The Books are Here!

Yes, we have books! They are now available on both Amazon.com, and through contacting us. They are priced at $18 on Amazon. The first order arrived almost a week early, and were nearly gone before we knew it. I hadn't anticipated how many people were waiting for it. So the next order was for 4X the amount, and just arrived yesterday. I have been contacting public policy groups hoping to generate interest in addressing the procedural and constitutional issues that arose through the passage of P.A. 495. I will be contacting some media outlets, as well. Hopefully there will be some write-ups in local publications soon. I have only contacted one bookstore thus far. A book signing is being planned in April or May at Totem Books in Flint. Until then, please contact me at undercoloroflaw@gmail.com for availability. I can ship books at a media rate. First class for one book at that rate is $2.72.

Questions Remain - How Did This Happen?

It is my desire that the publication of Under Color of Law will bring new attention to what happened in our state, and help to open dialogue and illicit changes in the legislative process in Michigan to prevent the devastating results P.A. 495 has had on us personally, and on the other businesses affected from happening to others.

 

The passage of P.A. 495 raised several significant questions involving the actions of legislators that have yet to be answered, and encompasses public policy as well as constitutional and procedural issues. I have begun contacting public policy organizations to address these issues. The following questions remain:

·         Why fiscal impact studies were not done to determine the impact on the businesses being regulated per the Michigan Administrative Procedures Act 24.240 Reducing disproportionate economic impact of rule on small business MCL 24.245(3) Section 40,

·         Since the new “Established Place of Business Requirements” were applied to renewals who were home-based and others whose business models did not require them to operate a full retail establishment, should the appropriate department have reviewed the takings assessment guidelines prepared under the Property Rights Preservation Act 101 of 1996 24.424 (3) and a consideration done of the likelihood that the governmental action may result in a constitutional taking per Section (4) of that Act?

·         Since the Michigan Constitution states, “No law shall embrace more than one object, which shall be expressed in its title” and “No bill shall be altered or amended on its passage, was the Michigan Constitution violated by adding the “Established Place of Business Requirements” the day of its final passage into a bill that dealt only with abandoned vehicles, had nothing to do with business or licensing up to that point, and had already been passed by the House on August 9, 2004?

·         Does the definition of ‘rule’ as defined in the Administrative Procedures Act 24.207 apply to the “Established Place of Business Requirements,” and what are the parameters of “on its passage” as intended by the Michigan Constitution?

·         P.A. 495 Section 248 (1) states “this subsection does not apply to renewals.” If this is referring to the new “Established Place of Business Requirements” as it appears, does this mean that a ‘grandfather clause’ was overlooked or intentionally ignored?

·         Were Senate Rules of Procedure violated since they prohibit an amended bill from being considered in the Committee of the Whole or on Third Reading until the amendment or amendments have been printed in the Journal (Senate Rules Chapter III Section 4 3.403. And yet Bill 4231 was voted on for passage by the Senate the same day amendment S-2 with the new “Established Place of Business Requirements” was added.

 

Did you know that you can request a "Declaratory Ruling from the Secretary of State if you have a question on an issue? I recently began the task of requesting a declaratory ruling on several of these issues pursuant to the Michigan Campaign Finance Act (MCFA) Act 388 of 1976 169.215(2), and the Administrative Procedures Act (MAPA), 1969 P A 306, MCL 24.201 authorizing an agency to issue a declaratory ruling if an interested person submits a written request as to an actual state of facts of a statute administered by an agency or of a rule or order of the agency, per MCL 24.263, 169.215(2). I have never submitted these questions in writing. Maybe we'll finally start getting some answers. Will keep you posted.

 

 

 

IT'S HERE!

Finally, here it is! Under Color of Law is published. It's now available on Amazon, and I will have hard copies on February 22. Now the work getting the word out begins.