PGI logo cropped.png
Congressional Millionaire’s Club
The Personal Gain Index shines a light on how members of Congress benefit during their tenure.





Michigan Eminent Domain Restriction Amendment, Proposal 4 (2006)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Michigan Constitution
Seal of Michigan.png
Preamble
Articles
IIIIIIIVVVIVIIVIIIIXXXIXIISchedule
Michigan Eminent Domain Restriction Amendment, Proposal 4 was on the November 7, 2006 election ballot in Michigan as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved.

Proposal 4 prohibited government from taking private property by eminent domain for certain private purposes.[1]

The effects of Proposal 4 were to:

  • Prohibit government from taking private property for transfer to another private individual or business for purposes of economic development or increasing tax revenue.
  • Provide that if an individual’s principal residence is taken for public use, the individual must be compensated for at least 125% of property’s fair market value.
  • Require government that takes a private property to demonstrate that the taking is for a public use; if taken to eliminate blight, require a higher standard of proof to demonstrate that the taking of that property is for a public use.
  • Preserve existing rights of property owners.[2]

The proposal was one of 12 eminent domain-related ballot measures throughout the country on the 2006 ballot.

Election results

Proposal 4 (Eminent Domain)
ResultVotesPercentage
Approveda Yes 2,914,214 80.1%
No724,57319.9%

Official results via: The Michigan Secretary of the State

Support

The Mackinac Center for Public Policy endorsed the measure. Their Senior Legal Analyst Patrick J. Wright said Proposal 4 was a "reasonable and significant restrictions on Michigan governments’ ability to use eminent domain to transfer property from one private owner to another."[3]

Fiscal Impact

The fiscal impact of land acquisition costs on state and local governmental entities from passage of Proposal 06-04 cannot be determined, because the number of purchases and the prices at which these purchases would occur are not known.[4]

Taxpayer's perspective

A Taxpayer’s Perspective from the National Taxpayers Union: The Save Our Homes Amendment (Proposal 06-4) would proscribe government eminent domain seizures that aren’t justified by clear purposes of general public benefit.

Campaign funding

Below is information on the amount of funds raised for Proposal 2:[5]

Contributions for Proposal 2:

Contributor Total
Protect Our Property Rights $375,748
Prime Housing Group $2,204

See also

BallotpediaAvatar bigger.png
Suggest a link

External links

References