WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 6044

Highways: other; failing to remove an obstruction in the right of way; prohibit from being used as evidence of abandonment. Amends sec. 20 of 1925 PA 368 (MCL 247.190).

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Parker Fairbairn and 2 co-sponsors

HB 6044 reinforces that Michigan highway rights of way remain public land; encroachments do not grant ownership or imply abandonment, protecting public access.

bill electronically reproduced 06/04/2026
#highways:other
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 6044

Bill overview

  • Jurisdiction: Michigan
  • Session: 2025-2026
  • Bill number: HB 6044
  • Title: Highways: other; failing to remove an obstruction in the right of way; prohibit from being used as evidence of abandonment. Amends sec. 20 of 1925 PA 368 (MCL 247.190).
  • Introduced by: Rep. Bill Schuette (primary); Co-sponsors: Rep. Alabas Farhat, Rep. Parker Fairbairn
  • Action history: Introduced and referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on June 4, 2026; electronically reproduced June 9, 2026.

Purpose and intent

The bill amends Section 20 of the public highway law codified at MCL 247.190 to clarify and reinforce rights-of-way protections for public highways in Michigan. Its core aims are:
- To reaffirm that all public highways, including their established rights of way, remain dedicated public land for highway purposes.
- To ensure that encroachments (fences, buildings, or other structures) that have been placed within or upon the right of way do not confer any title or property rights to the encroaching party.
- To prevent delays or misinterpretations about highway abandonment based on the presence of encroachments or failed removal actions by the responsible road commissions.

Key provisions and changes

  1. Property interests and right-of-way integrity (Subsection 1):

    • Reiterates that public highways, and their width as dedicated or purchased, must remain highways.
    • Encroachments (past, current, or future) within or extending into the right of way do not grant ownership or rights to the encroaching party.
    • Encroachments can be fences, buildings, or other obstructions, and their existence does not alter the public nature or title of the land within the right-of-way.

  2. Clarification on abandonment evidence (Subsection 2):

    • States that a board of county road commissioners’ failure to order the removal of an encroachment or obstruction within the public highway shall not be used as evidence of the board’s intent to abandon the public highway.
    • Addresses potential legal arguments that non-removal implies abandonment, providing a clear statute-based shield against such presumptions.

Who and what is affected

  • Public highway rights of way: The bill affects how encroachments within the right of way are treated in terms of property rights and abandonment arguments.
  • Boards of county road commissioners: Reinforces that their failure to remove encroachments cannot be construed as abandonment of the highway.
  • Encroachers/encroachment scenarios: Individuals or entities that have placed structures or obstructions within the highway right of way are limited in asserting property ownership or asserting abandonment principles based on non-removal actions.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Introduction and referral: Introduced on June 4, 2026, and referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for consideration.
  • Effective date: The text provided does not specify an effective date; typical statutes may specify an effective date upon passage or a later date if enacted. The bill would take effect per the enacted sections and any future rules adopted by the legislature.

Potential impacts and implications

  • Provides legal reassurance that highway right-of-way ownership remains with the public and cannot be transferred to encroachers via longstanding encroachments.
  • Reduces risk that failure to remove encroachments could be misinterpreted as formal abandonment of highway rights, potentially affecting maintenance responsibilities, funding, and public access.
  • Could influence enforcement actions by road commissions regarding removal of encroachments and management of right-of-way boundaries.

If you’d like, I can compare this to existing Michigan law or summarize potential fiscal implications once a fiscal note is available.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.