Is the City Planning to Take Legal Action in Response to Proposal 1 Passing?

At the Nov. 5 election voters approved Proposal 1, an East Lansing charter amendment impacting the city’s housing and rental regulations. Recently, supporters of the amendment voiced concern that the city will move to take legal action to nullify some of the amendment’s impacts.

Several speakers at the Nov. 19 City Council meeting, the first council meeting following the election, said they believe council was set to discuss a legal response in the closed session scheduled at the end of the meeting.

Council spent about 80 minutes in closed session, but took no action other than voting to adjourn upon returning.

Following the meeting, ELi reached out to each member of City Council asking if they could comment on what was discussed in closed session, or the possibility of legal action being taken in response to the amendment passing.

No council member responded by saying what was discussed in closed session or if legal action is imminent. However, Councilmember Erik Altmann, who has advocated against the amendment, explained the predicament he believes the city is in. 

“Prop 1 contains ambiguous language concerning rental housing, which is a big industry in this Big 10 college town of ours,” he wrote. “At some point an investment company will do the math and sue us arguing that Prop 1 preempts regulations like occupancy limits and rental restriction overlays. This could happen today or it could happen a decade from now, and no one knows what the courts will decide. That is the limbo we are presently in.”

Members of the group in favor of the charter amendment have pushed back against claims that the amendment will significantly alter East Lansing neighborhoods, or cause broad changes to the city’s ability to enforce rental laws. They say the amendment stops the city from setting relationship-based criteria to restrict who can stay in a home long term, and allows homeowners to have long term guests without obtaining a rental license. 

“The claim that Prop 1 removes rental housing regulations is false,” Patrick Rose, an attorney and member of the group that drafted the proposal said at the Nov. 19 meeting. “All one has to do is read the language of the amendment. It clearly states it excludes protections for rent paying tenants.”

Rose said the amendment keeps rental regulations, rental restriction districts, rental license and safety rules in place. He said he’s confident a judge would rule against an illegal renter if they claimed the charter amendment dismantled rental regulations. 

Councilmember Mark Meadows, who opposed the amendment leading up to the election, initially answered the email from ELi by explaining the closed session process, and that votes would be made in public, not during the closed session. 

However, council would not need to vote to do nothing, meaning council could have discussed potential legal avenues in the closed session and opted not to take action at the Nov. 19 meeting. ELi followed up by asking Meadows directly if legal action in response to the amendment is on the table at this point. Meadows responded as follows:

“Nice try,” he wrote. “No decision of any kind has been made regarding Prop 1 except to incorporate its requirements into the ordinances of the City of East Lansing.”

Mayor George Brookover responded by referring us to the synopsis of the night’s meeting, which just shows the meeting’s agenda and how council voted on each item. Councilmember Dana Watson and Mayor Pro Tem Kerry Ebersole Singh did not respond to our email. 

It is unclear what legal action from the city could look like. 

One resident in favor of the amendment read a letter from retired Circuit Court Judge James Giddings, who helped draft the amendment. In the letter, Giddings wrote that he saw “no legal merit” in potential suits the city could bring. 

To this point, Altmann and Meadows have been strong opponents to the charter amendment.

Watson said at the Nov. 19 meeting that the amendment passing, along with other local election results were a “shimmering light of hope” to her from the election.

Brookover and Singh have not taken a position on the amendment at city meetings.