Michigan Right to Farm Law, what does it mean?

[blackswan]

I second the homesteading name as well as aligning it with the Amish who sell the 'extra' as to not waste good food.

 

[wingless]

The full Public Comments to the GAAMPS are complete and available. If you PM me with your email address I'll forward the document, or you can request it yourself, here:


Heather Casteel
Michigan Department of Agriculture
& Rural Development
Environmental Stewardship Division
MAEAP and RTF Programs
Ph: 517-373-9797
Fax: 517-335-3329
[email protected]
www.michigan.gov/maeap
www.maeap.org

 

[fuzzybutt love]

I second the homesteading name as well as aligning it with the Amish who sell the 'extra' as to not waste good food.

Is it legal to donate home grown produce to food banks? If so, that could be used as an argument as well.

 

[wingless]

Hey, that public comments document for the 2013 GAAMPS is now also posted on the MDARD website, so you can get to it directly at this link:

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdard/Public_Input_for_2013_GAAMPs_398010_7.pdf

 

[MichAttorney]

Well, I've been in the process of completing my coop and getting my chickens into their new coop.






Which is almost finished now. BTW - they love it and have taken to it rather nicely. They learned really quickly to like the roosting area next to the windows.

I came back to this thread after some time and am deeply disturbed by the attempted changes to the GAAMPS. Good thing I got the birds and coop in this year!

The changes clearly conflict with the express legislative intent of the act - and I just don't see how they can be held up in court. The act contemplates preempting local ordinances that would conflict with the RTFA and here they are saying (in effect) that the zoning ordinances will now govern who can, or cannot, have a farm. If anyone tries to take away my beautiful girls they're going to be in for a big legal battle (I am an attorney after all - and they can't grind me under with legal bills when I'll be defending my own case).

The following cases are just a beginning to help others out, and they are plain, and there's no getting around them.

Here's a Michigan Supreme Court case that has something to say about the consistency between the policy and the regulation ...


Quote:
G.F. Redmond & Co. v. Michigan Securities Commission, 221 Mich. 1, 4-5 (1923).

Furthermore ...


Quote:
State v. Detroit, 130 Mich. App. 503, 509 (1983) (citing Jackson v. Secretary of State, 105 Mich. App. 132 (1981)). And in the Jackson case, the court threw out a rule that conflicted with the legislative intent.

In the case of the RTFA, you have a clear, unambiguous, and express declaration of legislative intent. A rule that runs counter to that should simply not stand.

Take that to the bank and smoke it.

I will certainly take the time to be at the October 31st meeting in Lansing come hell or high water.

 

[opuspodunktom]

I live in Warren and they're currently trying to force us to get rid of our chickens. We're new at this backyard farming stuff and LOVE it. We're keeping up to code with the GAAMP and are even improving what we have for our chickens.

I'm going in tomorrow morning to sort things out, armed only with a copy each of the MRTF and GAAMP. Should I acquire a lawyer as a safety precaution? Thank you so much for making this information better known. My fiancee`, her family, and myself were about ready to lose hope and it was just beating us down.

 

[MichAttorney]

Who is trying to force you? Were you issued a citation? Have you been told to remove the coop?

And of course, an attorney wouldn't hurt in making a legal argument ... and having an attorney represent you doesn't hurt, and often helps with credibility. Furthermore, it's not just the text of the statute and the regulations - it's the case law and court decisions backing it up that will get an attorney's attention.

You can private message me if you'd like.

 

[wingless]

Wow. Welcome to you both, MichAttorney and opuspodunktom. Looks like you both landed on the right thread!

One of the back stories here is the urban farming issue in Detroit, because they apparently won't go forward with permitting urban farms there without some relief from RTF protection; not sure why the section 7 provision that allows them to do this through the GAAMPS - for their city alone, and in order to protect the environment and public health - is not enough. However, I think the city thinks it will be getting whatever it needs from the state, and has gone forward with drafting an ordinance. The draft has just been published, and is here:

http://detroitfoodpolicycouncil.net/uploads/Urban_Ag_Draft_12Sept12.pdf

 

[RaZ]

Who is trying to force you? Were you issued a citation? Have you been told to remove the coop?

And of course, an attorney wouldn't hurt in making a legal argument ... and having an attorney represent you doesn't hurt, and often helps with credibility. Furthermore, it's not just the text of the statute and the regulations - it's the case law and court decisions backing it up that will get an attorney's attention.

The "who" here in Garden City is the city prosecutor and ordinance officer who both are acting on the expressed intent of the mayor who does not want chickens in "his city". Anyone who spoke in favour of an ordinance change in front of city council was later mailed a citation.

Apparently, since I have been the most outspoken advocate and the local paper had a front page article on my plight, I have been specifically targeted for extra attention by city officials, including several visits by the OO as well as police cars parked in front of my house for hours over a period of weeks.

I've challenged the citation in court and incurred the wrath of the prosecutor who is going to "make an example" of me to serve as a warning to any other chicken keepers in the city. At my last "Final Pre-Trial Hearing" I was finally assigned an attorney who admits that he knows nothing of the RTF legislature or the GAAMPs.

Oddly enough, my last court appearance, there were two (2) other arraignments for chicken citations. Those defendants have decided to fight, citing the RTF and the judge admitted that he knew little of the law but was aware of the GAAMPs. He also said that he would review the law and potentially combine the cases. Apparently there are more violations than the three (3) that I know of. I can't get a count as the court clerk says that they can not comment on pending cases.

My next appearance is October 16th and I hope I can get my attorney up to speed on the case.

If anyone wants details of the key players, please PM.

 

[wingless]

I came back to this thread after some time and am deeply disturbed by the attempted changes to the GAAMPS. Good thing I got the birds and coop in this year!

I assume that what you mean here is that anyone who has chickens in 2012 will be grandfathered in, even if the 2013 GAAMPS language passes? I've been looking for a legal explanation of how grandfathering works - perhaps you can explain?


Also, MANY thanks for your legal citations of how regulations have to be consistent with the policy or law. The inconsistency between what the law says and what the proposed GAAMPS will accomplish has been a major source of frustration.