Homeowner Fairness Act moving through Senate

Kathie Marchlewski, Midland Daily News 11/03/2005

A bill that local lawmakers say would remove a blanket contamination label from properties without individualized testing is on its way to the state Senate and might come to a vote by year end.

The Senate Appropriations Committee on Wednesday passed Bill 390, deemed the "Homeowner Fairness Act," with a bipartisan vote of 11-2.

If the bill makes it through the entire Senate, it would amend Part 201 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, which designates properties having hazardous substances as "facilities." Owners of those properties must disclose the information to potential buyers and must limit movement or disturbance of contaminated soil.

The amendment would ensure that only properties where contamination has been confirmed would be subject to the designation.

"This is an accountability measure," State Rep. John Moolenaar said. In response to local fears of casting a negative stigma on mid-Michigan based on dioxin contamination, he proposed an identical bill in the House of Representatives in April. It passed through the Government Operations Committee and on through the House, also with bipartisan support.

A similar bill landed in the Senate in June, sponsored by Mike Goschka, R-Brant, and co-sponsored by Jim Barcia, D-Bay City.

The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, which administers Part 201, opposes the change, saying it would slow the process of cleanup and redevelopment, and drive up costs.

The DEQ suspects that what casts any negative light and potentially pushes down homeowners' property values is not use of the word "facility." "The property value impacts are a result of known contamination," spokesman Robert McCann said.

Lawmakers argue otherwise. They say the DEQ's broad designation is impacting property owners unfairly and without proof.

"This has been a debacle," Goschka said. "It's a department out of control. They overstated and they overstepped their boundaries. They are mandating you clean up when it hasn't been established that it's contaminated."

McCann says the DEQ is aware of which areas of the flood plain are contaminated, and that the awareness is based on multiple rounds of testing. "It is widespread contamination throughout the flood plain," he said. "Ongoing sampling continues to affirm that."

The department plans to make its position on the bill clear to senators, who soon will be casting potentially law-changing votes. "I think there's been a lot of misinformation," McCann said. "It certainly is not any kind of homeowner fairness bill; it would be more accurate to describe it as a polluter fairness bill."

The bill would allow the facility designation to remain attached to properties where the homeowner, liable party and state agree that contamination is present and that the cleanup process should move forward.

"In areas where there is no dispute, we want to make sure the process moves forward in a timely way," Moolenaar said.

But according to the DEQ, the inclusion of the liable party in the language poses a potential problem.

"What's the incentive for the liable party to agree to that?" McCann asked. "You don't put the administration of the law into the hands of the person who broke it."

Goschka acknowledged there are some elements of the bill that need further consideration, and that senators on the appropriations committee raised questions that still need to be answered, such as who should bear the financial burden of testing -- the state or the liable party.

©Midland Daily News 2005

Reader Opinions:

Joel Wiese Nov, 03 2005

I'm a little concerned about Bill 390 simply because I don't understand how owners of contaminated property are being served well. I grow weary watching legislators like Rep. Moolenar continually push bad policy when the best interest of the legislation is for the polluters who delay their cleanup as much as they can. At what point does the price we pay with our health and livelyhood begin to count? I've never asked to have my property polluted, and if that occurred, I think the parties responsible should remediate the problems at my earliest convenience not theirs. When the contamination that the DEQ has already tested for is tremendously widespread, why must homeowners wait a minute longer before each and every property is individually tested before the risks that can logically be assumed is there is ultimately cleaned up? Years past, corporations polluted our water, air and land without a second thought, we're not in a day and age anymore where this is remotely acceptable.
 

For additional articles like this one, go to the Tittabawassee River Watch web site www.trwnews.net for complete coverage of the Tittabawassee River Dow Chemical dioxin contamination saga. . The Newspaper / Media page of our site contains an extensive archive of media articles dating back to January 2002. The source organization's web site link is listed to the right of the article, visit often for other news in our area. The Newspaper / Media page may be accessed by scrolling down to the bottom of the CONTENTS section and clicking on the Newspaper/Media link.