The New York Times recently published an article that addresses the conflict between saving beaches that are being impacted by rising sea levels and the improvements adjacent to them. The issue addressed in the article is summarized by this quote. ‘At issue is a legal concept from the sixth century A.D., when Emperor Justinian ordered the codification of Roman laws. The resulting code declared that features of nature like the air, running water, the sea and “the shores of the sea” must be held in trust for the use of the public

These deadlines confirm what I suspected that the need to alter the Oneida route will delay the eminent domain process. If the first submission deadline is January 5, 2026, METC will need time to finalize the route, complete appraisals, and issue good faith offers.  Further, the staggered deadlines likely demonstrate the order and the grouping for the issuance of good faith offers and filing of just compensation lawsuits.

The Michigan Public Service Commission (“MPSC”) has issued a certificate for Michigan Electric Transmission Line Company’s (“METC”) Oneida Substation to Nelson Road Substation and Helix to Hiple Projects. It contains interesting language discussing “minor modifications” to the route. 

While this webpage focuses primarily on my work in my home state of Michigan, I also work with co-counsel in other states. A case in another state (that I’m not identifying to protect the client’s privacy) involved an offer of $51,537 to obtain approximately one acre from a forty acre property for a road project just entered a final order. The property was used for residential and agricultural purposes.

The Michigan Public Service Commission (“MPSC”) has issued a certificate for Michigan Electric Transmission Line Company’s (“METC”) Oneida Substation to Nelson Road Substation and Helix to Hiple Projects.

A recent matter in another state that resulted in a $4,000,000 settlement above the $51,537 originally offered included a temporary taking claim. In that case, the project was announced in 2006, the owner learned shortly thereafter that his access would be curtailed significantly, commercial users interested in developing his property moved to a different property on the same intersection due to the access restrictions, and his access was physically reduced years before a formal takings lawsuit was filed due to interim construction activities.

Private entities like International Transmission Company working through its Michigan entities ITC and METC, Consumers Power, and other utility companies enjoy the power of eminent domain. Under the current standard contained in the Uniform Condemnation Procedures Act (“UCPA”), courts enjoy broad power to review the propriety of eminent domain takings initiated by private agencies unless the project obtained regulatory approval. 

The City of Tom’s River, New Jersey is embroiled in controversy.  A church is in the process of obtaining zoning approval to build a homeless shelter. While that was underway, the City passed an ordinance authorizing the use of eminent domain to acquire the church and its 11 acres of property to build a park. If a Michigan city attempted this maneuver, would it be legal? Maybe, maybe not.