Looney Dunes: Uh-Oh not good news
Some states moving to protect property rights, some cities move to seize property...
Ruling Sets Off Tug of War Over Private Property - New York Times
Then we have Michigan's Great Lakes Beaches ...
"State's top court rules beach-walking is OK
Tradition a right, Michigan justices say
July 30, 2005
BY HUGH McDIARMID JR.
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
Strolling along a Great Lakes beach is no crime, Michigan's Supreme Court ruled Friday in upholding the time-honored tradition of beach-walking.
The court, with five of seven justices fully agreeing, found that "walking the beach ....is inherent in the exercise of traditionally protected public rights."
The decision reverses a state Court of Appeals judgment that walking along the shoreline was trespassing. That ruling had stunned many Michiganders, for whom beach-walking is a long-standing tradition.
Now, its legality is certain.
"This means so much to our state, and so much for the Great Lakes," Pamela Burt, the attorney who argued in favor of beach--walking, said Friday.
But it is a blow to property--rights' advocates who had agreed with the appeals court.
"My initial reaction is that I'm disappointed," said Bob LaBrant, senior vice president with the Michigan Chamber of Commerce. The chamber had filed a court brief in support of property-owners' rights to prohibit beach walkers.
All seven justices agreed the public had the right to walk the beach. Five ruled the boundary was the ordinary high-water mark, loosely defined as "the point on the bank or the shore up to which the presence and action of the water is so continuous as to leave a distinct mark." Two -- Justices Stephen Markman and Robert Young Jr. -- said the beach-walker's domain should be confined to the area of shoreline commonly referred to as wet sand, which could be feet from the water's edge, depending on wind and wave conditions.
The decision was a comfort to generations of Michiganders who have enjoyed a tacit understanding that it is acceptable to walk Great Lakes shoreline as long as walkers stayed near the water's edge out of respect for waterfront landowners.
But that became the fulcrum in a dispute that mushroomed from a garden-variety easement squabble between neighbors in Alcona County.
Joan Glass sued neighbors Richard and Kathleen Goeckel after they tried to block her access to Lake Huron via an easement that runs through their land. They eventually settled all their differences except one: Glass claimed she had the right to venture off the 15-foot wide easement to stroll the shore in front of the Goeckels' property. The Goeckels said it was trespassing and that Glass regularly congregated with friends on the beach in front of their home.
The high court decision did not appear to address what activities other than strolling might be permitted along the shoreline strip, although it did state that beach-walking "remains subject to regulation as is any use of the public trust."
Pro beach-walking groups, including environmental organizations, joined Glass in the case, contending the shoreline is Great Lakes bottomland and belongs to Michigan's citizens.
Property-rights groups, some landowners and the state Chamber of Commerce backed the Goeckels, arguing waterfront property-owners' rights extend all the way to the water's edge, including the high-water mark and the wet sand.
The Goeckels were not available for comment late Friday.
Glass said, "I'm very, very happy, but it's been very, very upsetting for me."
And did she think her neighborhood squabble would turn into a Supreme Court case?
"No, never, never, never, never. I hope it's over now."
No comments:
Post a Comment