Don't Trample on my Property (Rights)!

For those of you that don’t live in Michigan, a little background. A series of lower-court battles over the past few years have tried to answer the following questions posed by waterfront property owners: “Where does my property line end: at the water’s edge, or somewhere else? Can I, as a property owner, ban people from spending a day (or any amount of time) on my beach? Can I ban people from take an evening stroll on my beach? Can I force those people to walk in the water instead of on my beach?”

All of these lower-court battles culminated in Michigan’s Supreme Court ruling, recently, that shoreline-property owners do not have the right to prohibit trespassing on private shore above the water’s edge. (Search the web for “Glass vs. Goeckel” for details.) In doing so, the court expanded public access to the “ordinary high water mark” which, quite often, can be several feet inland. And in the case of several lakes in the Great Lakes states, water levels have sunk significantly in recent years, putting the “ordinary high water mark” DOZENS of feet above the current water’s edge.

This is the second property-rights battle in less than a month that property-owners have lost. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled recently that local governments can force property owners to sell out and make way for private economic development when officials decide it would benefit the public, even if the property is not blighted and the new project's success is not guaranteed.

While not agreeing with either of these decisions, I’ve remained quiet about them. But a letter to the editor in the August 14 edition of the Grand Rapids Press brings my silence to an end. Tom Mac, who lives in the Grand Rapids area, had this to say about the rights of lakefront property owners:

“With the local beaches being named as the most "family friendly" in the nation, why not focus on how to make them the most accessible and tourist friendly? Unfortunately, there are now some townships that have closed their beaches to "resident members only," leaving the rest of us to fight the crowds and the traffic. How selfish!

“Sorry, these folks don't get much sympathy from me. Lake Michigan during the summer is one of the most beautiful places in the world. This is the place with no sharks, no crocs, no jellyfish, no tsunamis and no terrorists. Our backyard could be the place to travel to for the nervous Europeans, who now spare no expense traveling to Hawaii, Taiwan, or Australia.

“I understand the inconveniences of the lakeshore residents, but they have to keep in mind that the Great Lakes are a gift to us all, to enjoy and to use for the resources they offer. The teenagers and the revelers can be watched more closely, but we should not restrict our beaches any more than they already are. Rather open them responsibly so that all can benefit.”

Since when is one person’s private property “a gift to us all” that should be opened “so that all can benefit?” Since when has one person’s private property become everyone’s backyard? Who’s left to clean-up the mess left on private beaches, left by teenagers and revelers? Mr. Mac? Of course not! The property owner, who worked for years to earn the privilege of buying the property, is left holding the (garbage) bag.

The rebel side of me would like to find out where Mr. Mac lives, get a bunch of kids and tents, and set-up camp for a day or two in his front yard. Turn on the boom-box and have a great time! Then, leave-behind pop cans, beer cans, trash, and other telltale signs of some people who see his property as “a gift to us all.”

Sorry, Mr. Mac. You don’t get much sympathy from me…