Traverse City is poised to vote on new prowling and trespassing ordinances on Monday, Oct. 19. These measures, initially considered at an Oct. 5 City Commission meeting, are aimed at enhancing safety at Hull Park, but the ACLU of Michigan has formally expressed its opposition, calling them unlawful and raising significant constitutional concerns in a letter to the city.
The proposed prowling ordinance would enable police to charge individuals with “prowl[ing] after dark” on private property, a violation that could carry a punishment of up to 93 days in jail. The ordinance defines prowling as “willfully lurking about, lying in wait or moving stealthily about private property as if in search of prey or plunder.” Additionally, amendments to existing trespassing penalties would grant police officers the authority to require any person violating the chapter to leave any park for three days.
City officials have cited increasing safety concerns at Hull Park as the impetus for these new ordinances, including incidents of public drinking, threatening behavior, and the assault of a local sailing instructor. Traverse City Police Department data indicates a significant increase in incident reports and arrests at the park. This rise in activity coincides with the clearing of a local homeless encampment known as "The Pines" in May 2025. Traverse City Manager Benjamin Marrentette emphasized during the Oct. 5 meeting that police would exercise discretion in enforcing the new rules.
However, the ACLU of Michigan argues that this very discretion presents a fundamental problem. Holly Hillyer, an author of the ACLU’s letter and a member of the Northwest Michigan Lawyers’ Committee, explained that when police “have too much discretion and not enough guidance from the legislature, that creates a risk that they're starting to sort of make the law as they go.”
The ACLU further criticized the definition of prowling as “inscrutable,” arguing that its ambiguity would empower officers to stop and arrest anyone they consider suspicious. The organization specifically highlighted that unhoused people are often stereotyped in this manner. The ACLU of Michigan contended that such ambiguity would disproportionately place unhoused individuals at risk of arrest or citation, stating that "Anti-unhoused prejudice already pervades law enforcement," and that implicit bias would inevitably influence enforcement decisions, regardless of officers' intentions.
In addition to the concern regarding ambiguity and discretion, the ACLU of Michigan identified two other “serious constitutional concerns.” The first relates to the Fourth Amendment, which requires probable cause for arrests and seizures. The ACLU argued that the current ordinance language would effectively bypass this requirement, allowing police to arrest individuals based on “mere suspicion” rather than concrete evidence.
Secondly, the ACLU addressed Fifth Amendment protections against self-incrimination. The draft ordinance includes language suggesting that an officer shall give a person an opportunity to “dispel any alarm … by requesting the person to identify himself or herself and explain his or her presence and conduct.” The ACLU's letter cited a Supreme Court decision, emphasizing that while police have the right to request voluntary answers, “they have no right to compel them to answer.”
Concluding its argument, the ACLU of Michigan asserted that the trespassing portion of the ordinance violates both due process and First Amendment rights, urging the City Commission to reject the draft ordinances in their entirety.
Traverse City Mayor Amy Shamroe confirmed that the city is awaiting an official opinion from the city’s attorney regarding the proposed ordinances. The vote to approve the ordinance is scheduled for Monday, Oct. 19.
