Restore the Vote

At Outside Legal Counsel PLC, we believe government must follow the Constitution — especially when it comes to taxing its citizens. That's why we are preparing a new legal challenge under the Michigan Constitution to stop what we believe is an unconstitutional, unvoted tax increase being imposed on Michigan property owners through a lake-level law called Part 307 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA).

Under Part 307, local county governments (often through a county drain commissioner) can set and maintain official water levels for inland lakes. These "legal lake levels" are meant to ensure water remains at a steady depth for boating, recreation, flood prevention, or environmental balance. On the surface, this may sound harmless. But the problem comes with how these projects are funded — and who pays the price.

Once a lake is placed under Part 307 jurisdiction, the local government can spend tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars building structures, modifying dams, dredging channels, or maintaining equipment to hold the lake at the designated level. To cover these costs, they send special assessment bills directly to property owners—usually those who own land near the lake—without any public vote or opportunity to opt out. These assessments can run into the thousands of dollars, year after year.

That's where the Michigan Constitution comes in. In 1978, Michigan voters approved the Headlee Amendment to stop exactly this kind of government overreach. The Headlee Amendment says that local governments cannot impose new taxes, or increase existing ones, without first getting approval from the voters. The goal was simple: give taxpayers the final say on when and how government takes their money.

But instead of asking for voter permission, counties across Michigan are using Part 307 to sidestep Headlee. They call the charges “special assessments,” which under certain circumstances can be exempt from Headlee rules. But in many cases, these so-called assessments look and act just like taxes. They are imposed broadly, not tied to specific benefits to each property, and fund large, ongoing infrastructure projects that serve a general public purpose—not a private one.

In other words, these are taxes dressed up as fees.

We believe this violates the Headlee Amendment and Michigan’s constitutional protections for property owners and taxpayers. That’s why we are preparing a lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of Part 307 assessments when imposed without a vote of the people. If successful, our case could not only protect the rights of lakefront owners in one community—it could have statewide implications for taxpayers everywhere.

The central legal question is this: Can local government force property owners to pay for large public projects without first giving them a voice through the ballot box? We believe the answer is no. Government must follow the constitutional limits set by voters, not find clever ways around them.

This case will not challenge the idea that lake levels should be managed responsibly. We recognize that water management is important. But constitutional rights matter just as much. There is a right way to fund these projects—through democratic consent—not by issuing assessments behind closed doors and calling them something they’re not.

If you are a Michigan property owner—especially one who has received a bill under Part 307—you may have already felt the impact of these assessments. You didn’t vote on them. You didn’t consent to them. Yet you are being forced to pay. That's not how taxation is supposed to work in a free society governed by law.

We are currently reviewing and gathering information for cases (including a class action) involving these kinds of illegal assessments. If your property has been affected by a Part 307 lake-level district or project, we encourage you to contact our office. You may be able to join or support this lawsuit. And even if you haven't been assessed yet, this case could affect future government projects in your area.

The Michigan Constitution was written to protect the people from runaway local taxation. It’s time to make sure it still does.

For more information or to share your experience, contact us or share the flyer with friends and family.

Together, we can defend the rule of law and protect the rights of Michigan taxpayers.

The Headlee Amendment is a crucial taxpayer protection provision enshrined in the Michigan Constitution since 1978. Named after its sponsor, businessman and political activist Richard Headlee, the amendment was a response to growing concerns about unchecked growth in government spending and taxation, especially at the local level.

The Headlee Amendment is found in Article IX, Sections 25–34 of the Michigan Constitution. It was adopted by voters to put clear limits on how state and local governments raise revenue, especially through taxes and mandates that affect local taxpayers and property owners.

At its core, the Headlee Amendment does several important things. Perhaps the most well-known provision is Section 31, which says that local governments cannot impose new taxes or increase the rate of existing taxes without voter approval. This includes property taxes and other levies. This section is designed to ensure that only the voters — not bureaucrats or local officials — can decide when their tax burden should increase.

The Headlee Amendment has had a wide-ranging effect on how Michigan governments operate. For example, if a county wants to raise a millage to fund a new road project, or if a township wants to increase a special assessment to built a park, the Headlee Amendment may require that such increases be approved by a vote of the people. If no vote is held, the increase could be challenged in court — and struck down as unconstitutional.

Over the years, the Headlee Amendment has become a powerful tool for Michigan residents to hold their governments accountable. Lawsuits can be used to enforce its provisions, particularly where governments attempted to disguise new taxes as "assessments" without proper voter approval. Sound familar?

At its heart, the Headlee Amendment reflects a simple principle: the people, not the government, has the final say when it comes to taxes.

Philip L. EllisonAttorney Philip L. Ellison of Outside Legal Counsel PLC is preparing a constitutional lawsuit under the Headlee Amendment to challenge the way local governments in Michigan impose special assessments under Part 307 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (MCL 324.30701 et seq). He is the same attorney who successfully obtained a ruling in CHiLLL v Roscommon County that the government is not properly maintaining the legal levels of Higgins Lake.

Part 307 allows county governments, typically through the drain commissioner, to establish and maintain "legal lake levels" for inland lakes. These projects often involve costly construction, maintenance of dams, or water level control structures. To pay for these projects, counties want to separately bill nearby property owners — sometimes thousands of dollars each — through special assessments, without holding a public vote.

We believe these assessments violate the Headlee Amendment to the Michigan Constitution, which prohibits local governments from imposing new taxes or increasing existing ones without voter approval (Art IX, § 31). While local governments argue that these are not taxes, but "fees" or "assessments," we contend that when they are used to fund broad public infrastructure on lakes with public access without a clear, direct benefit to each property, they cross the constitutional line.

Our legal position is that these Part 307 assessments are functionally unvoted taxes, imposed without proper constitutional authority. By avoiding the ballot box, counties are effectively sidestepping the protections voters enacted in 1978 to stop this kind of financial overreach.

This lawsuit is about more than lake levels. It's about the right of taxpayers to have a voice in how local government raises money. If successful, this case could set a powerful precedent to rein in unconstitutional local taxation and protect property owners statewide.

If you've been assessed under Part 307, your rights may have been violated — and we want to hear from you. Please contact us.