STATE OF MICHIGAN

FRANK J. KELLEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL

Opinion No. 6609

February 9, 1990

MIGRANT AGRICULTURAL WORKERS:

Township zoning authority over migrant labor camps

ZONING AND PLANNING:

Township zoning authority over migrant labor camps

While a township may enact reasonable zoning regulations not inconsistent with state statutes or regulations governing agricultural labor camps, a township may not use its zoning power to effectively prohibit such camps in agricultural areas.

Raj M. Wiener

Director

Department of Public Health

3423 N. Logan, P.O. Box 30195

Lansing, Michigan 48909

You have requested my opinion whether, in view of the statutory authority of the Department of Public Health to regulate and license agricultural labor camps for the temporary housing of migrant workers, a township may further regulate such camps pursuant to its zoning authority, and if so, whether it may enact zoning ordinances, the effect of which is to preclude the construction of agricultural labor camps.

Part 124 of the Public Health Code, MCL 333.12401 et seq; MSA 14.15(12401) et seq, requires a person operating an agricultural labor camp to acquire a license from the Department of Public Health and directs the Department to promulgate rules setting forth minimum standards for construction, health, sanitation, sewage, water supply, plumbing, garbage disposal and operation.

1943 PA 184, MCL 125.271; MSA 5.2963(1), grants townships broad authority to enact zoning regulations in portions of the township outside the limits of cities and villages. Townships have no police power of their own and may exercise zoning power only by grant from the Legislature through zoning enabling acts. Fredal v Forster, 9 MichApp 215, 229; 156 NW2d 606 (1967). A municipality may not enact an ordinance which directly conflicts with a state statute. People v Llewellyn, 401 Mich 314; 257 NW2d 902 (1977).

In Dingeman Advertising, Inc v Saginaw Twp, 92 MichApp 735; 285 NW2d 440 (1979), the court held that the broad general grant of power under the township rural zoning act did not allow a township to enact a zoning ordinance in contravention of the Highway Advertising Act which provided specific standards for billboard advertising. It is clear that this principle also would prohibit a municipality from enacting an ordinance which directly conflicts with a regulation enacted pursuant to statutory authority. In Noey v City of Saginaw, 271 Mich 595; 261 NW 88 (1935), for example, the Supreme Court held that a regulation promulgated by the Liquor Control Commission which prohibited the sale of alcoholic beverages between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. could not be superseded by a city ordinance which prohibited sales from midnight to 7:00 a.m.

However, a township may, when authorized to do so, enact reasonable standards relating to the public welfare which are stricter than minimum standards set by state statute or by rules enacted pursuant to statutory authority. Thus, in Palmer v Superior Twp, 60 MichApp 664; 233 NW2d 14 (1975), the Court of Appeals upheld a township ordinance setting standards for mobile home parks stricter than those in the applicable state statute. The court read the provisions of the state act as evidencing an intent to impose the minimum, not the only, standards.

Section 12421(1) of the Public Health Code, MCL 333.12421(1); MSA 14.15(12421)(1), states:

Pursuant to this authority, the Department has enacted administrative rules, including 1979 AC, R 325.1503, which provides:

Thus, 1979 AC, R 325.1503 expressly permits a township to utilize the power granted by the rural township zoning act to regulate health and safety within agricultural labor camps, so long as the township's zoning requirements are within the minimum standards set by the Department of Public Health and are reasonable.

A township may not, however, under the guise of zoning, completely prohibit agricultural labor camps in areas zoned for farming. In Waterford Proc v Waterford Twp, 25 MichApp 507; 181 NW2d 675 (1970), the state health commissioner had issued a license to operate a landfill to the Plaintiff, but the township refused to license the proposed facility. The court stated:

See also, National Amusement Co v Johnson, 270 Mich 613; 259 NW 342 (1935). To like effect, see OAG, 1969-1970, No 4680, p 94 (October 31, 1969) (where a state statute provided for permits for mobile home parks, a township could not prohibit them); and OAG, 1979-1980, No 5454, p 73 (March 8, 1979) (a statute providing for adult foster care facilities in areas zoned for single family residences supersedes a township zoning ordinance limiting the number of non-related persons occupying single-family homes).

It is my opinion, therefore, that while a township may enact reasonable zoning regulations not inconsistent with state statutes or regulations governing agricultural labor camps, a township may not use its zoning power to effectively prohibit such camps in agricultural areas.

Frank J. Kelley

Attorney General