From its inception, the Michigan Land Use Leadership Council walked a political tightrope. Created by executive order in February 2003, the group worked for six months to reconcile conservative politics with progressive reform in an attempt to finally address the unchecked sprawl and urban decline that have plagued Michigan communities for more than 40 years.

The results are a mixed bag. The final report, released publicly in mid-August, contains nearly 160 good recommendations. However, they are nestled amid controversial and increasingly problematic nods to the building industry and local control advocates. Since its unveiling, the politically charged report has proven to be both too specific to prompt immediate actions and, also, too general to keep special interest groups from picking and choosing concepts and quotes to advance their own agendas.

Governor Granholm attempted to defuse the political tensions early by sharing Council appointments with key legislative conservatives, specifically, Senate Majority Leader Ken Sikkema (R-Wyoming) and Speaker of the House Rick Johnson (R-LeRoy). The result was a complicated collection of the state's most powerful lobbying forces engaged in the land use debate, including the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, Municipal League, Townships Association, Homebuilders Association, Michigan Environmental Council and the Farm Bureau. The groups worked surprisingly well together during the process, but since the report's release, it appears the old paradigms have regained their hold on participants.

Sadly, the policies themselves, if implemented, would indeed improve land use planning in Michigan and slow sprawl. By and large, they parallel the Michigan Smart Growth Agenda created by Michigan environmental groups and local citizens in 2001. The report suggests, among other things, increasing coordination among the 1,800 local units of government doing planning; providing an increased role for state participation and better targeting of state investments; and directing development funds and expertise into already urbanized areas with sufficient infrastructure to meet growth demand. Some of the more popular recommendations also include economic development packages and school location guidelines intended to revitalize urban areas and make cities more attractive to young professionals.

However, in both background content and packaging, the report dilutes these strong recommendations by attempting to soften and bridge the partisan wrangling and conflicting special interests that have effectively stalled similar attempts to slow the state's rapid descent into urban sprawl over the last 30 years. The report devotes long sections to an outline of the principles of local control and private property rights-sections which, taken out of context, have served to further divide interest groups in the intervening months. Council members were also allowed to record reservations or objections to individual recommendations within the final document, further accentuating the differences between groups involved in the process.

Absent strong leadership, these differences again threaten to sink yet another promising opportunity for land use reform. The Governor's office and the Legislature both appear reticent to lay claim to the report and champion its excellent recommendations.

By all accounts, the majority of the ideas continue to wallow in the limbo of bipartisanship, and since its release, Council members have been heard bending the report to fit their own agendas in meetings with legislators, editorial boards and constituent groups. Without a coordinated push from residents and a clear call for action on key items, the report will likely end up on the bookshelf with the dozens of other land use recommedations.

Former Governor William Milliken, a Republican who had crafted and championed a narrowly defeated statewide land use reform package while he was Governor in the late 1970s, chaired the Council, and former Attorney General Frank Kelley co-chaired. The Council was staffed and managed by Bill Rustem and Public Sector Consultants, Inc., a Lansing-based pubic policy research firm. The entire report is available online at the Land Use Leadership Council's web page: www.michiganlanduse.org.

Economic and social costs of sprawl
According to a recent report by the Michigan Partnership for Economic Progress, Michigan lost population in the 25 to 34 age category that includes young, skilled employees and entrepreneurs-at almost twice the national average. The state also ranks near the bottom nationally in terms of the number of out-of-state graduates that migrate into the state.

The Michigan Smart Growth Agenda
The Michigan Smart Growth Agenda was created in 2001 through a series of public meetings with residents and environmental groups around the state. Paralleling the recommendations of the Land Use Leadership Council, the agenda relies on long-range visioning, cooperation among multiple units of government at all levels and new tools for land management at the local level:

• Statewide Goals and Coordination
• Multijurisdictional Planning
• Distribute taxes more equitably
• Improve Urban Development and Redevelopment
• Revolutionize Transportation
• Farmland Protection and Agricultural Industry Development
• Protect Natural Resources
• Improve School Impacts

Reservations and objections chart
Council members were allowed to record reservations and objections on each individual policy recommendation contained in the Council's final report. The members recording the most were homebuilder Robert Johnson (33 total); developer Mick McGraw (30); realtor Gil White (24); Chamber of Commerce President Jim Barrett (24); and State Representative Ruth Johnson (46).

Council member (Reservations, Objections)
Jim Barrett, Michigan Chamber of Commerce - 21, 3
State Senator Patty Birkholz, Saugatuck - 5, 0
State Representative Ruth Johnson, Holly - 41, 5
Robert Jones, Builder/Former President MI Home Builders Association - 28, 15
Mick McGraw, Home Builder/Developer - 20, 10
Larry Merrill, Michigan Township Association - 3, 0
Lana Pollack, Michigan Environmental Council - 9, 1
Brian Warner, Wolverine Power - 6, 7
Gil White, Michigan Association of Realtors - 22, 2
Wayne Wood, Michigan Farm Bureau - 5, 10
Hans Voss, Michigan Land Use Institute - 2, 0


State, Nature Conservancy partner in Keweenaw protection
At the northernmost tip of mainland Michigan, 6,275 majestic acres belong to the people of Michigan now that an historic transaction between The Nature Conservancy and the State of Michigan was completed and marked with a celebratory event September 12 near Copper Harbor. The newly-protected land at the tip of the Keweenaw Peninsula links with property already owned by the Conservancy and the state for a total of 11,104 acres and 13 miles of shoreline protected for wildlife habitat and open to the public for hunting, fishing and hiking. The Nature Conservancy acted as a third-party broker in the transaction, buying the entire acreage from International Paper's Lake Superior Land Company and holding it until being reimbursed over two years from the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund. The trust fund receives its revenue from royalties generated by leasing of oil and gas on state-owned land. MEC supported the state's purchase of the land.