Introduced
by
To preempt local government zoning ordinances that prohibit a gravel pit unless “very serious” environmental consequences would result, as established in a particular lawsuit (Silva v Ada township).
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, Tourism, and Outdoor Recreation
Reported without amendment
Without amendment and with the recommendation that the bill pass.
Amendment offered
by
To narrow the scope of the bill to exclude salt extraction.
The amendment failed 45 to 63 (details)
Substitute offered
by
To replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details but does not change the substance as previously described.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Passed in the House 85 to 25 (details)
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, Environment, and Great Lakes
Reported without amendment
With the recommendation that the substitute (S-4) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered
To replace the previous version of the bill with one that requires an owner challenging a zoning decision potentially affected by the bill to show that extractable resources are present, that there is a market for them, and that no very serious consequences would result from the extraction.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Passed in the Senate 26 to 12 (details)
To preempt local government zoning ordinances that prohibit a gravel pit unless “very serious” environmental consequences would result, as established in a particular lawsuit (Silva v Ada township). A property owner challenging a zoning decision potentially affected by the bill would have to meet certain procedural and evidentiary burdens.
Passed in the House 85 to 23 (details)
To concur with the Senate-passed version of the bill, which potentially imposes certain additional burdens on property owners.
