E-M:/ Citizens Group Seeks Reversal of Supreme Court's MEPA Decision

[Cyndi Roper <croper@cleanwater.org>]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enviro-Mich message from Cyndi Roper <croper@cleanwater.org>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Press Release
Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation
August 15, 2007

Contacts: Terry Swier, President, Michigan Citizens for Water 
Conservation (231) 972 8856
James Olson, Olson, Bzdok & Howard, Traverse City, Attorney for Michigan 
Citizens for Water Conservation (231) 499 8831; (231) 946 0044

Citizens Group Fighting Nestle Water Extraction Seeks Reversal of 
Supreme CourtÂ’s Crippling Blow to Environmental Citizen Suit Law


Traverse City, Michigan. Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation, the 
citizen group who won a major court victory that limited groundwater 
pumping by Nestlé for its Ice Mountain bottled water that harmed a 
stream, two lakes, and wetlands, filed a Motion for Rehearing with the 
Michigan Supreme Court on Wednesday, August 15, 2007.

On July 25th, the StatesÂ’s highest court, in a 4-to-3 decision, agreed 
with lower court rulings that NestleÂ’s groundwater extraction illegally 
harmed the lakes, stream, and wetlands. But the Court also reversed part 
of the lower courtÂ’s ruling by limiting the citizen groupsÂ’ legal right 
to bring a lawsuit against Nestlé under Michigan’s Environmental 
Protection Act for damaging a lake and wetlands on its own property. The 
citizens group has standing, the right to bring the suit, to protect the 
lakes and
streams which individuals or the groupÂ’s members owned or used, but no 
right to bring suit to stop a polluter from destroying a lake and 
wetland on his or her own property, the CourtÂ’s decision said.

Ironically, in June of this year, MichiganÂ’s internationally renowned 
environmental citizen-suit law won more acclaim when the lawÂ’s author, 
Professor Joseph Sax, who wrote the law at the request of former 
Governor William Milliken in 1970, was awarded the prestigious 
international Blue Planet Prize in Tokyo.

“MCWC has asked the Court to rehear its decision, because we think the 
citizens of Michigan deserve a closer look at a ruling that blocks their 
right to sue to prevent environmental damage on Nestle’s property,” 
Terry Swier, President of Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation, 
said. “Our air, water, and natural resources do not recognize the legal 
fiction of property boundaries when it comes to environmental harm.”

The citizen group requests the Court to rehear its July 25th decision, 
because it denies them their legal right to bring a citizen suit to 
prevent Nestlé from causing undeniable harm, according to the findings 
of the lower courts, to the water resources of the state. “In a larger 
sense, the decision may have exceeded the CourtÂ’s judicial power under 
our constitution and denied these people their first amendment right to 
petition government to redress wrongs,” said James Olson, from Olson, 
Bzdok & Howard, who represents the citizen groups in its battles with 
Nestlé. “In the immediate sense, the decision ignored a model 
environmental law passed by our legislature and knocked the teeth out of 
citizens’ individual right to protect the environment,” he said.

The CourtÂ’s blow to the right, granted to citizens by the Legislature to 
bring suits to protect the stateÂ’senvironment, has met with outcry on 
the editorial pages of most newspapers.

Former Governor Milliken, who with a bipartisan Legislature spearheaded 
the adoption of the landmark environmental law in 1970, condemned the 
CourtÂ’s decision in various news articles.

George Weeks, a well-respected political columnist, in an Op Ed, July 
29th, described the Michigan Environmental Protection Act as “crippled” 
by the “the Michigan Supreme Court, which Weeks dubbed as the “Engler 
Four – justices elevated to that bench or the Court of Appeals by ex-Gov 
John Engler.”

Michigan Citizens for Water ConservationÂ’s reason for filing the Motion 
for Rehearing is to give Court an opportunity to reconsider its earlier 
July 25th decision. “It makes no sense to us. The Court says we have 
standing to prevent the damage to the stream and one lake within the 
affected area of NestleÂ’s pumping, but then says we donÂ’t have the right 
to protect the lake and wetlands on NestleÂ’s property, even though these 
water resources are also harmed and within the same affected area,” Terry
Swier said.

###


==============================================================
ENVIRO-MICH:  Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action.   Archives at
http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/

Postings to:  enviro-mich@great-lakes.net      For info, send email to
majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info enviro-mich"
==============================================================