ABOUT

Clark Hill is an international team of legal advisors focused on delivering exceptional growth for your business. With locations spanning across the United States, Ireland, and Mexico, we work in agile, collaborative teams, partnering with our clients to help them reach and exceed their business goals. For more information, please visit clarkhill.com

 

 

 

 

Login

 

CONTACT

Stephon B. Bagne

Member, Clark Hill PLC

Phone: (313) 965-8897

Fax: (313) 309-6897

Email: sbagne@clarkhill.com

 

Stephon B. Bagne’s expertise in representing property owners in condemnation cases is widely recognized. Stephon has represented all types of property owners in a variety of situations including vacant and improved property, partial and total takings, easement and fee acquisitions, involving commercial and residential properties. He has won jury trials in courts throughout the State of Michigan and successfully defended those verdicts before the Michigan Court of Appeals. Stephon has prevailed in challenges of the necessity of takings and negotiated less onerous acquisitions in partial taking matters. He regularly speaks and writes about eminent domain and other real estate law issues for a variety of professional organizations. For a more complete bio, please click here.

 

 

 

 

« Hold the Salami: The Government Cannot Stage Multiple Acquisitions to Reduce Total Just Compensation | Main | Success for Farmers – Part I »
Friday
Nov182022

Success for Farmers – Part II

Consent Judgment Entered in Zoning Enforcement Action Allowing Unique Farming Activities to Continue

 

I have just successfully concluded defending a lawsuit brought against a farmer engaging in fairly unique activities. The farmer grows various types of aquaculture products, air plants, or lichen on things like driftwood or different types of rocks. These products are used as decorative features or in aquariums. 

Local neighbors complained about these processes, resulting in the township filing a lawsuit seeking to terminate the operation. Fortunately, I was opposed by a reasonable attorney willing to look at the law as a whole and not assume that farming was limited to corn, soybeans, or livestock. While this farm is unique, perhaps the only operation of its kind in Michigan, it was engaging in agricultural activities. While there was some processing of the products, it was practically no different than a farmer growing poinsettias, putting them in pots, and decorating the pots with colorful foil.

My client agreed that it would be better to invest in some upgrades to their facilities to mollify neighbor complaints than seek to prevail in litigation. Doing so was less costly, less time consuming, and demonstrated their willingness to be a good neighbor. After meeting with municipal officials and explaining the operation, we were able to negotiate a consent judgment that trumps the local zoning ordinance. That consent judgment recognizes the farmer's ability to continue the operation. In exchange, the farmer agreed to some site upgrades, like planting buffer trees and limiting the area in which some activities are undertaken away from the complaining neighbors. While NIMBY (not in my backyard) neighbors may not be satisfied, the township was. It was a good result obtained relatively inexpensively. The result was possible through knowledge of the Right to Farm Act.

If you are experiencing difficulties with your local municipality regarding your farming operations, please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>