home rule in Michigan

2021If the point of this home rule process was to reduce the Legislature’s involvement to 34 making a “general grant of rights and powers,” Gallup, 170 Mich at 200 , there is no particular reason to question the Governor’s involvement in supervising and potentially vetoing proposed charters.

1999We noted in Gallup v Saginaw, 170 Mich 195, 200 ; 135 NW 1060 (1912), that the home rule act is “one of general grant of rights and powers, subject only to certain enumerated restrictions, instead of the former method of only granting enumerated rights and powers definitely specified.

2021“When reviewing the provisions of a home rule city charter, we apply the same rules that we apply to the construction of statutes.” Barrow v City of Detroit Election Comm, 301 Mich App 404, 413 ; 836 NW2d 498 (2013).

2021“When reviewing the provisions of a home rule city charter, we apply the same rules that we apply to the construction of statutes.” Barrow v City of Detroit Election Comm, 301 Mich App 404, 413 ; 836 NW2d 498 (2013).

1992In Detroit Bd of Street Railway Comm’rs v Wayne Co, 18 Mich App 614, 622-623 ; 171 NW2d 669 (1969), this Court aptly summarized the single-object rule in the context of a dispute over a tax repeal: It might have been better draftsmanship to have placed the provision concerning the taxability of municipal transportation utilities in the general property tax law (where one might expect to find it) rather than in the home rule act.

1992In Detroit Bd of Street Railway Comm’rs v Wayne Co, 18 Mich App 614, 622-623 ; 171 NW2d 669 (1969), this Court aptly summarized the single-object rule in the context of a dispute over a tax repeal: It might have been better draftsmanship to have placed the provision concerning the taxability of municipal transportation utilities in the general property tax law (where one might expect to find it) rather than in the home rule act.

1979Although provisions in the home rule cities act are to be liberally construed, City Comm of Jackson v Hirschman, 253 Mich 596, 599 ; 235 NW 265 (1931), a construction in the instant case in favor of the commercial activity by the defendant is outweighed by the principle that a municipality should not encroach upon the field of private enterprise where the articles provided are not of public necessity and are available from private enterprise.

1979Although provisions in the home rule cities act are to be liberally construed, City Comm of Jackson v Hirschman, 253 Mich 596, 599 ; 235 NW 265 (1931), a construction in the instant case in favor of the commercial activity by the defendant is outweighed by the principle that a municipality should not encroach upon the field of private enterprise where the articles provided are not of public necessity and are available from private enterprise.

2024No exceptions are relevant here. 21 lease agreement; or the board of a nonprofit corporation formed by a city under section 4o of the home rule city act, 1909 PA 279 , MCL 117.4o. (b) “Meeting” means the convening of a public body at which a quorum is present for the purpose of deliberating toward or rendering a decision on a public policy, or any meeting of the board of a nonprofit corporation formed by a city under section 4o of the home rule city act, 1909 PA 279 , MCL 117.4o. (c) “Closed session” means a meeting or part of a meeting of a public body that is closed to the public. (d) “Decis

2015The OMA provides a multifaceted definition of “public body” as follows: “Public body” means any state or local legislative or governing body, including a board, commission, committee, subcommittee, authority, or council, that is empowered by state constitution, statute, charter, ordinance, resolution, or rule to exercise governmental or proprietary authority or perform a governmental or proprietary function; a lessee of such a body performing an essential public purpose and function pursuant to the lease agreement; or the board of a nonprofit corporation formed by a city under section 4o of th

2016Home rule cities are empowered to form for themselves a plan of government suited to their unique needs and, upon local matters, exercise the treasured right of self-governance.”) (citation omitted), and AFSCME v Detroit, 468 Mich 388, 410 ; 662 NW2d 695 (2003), quoting Walker, 445 Mich at 690 (“We have held that ‘home rule cities enjoy not only those powers specifically granted, but they may also exercise all powers not expressly denied.’ ”).

2016Home rule cities are empowered to form for themselves a plan of government suited to their unique needs and, upon local matters, exercise the treasured right of self-governance.”) (citation omitted), and AFSCME v Detroit, 468 Mich 388, 410 ; 662 NW2d 695 (2003), quoting Walker, 445 Mich at 690 (“We have held that ‘home rule cities enjoy not only those powers specifically granted, but they may also exercise all powers not expressly denied.’ ”).

1985Since any conflicts between a home rule charter provision and an ordinance enacted under the charter are resolved in favor of the charter, Thiesen v Dearborn City Council, 320 Mich 446 ; 31 NW2d 806 (1948); Michigan Law Enforcement Union, Teamsters Local 129 v Highland Park, 138 Mich App 342, 347 ; 360 NW2d 611 (1984), defendants reason that Ord. 556-H is invalid and therefore void and unenforceable.

1985Since any conflicts between a home rule charter provision and an ordinance enacted under the charter are resolved in favor of the charter, Thiesen v Dearborn City Council, 320 Mich 446 ; 31 NW2d 806 (1948); Michigan Law Enforcement Union, Teamsters Local 129 v Highland Park, 138 Mich App 342, 347 ; 360 NW2d 611 (1984), defendants reason that Ord. 556-H is invalid and therefore void and unenforceable.

1969In that case the Supreme Court declared that the DSR was not required to pay the Detroit board of education ad valorem taxes on its real and personal property situated in the city of Detroit, since, for the purposes of that act, the Detroit board of education was not a State agency levying a "State tax." [7] "No law shall embrace more than one object, which shall be expressed in its title." Const 1963, art 4, § 24. [8] The complete title of the home rule act is as follows: "An act to provide for the incorporation of cities and for revising and amending their charters." PA 1909, No 279, as amen

1969In all the following eases the subject matter dealt with in the aet under consideration was held to be within the objeet expressed in the title: Hall v. Calhoun County Board of Supervisors (1961), 373 Mich 612 (annexation of territory of one home rule eity by another); City of Detroit v. Wayne Circuit Judge (1897), 112 Mich 317 (requirement that notice be given to eity within 3 months of alleged negligent injury; aet was entitled: “an act to provide a charter for the city of Detroit”) ; Village of Kingsford v. Cudlip (1932), 258 Mich 144, 151 , and Bray v. Stewart (1927), 239 Mich 310, 317 (an

2026But that broad proposition does not demonstrate an entitlement to relief. “[A]n overnight guest in a home may claim the protection of the Fourth Amendment, but one who is merely present with the consent of the householder may not.” Minnesota v Carter, 525 US 83, 90 ; 119 S Ct 469 ; 142 L Ed 2d 373 (1998).

2026But that broad proposition does not demonstrate an entitlement to relief. “[A]n overnight guest in a home may claim the protection of the Fourth Amendment, but one who is merely present with the consent of the householder may not.” Minnesota v Carter, 525 US 83, 90 ; 119 S Ct 469 ; 142 L Ed 2d 373 (1998).

2024“A violation of a zoning ordinance constitutes a public nuisance that, by itself, ‘gives no right of action to an individual and must be abated by the appropriate public officer.’ ” Ansell v Delta Co Planning Comm, 332 Mich App 451 , 461; 957 NW2d 47 (2020), quoting Towne, 185 Mich App at 232 .

2023In Ansell v Delta Co Planning Comm, 332 Mich App 451 , 461; 957 NW2d 47 (2020), this Court explained: A violation of a zoning ordinance constitutes a public nuisance that, by itself, “gives no right of action to an individual and must be abated by the appropriate public officer.” Towne v Harr, 185 Mich App 230, 232 ; 460 NW2d 596 (1990).

2018That is certainly a true statement, but this Court still affords an agency's construction of a statute " 'respectful consideration,' " In re Complaint of Rovas Against SBC Mich. , 482 Mich. 90 , 103, 754 N.W.2d 259 (2008), as an agency's interpretation can be "helpful in ascertaining the legislative intent," id . at 118, 754 N.W.2d 259 .

2018That is certainly a true statement, but this Court still affords an agency's construction of a statute " 'respectful consideration,' " In re Complaint of Rovas Against SBC Mich. , 482 Mich. 90 , 103, 754 N.W.2d 259 (2008), as an agency's interpretation can be "helpful in ascertaining the legislative intent," id . at 118, 754 N.W.2d 259 .

2018That is certainly a true statement, but this Court still affords an agency’s construction of a statute “ ‘respectful consideration,’ ” In re Rovas Complaint, 482 Mich 90, 103 ; 754 NW2d 259 (2008), as an agency’s interpretation can be “helpful in ascertaining the legislative intent,” Id. at 118.

2018That is certainly a true statement, but this Court still affords an agency's construction of a statute " 'respectful consideration,' " In re Complaint of Rovas Against SBC Mich. , 482 Mich. 90 , 103, 754 N.W.2d 259 (2008), as an agency's interpretation can be "helpful in ascertaining the legislative intent," id . at 118, 754 N.W.2d 259 .

2016Home rule cities and villages already enjoy a broad construction of their powers and it is the intention here to extend to counties and townships within the powers granted to them equivalent latitude in the interpretation of the constitution and statutes. [2 Official Record, Constitutional Convention 1961, p 3395 (emphasis added).] Lennane, 225 Mich at 639 .

2016Home rule cities and villages already enjoy a broad 7 If it was ever the case, we conclude that, given the newly added language that expresses the people’s will to give municipalities even greater latitude to conduct their business, there is simply no way to read our current constitutional provisions and reach the conclusion that “there is . . . grave doubt whether . . . there has been any enlargement or extension of the subjects of municipal legislation and control or of the powers of cities except as those subjects and powers are specifically enumerated and designated in the Constitution its

1999In Adams Outdoor Advertising , at 218, the Court reiterated the broad authority granted to home cities by the Home Rule City Act: This reading of De Mull [v City of Lowell, 368 Mich 242 ; 118 NW2d 232 (1962)], as not restricting a city’s authority to regulate billboards under the home rule act, is also consistent with this Court’s longstanding liberal interpretation of that act.

1999In Adams Outdoor Advertising , at 218, the Court reiterated the broad authority granted to home cities by the Home Rule City Act: This reading of De Mull [v City of Lowell, 368 Mich 242 ; 118 NW2d 232 (1962)], as not restricting a city’s authority to regulate billboards under the home rule act, is also consistent with this Court’s longstanding liberal interpretation of that act.

1988This holding is supported by the home rule cities act, MCL 117.36; MSA 5.2116, and a decision of this Court, Marks v Battle Creek, 358 Mich 114, 117 ; 99 NW2d 587 (1959).

1988This holding is supported by the home rule cities act, MCL 117.36; MSA 5.2116, and a decision of this Court, Marks v Battle Creek, 358 Mich 114, 117 ; 99 NW2d 587 (1959).

1991Cady v Detroit, 289 Mich 499, 504-505 ; 286 NW 805 (1939), app dis 309 US 620 (1940).

1991Cady v Detroit, 289 Mich 499, 504-505 ; 286 NW 805 (1939), app dis 309 US 620 (1940).

1991Cady v Detroit, 289 Mich 499, 504-505 ; 286 NW 805 (1939), app dis 309 US 620 (1940).

1985Cady v Detroit, 289 Mich 499, 514 ; 286 NW 805 (1939), app dis 309 US 620 ; 60 S Ct 470 ; 84 L Ed 984 (1940); Butcher v Detroit, 131 Mich App 698, 703 ; 347 NW2d 702 (1984), lv den 419 Mich 917 (1984).