Property: conveyance of state property; sale of state property to federal immigration and customs enforcement; prohibit. Amends 1984 PA 431 (MCL 18.1101 - 18.1594) by adding sec. 256.
Summary
HB 5494 would amend Michigan’s Management and Budget Act to prohibit state officials and entities acting on behalf of the state from conveying state-owned real property to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or any ICE subsidiary. It also requires that any state property conveyance include a use restriction barring the property from being used as an immigration detention center by the federal government or by a non-governmental entity contracting with the federal government.
The bill further requires conveyance documents to include a reversion mechanism so the state can regain the property if the restriction is violated. Any transfer made in violation of the bill would be void and have no legal effect. In practical terms, the bill would limit the state’s ability to sell or transfer property for immigration detention purposes and would add enforceable conditions to future state property dispositions.
Impact
The bill would add a new section to 1984 PA 431, the Management and Budget Act, creating a statutory restriction on how state-owned real property may be conveyed. It would directly affect the Department, the State Administrative Board, and any other person acting on behalf of the state, and would make noncompliant conveyances legally void. The measure would also impose deed-level restrictions and reversion rights on future state property transfers involving detention-related uses, thereby shaping state real estate transactions and limiting potential federal or contractor use of state land for immigration detention facilities.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct legislative debate or roll-call evidence to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to reflect a policy preference against state involvement in ICE detention infrastructure. The available context suggests the bill is framed as a preventive restriction rather than a broader property-management change.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the bill’s restriction on state cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, especially ICE detention operations. Supporters would likely view it as preventing state assets from being used for immigration detention, while opponents may argue it unnecessarily limits the state’s flexibility in managing property or interferes with federal-state cooperation. Another possible issue is the breadth of the restriction, which applies not only to direct conveyances to ICE but also to conveyances that could be used as detention centers by contractors or other non-governmental entities.
Property: conveyances; requirements for the conveyance of certain property in Roscommon County and Crawford County; modify. Amends secs. 3 & 4 of 2006 PA 584.