Advocacy News – Sept. 25. 2026
What’s happening: The Senate Local Government Committee advanced Senate Bill 960, legislation aimed at addressing vacant commercial properties by allowing local governments to ask a court to remove certain privately negotiated deed restrictions.
Why it matters: Revitalizing vacant and blighted properties is a worthy goal. But SB 960 raises a fundamental concern: government shouldn’t be empowered to undo private property rights and negotiated agreements without compensation.
- Michigan businesses and developers rely on clear, predictable property rights when buying, financing and investing in commercial real estate. Allowing government to initiate legal action to eliminate recorded restrictions could create greater uncertainty for property owners, lenders, investors and prospective buyers.
Our view: Michigan can – and should – encourage redevelopment without undermining established property rights.
Rather than creating a new path for government to challenge private agreements, policymakers should focus on voluntary agreements, market-based incentives and regulatory reforms that help return vacant properties to productive use while preserving the certainty businesses need to invest.
Bottom line: Redevelopment and property rights don’t have to be competing priorities. Michigan should pursue both.
Go deeper: Read our testimony here. Contact Randy Gross with Qs or feedback.