Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Michigan Proposed House Bill No. 6394 (Very Dangerous)
Michigan Registar ^ | September 03, 2008 | Kevin Elsenheimer

Posted on 02/21/2009 5:07:20 AM PST by paratrooper82

HOUSE BILL No. 6394

September 3, 2008, Introduced by Reps. Elsenheimer and Walker and referred to the Committee on Intergovernmental, Urban and Regional Affairs.

A bill to amend 2006 PA 110, entitled

"Michigan zoning enabling act,"

(MCL 125.3101 to 125.3702) by adding section 409.

(Excerpt) Read more at findlaw.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: castledoctrine; censorship; chillingeffect; constitution; dissent; kelo; landgrab; lobbying; michelsenheimer; michigan; propertyrights; public; villian; zoning
HOUSE BILL No. 6394

September 3, 2008, Introduced by Reps. Elsenheimer and Walker and referred to the Committee on Intergovernmental, Urban and Regional Affairs.

A bill to amend 2006 PA 110, entitled

"Michigan zoning enabling act,"

(MCL 125.3101 to 125.3702) by adding section 409.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:

SEC. 409. (1) A PUBLIC OFFICIAL OR ANY OTHER INDIVIDUAL MAY

RECOVER EITHER TREBLE DAMAGES, COSTS OF THE ACTION, AND REASONABLE

ATTORNEY FEES, OR THE SUM OF $5,000.00, WHICHEVER IS GREATER, IF

ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE MET:

(A) THE INDIVIDUAL IS A DEFENDANT IN A CIVIL ACTION ARISING

FROM THAT INDIVIDUAL'S COMMUNICATION WITH A LOCAL UNIT OF

GOVERNMENT, A PUBLIC OFFICIAL, OR OTHER PERSON.

(B) THE COMMUNICATION UNDER SUBDIVISION (A) WAS IN FURTHERANCE

OF THAT INDIVIDUAL'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PETITION AND OTHERWISE

PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS OF GOVERNMENT OR, IF APPLICABLE, IN

FURTHERANCE OF THE EXERCISE OF HIS OR HER POWERS OR DUTIES AS A

PUBLIC OFFICIAL.

(C) THE COMMUNICATION UNDER SUBDIVISION (A) WAS INTENDED TO

INFLUENCE GOVERNMENTAL OR ELECTORAL ACTION UNDER THIS ACT OR AN

ORDINANCE ADOPTED UNDER THIS ACT.

(D) THE COURT FINDS BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT

THE CIVIL ACTION WAS INITIATED WITH THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF

HARASSING OR INTIMIDATING THE INDIVIDUAL OR OTHERWISE HINDERING

THAT INDIVIDUAL'S PARTICIPATION IN THE PROCESS OF GOVERNMENT.

(2) SUBSECTION (1) DOES NOT IMPAIR ANY RIGHTS OF THE DEFENDANT

UNDER COMMON OR STATUTORY LAW OR COURT RULE.

(3) AS USED IN THIS SECTION:

(A) "COMMUNICATION" MEANS AN ORAL STATEMENT, WRITING,

ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION, PHOTOGRAPH, DEPICTION, PEACEFUL

DEMONSTRATION, OR OTHER EXPRESSION.

(B) "PUBLIC OFFICIAL" MEANS ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:

(i) AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS ELECTED OR APPOINTED TO A PUBLIC

OFFICE OF A LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT.

(ii) A MEMBER OF A ZONING COMMISSION, OF A ZONING BOARD OR

PLANNING COMMISSION EXERCISING THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF A ZONING

COMMISSION UNDER SECTION 301, OR OF A ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS.

(iii) AN OFFICIAL DESIGNATED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO

ADMINISTER AND ENFORCE THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

1 posted on 02/21/2009 5:07:21 AM PST by paratrooper82
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: paratrooper82

What does it mean?


2 posted on 02/21/2009 5:14:13 AM PST by netmilsmom (Psalm 109:8 - Let his days be few; and let another take his office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom

It means that they do not want irate citizens showing up at city council meetings and throwing shoes at the boardmembers. (It’s OK to throw shoes at Bush, however...)


3 posted on 02/21/2009 5:25:26 AM PST by Rebel_Ace (Tags?!? Tags?!? We don' neeeed no stinkin' Tags!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom

A public zoning official who is sued by an individual can recover 3X damages if he and the judge conspire to claim all three of the conditions are met:

1. He was sued because he performed his official duties,
2. The individual used email, letters, or speech to protest
the zoning official’s actions, and
3. The individual ‘dared’ to file a lawsuit.

Basically, it’s a law intended to stifle zoning lawsuits by property owners.......


4 posted on 02/21/2009 5:27:39 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
“(D) THE COURT FINDS BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT

THE CIVIL ACTION WAS INITIATED WITH THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF

HARASSING OR INTIMIDATING THE INDIVIDUAL OR OTHERWISE HINDERING

THAT INDIVIDUAL'S PARTICIPATION IN THE PROCESS OF GOVERNMENT.”

If you contact by letter, telephone, email, photograph or any kind of communication with your public official, employee, or anyone working for the government you can be sued for treble damages or $5,000 dollar which ever is more if the Judge finds “by a preponderance of the evidence” they were harassed or intimidated by the taxpayer!

What ever happened to the peoples Constitutional Right to “redress of grievances against their government?” This State Representative Kevin Elsenheimer has forgotten that he is a State Representative and is suppose to Represent the people's interest and not the governments!

I just received an email response form my State Representative Kevin Elsenheimer and he is still pushing the legislation.

5 posted on 02/21/2009 5:28:54 AM PST by paratrooper82 (82 Airborne 1/508th BN "fury from the sky")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: paratrooper82

Now I know what to do with the request for money that I got from the Michigan GOP. Burn it.


6 posted on 02/21/2009 5:37:42 AM PST by Mark was here (The earth is bipolar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
A public zoning official who is sued by an individual can recover 3X damages if he and the judge conspire to claim all three of the conditions are met:

1. He was sued because he performed his official duties, 2. The individual used email, letters, or speech to protest the zoning official’s actions, and 3. The individual ‘dared’ to file a lawsuit.

Basically, it’s a law intended to stifle zoning lawsuits by property owners.......

That's the way it would work, but the language "a public official or any individual" could be reversed. If a public official sued a citizen for libel because he didn't like a protest or editorial, it reads as if an upstanding judge could award treble damages to the non-official individual if he chose.

7 posted on 02/21/2009 5:39:06 AM PST by Pearls Before Swine (Is /sarc really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mark was here
Yes Sir! This State Representative is a RINO and the Speaker of the House for the GOP! Go figure?
8 posted on 02/21/2009 5:42:22 AM PST by paratrooper82 (82 Airborne 1/508th BN "fury from the sky")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom

what does it mean? It means Michigan is going further down the toilet. Michigan still contains too many stupid people. As more smart people leave Michigan, a higher percentage of those who remain are stupid.


9 posted on 02/21/2009 5:52:33 AM PST by spintreebob (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: paratrooper82

“If you contact by letter, telephone, email, photograph or any kind of communication with your public official, employee, or anyone working for the government you can be sued for treble damages or $5,000 dollar which ever is more if the Judge finds “by a preponderance of the evidence” they were harassed or intimidated by the taxpayer!”

Why don’t they just come out and say “tar-and-feathering” instead of just obliquely referring to it?


10 posted on 02/21/2009 6:08:58 AM PST by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer
Can you imagine challenging your property taxes with your local unit of government? Under this proposed legislation you could found guilty of harassing or intimidating them and fined treble damages or up to $5,000 which ever is more. Remember all the Judge has to find based on a “preponderance” of the evidence, this means, you do not have a right to a jury trial, or discovery, of basically no “Due Process of Law.”

Thank you GOP Michigan State Representative Kevin Elsenheimer!

11 posted on 02/21/2009 6:14:06 AM PST by paratrooper82 (82 Airborne 1/508th BN "fury from the sky")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

Yep. It’s to protect ACORN.
Michigan might as well stop the pretense that it’s trying to attract businesses and spur the economy. No one will want to live here.


12 posted on 02/21/2009 6:16:39 AM PST by ElayneJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: paratrooper82

Michigan has arguably the best state supreme court in the nation. It overturned a previous ruling that allowed municipalities to seize private property and give it to another private entity. That ruling is a gem of conservative, constitutional thinking.

This law, if it passed, would get shot down by the first state district court that hears it because these lower courts know that the state’s SC would not stand for it.


13 posted on 02/21/2009 6:26:59 AM PST by sergeantdave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave
I would like to believe that, unfortunately the one Conservative Justice on the Michigan Supreme Court was just replaced in the last election by a liberal!

I personally witnessed a Circuit Court Judge in Michigan state from the bench, “do you wnat to see a bunch of junk cars sitting around?” They make law from the bench and Michigan Townships ended up with zoning by fiat and not by statue. Michigan Townships are not municipalities and cannot have zoning authority, but this does not stop the Courts from putting people in jail over illegal zoning> In another example, This State Representatives law firm was writing “junk” ordinance at about $20,000 dollars a pop, and Judges were putting citizens in jail and fining them under these ordinances. In 2001, the Michigan Attorney General (at the time Jennifer Granholm) state general law counties DO NOT HAVE POLICE POWER AUTHORITY TO REGULATE ANYTHING UNLESS IT IS ON COUNTY PROPERTY. AG Opinion No. 7096, yet, for years under these illegal ordinances people were going to jail and being fined because those same Judges decided to make law from the bench!

Again, I sure hope you are right, but, I am very doubtful.

14 posted on 02/21/2009 6:42:42 AM PST by paratrooper82
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave

Good to know SgtDave. Glad we have the best of something good. You post even makes my coffee taste better.
mc


15 posted on 02/21/2009 6:50:45 AM PST by mcshot (Michigan: First in worst, last in best and sinking fast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: paratrooper82

“I would like to believe that, unfortunately the one Conservative Justice on the Michigan Supreme Court was just replaced in the last election by a liberal!”

Didn’t know that. Which justice was replaced?


16 posted on 02/21/2009 7:10:23 AM PST by sergeantdave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: paratrooper82

I read it twice. It doesn’t say a word about penalty for shooting the official


17 posted on 02/21/2009 7:20:16 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 . The original point of America was not to be Europe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave
MICHIGANS HIGH COURT CONSERVATIVE ERA ENDS MICHIGANS CHIEF JUSTICE TO BE REPLACED BY MORE LIBERAL JUDGE.
Friday January 02, 2009ACCIDENTS.COM NEWS CENTERLANSING — Conservatives’ nine-year reign on the Michigan Supreme Court ended this week when Republican Chief Justice Clifford Taylor worked his last day
18 posted on 02/21/2009 9:05:18 AM PST by paratrooper82
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: bert

You certainly got that right! A reminder and I have fixed the date also:

On Monday, February 23, 2009, our State Representative, Kevin Elsenheimer GOP (RINO) will be on the Norm Jones Radio Show, WTCM 580 AM in Traverse City Michigan at 10:10 AM! He will be talking about his proposed House Bill No. 6394, if adopted into law, will empower government officials, employees, or anyone working for the government with the authority to file a civil action against any taxpaying citizen who challenges them and they perceive they are being harassed, by seeking treble damages or up to $5,000 dollars against that taxpayer! They can find you guilty on a simple preponderance of the evidence, which would deny you or anyone else due process of law, you will not have the right to a jury trial or any discovery, simply put, you will be at the mercy of a Judge who is a government official! Please jam the telephones of WTCM 580 AM at 1-800-817-0580 and tell this State Representative what you think of his proposed Bill.
Those of you out of the listening area, you can catch the interview on the Web at www.wtcmradio.com click on the top of the page “listen live”

This State Representative has clearly forgot who he works for! PASS THIS EMIAL ON, LET EVERYONE YOU KNOW ABOUT THIS!

Time to take a stand against this kind of oppressive government right here and right now!


19 posted on 02/21/2009 9:26:40 AM PST by paratrooper82
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: paratrooper82

OH my!!!

Thank you!
I’m from MI and didn’t understand.


20 posted on 02/21/2009 10:42:12 AM PST by netmilsmom (Psalm 109:8 - Let his days be few; and let another take his office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer; grellis; AdmSmith; Berosus; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Fred Nerks; ..

Thanks Gaffer.

It’s step one of reimplementing land seizures and another door through which assessments can be raised.


21 posted on 02/21/2009 3:04:26 PM PST by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/____________________ Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Springman; sergeantdave; cyclotic; netmilsmom; RatsDawg; PGalt; FreedomHammer; queenkathy; ...
If you would like to be added or dropped from the Michigan ping list, please freepmail me.

YEESH, what the hell is this state coming to????? This is from a freaking RINO!!!

22 posted on 02/21/2009 4:40:39 PM PST by grellis (I am Jill's overwhelming sense of disgust.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave

Chief Justice Clifford Taylor.


23 posted on 02/22/2009 4:39:51 AM PST by 70th Division (I love my country but fear my government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson