Opinion: Township Planner is a Dedicated, Hardworking Public Servant

(Editor’s Note: Township Trustee Rudy Rudolph maps out just some of the ways our Planner, Jenn Cram, is working on behalf of Old Mission Peninsula residents. -jb)

There have been some recent criticisms of Peninsula Township’s Planning Office that, in my opinion, are totally unwarranted. In particular, one of the candidates for Township Supervisor has indicated that his top priority is to “clean house” in the Planning Department.

I am generously going to suppose that these threats are leveled out of ignorance of the work your Planner is doing and not out of some ulterior motive targeted at disrupting the ordinance enforcement process of the Township.

Having worked with Jenn Cram as a member of the Town Board for the past two years, I have had an opportunity to see her in action and to work with her on a number of issues. Please allow me to share my observations with you all.

First of all, Ms. Cram was charged by the Township Board to administer Township Ordinances in a fair, consistent, and civil manner when she was hired. In my opinion, she is operating exactly as she was charged by the Township Board.

Additionally, until just recently she has had to act not only as Planner, but also as the Township Ordinance Administrator, doubling her responsibilities. If you have been paying attention, you have often found her working late, working on weekends, and working on days off, in order to try to keep up with the demands of both offices.

Wineries

Ms. Cram was hired by the Township in the middle of the ongoing chaos generated by the WOMP lawsuit. As you should know, your neighbors, the Wineries of Old Mission Peninsula, felt that the Township Ordinances, which had originally been negotiated with the early winery operators, were restricting them from operating as full-fledged commercial tourist attractions, despite the fact that they are located on agriculturally-zoned land. Agricultural zoning precludes commercial activities unrelated to agricultural operations.

During the first months of service with the Township, Ms. Cram spent countless hours poring through piles of documents, to try to make some sense of the existing ordinances and the supporting Special Use Permits that each of the wineries operate under. And, to make it more confusing, the Special Use Permits for the wineries all differ from one another as a result of negotiations by each entity during the process leading to the issuance of the permit.

Some of this massive research effort was generated in support of the new attorneys that the Township found it necessary to hire. Some of the work was generated by demands from entities suing the Township over various supposed slights. This effort took up countless hours of time by both your Township Clerk and Township Planner.

To her great credit, one of Ms. Cram’s first suggestions was to form a Citizens’ Advisory Committee to address citizen concerns regarding agricultural operations. I served on that committee prior to my appointment as a Township Trustee. The committee Ms. Cram envisioned was truly representative of the interests of all Old Mission Peninsula citizens, not just a select few. There were seats for three winery representatives, three representatives of the traditional farming community, three for members of Protect the Peninsula and finally, three at-large members, one of which seat I was honored to fill.

The process, as Ms. Cram envisioned it, would have given operators and concerned citizens equal representation, which would have been good for all of us. The wineries chose not to participate in this forum, which was unfortunate, I think, for all of us. I can only conclude that they felt they had little to gain in engaging with their neighbors, and rather, they had more to gain by suing their neighbors for damages that, in my opinion, are totally undeserved.

Further, in trying to better understand the rights of our farmers to operate on the Peninsula, your Planner engaged with the Michigan Commission of Agriculture and Rural Development, which gives her a firm grasp on what is real and what is fantasy, regarding the Michigan Right To Farm Act (RTF). As a result, she was able to bring in an expert to educate our own advisory committee members about “Right to Farm” and “Generally Accepted Agricultural Management Practices” (GAAMP) concepts. This helped us immensely. She continues to be engaged with MCARD so that any changes in RTF will be readily understood by your Township.

Interchanges were lively between the residential citizens and farm operators, but I think in the end, everyone came to understand that all of us were looking for the best compromise for all parties. And we were able to formulate some useful recommendations to the Planning Commission.

The Planning Commission, then faced with an early court judgment in the WOMP lawsuit that indicated the existing ordinances were too vague, proceeded, guided by Ms. Cram and the Township attorneys, to recommend replacing many of the agricultural ordinances. These revisions were processed through the Township’s Planning Commission and eventually put into effect by action of the Township Board, through a fully transparent public process which was strongly opposed by the wineries and their allies.

(Read the new Farm Processing ordinance here. -jb)

Building Heights

I would also like to address the “building heights” issue, which is often used as a platform to attack your Planner. As a Peninsula Township Trustee and having served as a Trustee of an Illinois Rural Fire Protection District for 18 years, this is how I see it.

Your planner, reviewing plans for a residential construction project, found an inconsistency in the building heights ordinance, regarding how building height should be measured. As she should, she brought it to the attention of the Town Board. In doing so, Ms. Cram was only asking for guidance in how to administer an ambiguity.

This was blown way out of proportion by a small group of people, leading to a mob scene at a Township meeting which, in my opinion, was planned and designed to intimidate both the Planner and the Town Board, during a critical part of the WOMP trial proceedings. Your planner’s very professional response was to form an advisory committee to take input from citizens, architects, contractors, and the fire department (who will be most affected by any relaxation of building height restrictions).

This led to a revision of the ordinance that is easier to understand and implement, and meets the needs of most residents, while still protecting public safety. This revision was processed publicly through the Planning Commission and was eventually passed by the Town Board in a fully transparent process, as it should be.

Seven Hills

Again, in order to understand the rather loose and convoluted licensing process regarding Michigan Liquor Control Commission small winery, small distillery and small brewery licenses, Ms. Cram opened direct communications with the MLCC. Their response was, “We wondered why no one from Peninsula Township had ever contacted us before.”

My own observation is that some businesses are using the loose MLCC licensing process to essentially apply for multiple specialty licenses which allow them to operate almost like a commercial Class C licensed business. Class C liquor licenses, like the license granted to Old Mission Tavern, The Boathouse and others, are closely regulated by the MLCC according to population, and are very expensive licenses to gain and maintain. Some businesses on the Peninsula have taken advantage of the loose MLCC process for specialty licenses, and lack of engagement by the Township in the past, to gain multiple specialty licenses under the radar, so to speak.

Recently your Planner, after researching the MLCC rules, has been criticized for denying a small brewery license to Old Mission Distilling, located at the Seven Hills establishment. This is, in fact, not what happened, in my view. There was never a denial of anything. The enterprise had a Special Use Permit, issued through the public vetting process of Planning Commission recommendation, public hearings, and Town Board action. Their SUP specified a small distillery operation and small restaurant. All the permitting issued for sanitation and other facilities were specific to that use.

Subsequently, the enterprise applied for a small winery license from the MLCC, which they automatically issued because no one from the Township questioned it at the time. When Ms. Cram become aware of a more recent application by this business, for a small brewery license, she responded to the MLCC that, without an amendment to its SUP, the enterprise would not be in compliance with Township ordinances.

In my opinion, this response was exactly correct and in conformance with directions Ms. Cram had received from the Township Board. Once again, a few people who either misunderstood the process or perhaps found it convenient to disrupt the ordinance administration of the Township, blew this process, which was perfectly reasonable and proper, out of all proportion.

In this case, the Planner was accused of taking biased action toward the enterprise. This was certainly not the case as I view it. Instead, she was acting in full accord with the existing ordinances, as was her job. Eventually, I believe, the enterprise agreed to amend their Special Use Permit, go through the proper public vetting process, and allow the Grand Traverse Public Health Department to evaluate whether their sanitary system was properly sized to service a small brewery operation.

Shoreline

Complaints by Peninsula Township citizens regarding dock and boat hoist placement, along with changes promulgated by FEMA regarding the definition of Great Lakes flood plains, has caused your Planner to take a critical look at the Township’s ordinances regarding shoreline activities. Again, this is not something your Planner decided to address without evidence the existing ordinances needed consideration and possibly changes. Now she is being criticized by the same few people that always seem to find it amusing to stir things up.

Rather than taking unilateral action on these matters, here is what your Planner actually did. She formed an advisory committee composed of general citizens, private shoreline owners, multiple family shoreline users and contractors. By doing this, Ms. Cram is able to educate herself as to how people use the shoreline, how other government agencies overlap in this jurisdiction, and how we might improve our ordinances and processes to address the needs of our citizens.

At the same time, it has become a forum that allows any citizen to engage in the process, and many have, to everyone’s benefit. These are not simple issues because what one person or group does can adversely affect the welfare and safety of their neighbors. Like the processes of evaluating agricultural ordinances and building height ordinances, there is, I think, a very good likelihood this forum will lead to much more understandable and simpler ordinances and processes addressing the use of our 42 miles of beautiful waterfront.

In spite of all these distractions, having to cover two jobs, demands for court appearances in the WOMP lawsuit, and weathering all the critics, Ms. Cram has also managed to oversee a successful PDR program and to finally, working with the Planning Commission, complete the Township’s Master Plan, which has been in limbo since COVID. The Town Board was able to finally approve the latest Master Plan revision at their July meeting.

Now, I will ask you, does this sound like the biased, overbearing bureaucrat that some would have you believe occupies the seat? Or does this sound like a dedicated, hardworking public servant? I, for one, am glad she is part of the Township Team. You will have to decide for yourself.

In conclusion, you may not agree with an ordinance that the Planning Department is administering, but you should not blame the Planner for doing a consistent, even-handed administration of the ordinances. Rather, you should put your efforts into working to change that ordinance through the proper channels.

W. William Rudolph
Peninsula Township Trustee

——————————