Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Division Act topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee adopts substitute H-1 to House Bill 4081 on Land Division Act
Summary
The Committee on Regulatory Reform voted to adopt substitute H-1 to House Bill 4081, which, as described in the substitute, allows municipalities the option to permit a parcel to be split into up to 10 parcels upon enactment. The committee then reported the bill with the substitute recommendation to the next stage.
The Committee on Regulatory Reform on an announced meeting date adopted substitute H-1 to House Bill 4081, a change to the Land Division Act that would allow municipalities to authorize splitting a parcel into as many as 10 parcels upon enactment.
The substitute was moved by Representative Regas. During a roll call conducted by the committee clerk, members registered support and the clerk announced, “you have 12 yays, 0 nays, 0 pass. The substitute is adopted.” Later in the same session Representative Wozniak moved to report House Bill 4081 with the recommendation as substituted H-1; the clerk reported the final committee report with an alternate tally recorded in the transcript as “11 yays, 0 nays, 1 passed.” The transcript contains both tallies as read on the record.
The substitute text described to members allows a municipality to begin the process under the Land Division Act by permitting an existing parcel to be split into up to 10 separate parcels immediately upon enactment if the local government chooses to use that option. The substitute was described in committee as voluntary for municipalities and as providing local governments an option to “get going soon” on approved land divisions.
The committee record shows supporters on file for the bill, including Marcus Keach of the Grand Rapids Chamber, Brad Ward of the Michigan Realtors, and Jared Scarup of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy; those witnesses were listed on committee cards as supporting the bill and did not speak at the hearing. No committee amendment other than the H-1 substitute was adopted and no formal conditions or implementation deadlines were recorded in the meeting minutes.
The committee did not provide a detailed fiscal analysis or implementation timeline during the meeting. The substitute leaves detailed adoption and use of the option to municipal governments; decisions about local ordinance changes, site-specific reviews, and any related local approvals will rest with the affected municipality.
