner’s property. Government should provide for the removal of endangered species or due process and compensation to the exact degree an owner’s right to use his or her property has been diminished by government action.
We believe the Natural Rivers Act should be reviewed to ensure private property owners’ rights remain protected. We believe the following will not only strengthen private property rights, but create more widespread support and compliance with the Act:
The initial request for and final approval of a Natural Rivers Act designation must originate from the local units of government in which the river is located.
Agriculture and other industries must be fairly represented on local Natural Rivers Review Boards.
An economic impact study should be conducted to determine the effect of a Natural Rivers Act designation on local businesses and property owners.
If the local unit of government approves a Natural Rivers Act designation, the designation must be subject to review at least every five years.
We support:
Legislation requiring state and local agencies to evaluate the impact of proposed rules and regulations on private property rights and compensate the landowner for any private property rights taken.
The original description of a parcel standing and the moving of a boundary through re-measurement not being automatically considered conclusive.
The development of a process to provide notification to all adjacent landowners when a new land survey is conducted by a registered surveyor.
A property line survey for all arm’s length property sales.
The Doctrine of Adverse Possession continuing in property line disputes.
Review of all regulations and enforcement policies encroaching on the rights of property owners, including buildings, planted trees and travel ways placed too close to property lines. The presence of other trespassing does not constitute permission to enter private land.
Legislation denying claims of prescriptive easement based on intentional recreational trespass.
Developing and implementing a “purple paint law” to authorize posting of private property by using a specific paint color.
A public awareness campaign utilizing all types of media to encourage better understanding between farmers and nonfarm neighbors as population density around farms increases.
Increased and graduated fines for trespassing.
We oppose:
Any legislation allowing public access to or through private property without permission of the property owner or owner’s authorized agent.
Non-private easements (except maintenance easements) being sold, traded or otherwise transferred without consent of the current property owner. This should include all past and future transactions. Michigan law should protect the rights of the property owner.