06/24/2007

Forum

State's environmental act threatened

BY JOAN L. WOLF

Michigan citizens need to be aware that the 37-year-old landmark Michigan Environmental Protection Act is at grave risk in a pending Michigan Supreme Court decision. As one of many who fought for its passage in 1970, I urge Michigan citizens to take notice that the right of every citizen to go to court on behalf of our air, water and other natural resources could be overruled.

The act was no hare-brained idea. It was written by Dr. Joseph Sax, an environmental law expert at the University of Michigan Law School. The deans of all Michigan law schools said it was well drafted. The Legislature consulted continually with the chairman of the University of Michigan's legal research department.

The act fulfills the promise of Michigan's 1963 Constitution, which says: "The conservation and development of the natural resources of the state are hereby declared to be of paramount public concern in the interest of the health, safety and general welfare of the people. The legislature shall provide for the protection of the air, water, and other natural resources of the state from pollution, impairment and destruction.”

The Legislature passed the act to make it possible for citizens to enforce it when government fails to do so.

Because of the tremendous outpouring of support the law passed virtually unanimously over the strenuous objections of Michigan's leading business associations.

They claimed it would destroy the economy and interfere with the "cooperation” they had with state agencies.

In a case now pending before the Supreme Court, attorneys for Nestle Waters have argued against citizens' rights under the act, saying citizens must be directly affected by an environmental action to go to court.

"Directly affected” means citizens would have to show pollution, impairment or destruction of natural resources on their own property, but not the property of the company causing the harm.

That would return Michigan to pre-act days. It would mean a Grand Rapids citizen couldn't use the act to protect the headwaters of a trout stream in northern Michigan, or a citizen couldn't fight a proposed polluting plant until it was built and until they could prove lung impairment from that plant. One of the earliest suits was won by an organization that sued to stop Michigan from allowing companies to continue to pollute when competing companies were complying.

However, still smarting over any developer or company having to slow or stop an action, the state Chamber of Commerce and Michigan Manufacturers' Association have filed a brief supporting Nestle and contending that the act is unconstitutional.

This is particularly scary because, as the Michigan Campaign Finance Network points out, the chamber put millions into an advertising campaign that aided the election of three Supreme Court justices who will vote on the case.

Can we rely on justices to make independent decisions when special interests significantly contribute to their election?

I urge citizens to watch carefully what happens to our rights to a clean, healthful, recreation-friendly environment when the court makes its decision.

About the author
Joan L. Wolf of Frankfort helped lead the passage of the Michigan Environmental Protection Act in 1969 and 1970. She founded the West Michigan Environmental Action Council, the first group of its kind in the state. Wolf has been named to the Michigan Women's Hall of Fame and was recently honored by the Michigan United Conservation Clubs.

About the forum
The forum is a periodic column of opinion written by Record-Eagle readers in their areas of interest or expertise. Submissions of 500 words or less may be made by e-mailing letters@record-eagle.com. Please include biographical information and a photo.