To view or leave comments on this story, click HERE.
(Editor’s Note: Jim Floraday maps out a future where the Old Mission Peninsula could become the next NAPA Valley, if certain candidates are elected to the Township Board. Read on for his thoughts. -jb)
Next week, when the in-person and absentee ballots are counted, we will all be deciding on the forthcoming direction for the Old Mission Peninsula. There are those who profess that there is a need for change, that money has been wasted on the WOMP lawsuit (Wineries of Old Mission Peninsula), that present leadership lacks decisiveness and lacks common sense in their decision-making.
Old Mission Gazette is Reader Supported.
Click Here to Keep the Gazette Going.
I wish I had the time and energy to be as vocal as the vocal-minority who are compelled to find fault and post combative statements.
And yet, I wondered what is behind the actions and intentions of the present leadership. Why spend the money defending present ordinances? Why not allow the wineries to grow their businesses along other venues? Why not encourage more agricultural and commercial activities to attract more tourists to this amazing peninsula? Why are they keeping their foot on the brake pedal?
Think about it, Old Mission Peninsula could become the next Napa Valley … and if one combines Old Mission Peninsula and the Leelanau Peninsula, this region has the potential to give the California region known as “Wine Country” a run for tourist dollars in the next 40 to 50 years.
Upon researching that region, I uncovered the following: “The Wine Country has undergone a boom in tourism. Today there are well over 800 wineries in Napa and Sonoma Counties … The Wine Country tourism boom has its downside, exemplified by traffic congestion on State Route 29, particularly on summer weekends, when the number of tourists often exceeds the carrying capacity of the road.”
In researching these two wine destinations, the field seemed too narrow; thus, the research was expanded to the top 10 wine destinations in the US. The following table, in chronological order from numbers 1 – 10, provides information we all need to consider as we choose the course for Old Mission Peninsula. These numbers are staggering, not only in the growth of wineries in each region, but in the number of annual tourists.
One must also consider the various issues each region faces as relates to wine tourism. Many of the items listed in the following table are already hitting close to home, while others are on the horizon if Old Mission Peninsula goes in the growth direction of these ten regions.
These two tables provide a quick reference for each of us to ponder as we consider our votes for the four trustee positions. I’m concerned that the pendulum is close to swinging in a new direction for Old Mission Peninsula as relates to agritourism which favors wineries, breweries, distilleries, and possibly cannabis, as identified in the article “Cannabis tourism: how a new travel trend is taking off.”
There have been several posts asking us to vote for change and new leadership by voting for the four candidates: Shelia Johnson, Kate Jerman, Fred Swaffer, and JP Milliken. (Editor’s Note: Click through the links to read their responses to the Gazette’s questionnaire; JP Milliken did not return his responses. -jb)
If one believes in the phrase “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours,” then this band of four could certainly be looking to each other to orchestrate a major change as relates to the direction of Old Mission Peninsula and tourism related to wineries, breweries, distilleries, and possibly cannabis dispensaries.
From a hypothetical perspective, the strands for each candidate could be woven together, thus forming a unified front to move Old Mission Peninsula in a different direction … possibly as follows…
I believe a vineyard owner on Old Mission Peninsula who is interested in selling their harvest would do so to WOMP. Two of the candidates have mentioned being farmers, and one possibly even implied a relationship to WOMP.
Thus, I believe candidates Johnson and Jerman are pro-winery candidates who will support the winery owners and may even modify ordinances to allow wineries to operate like Willow Vineyards in Leelanau County, which is only 12 acres.
To support the modifications to ordinances, one could tap candidate Swaffer, who could be interested in additional modifications to allow cannabis dispensaries to operate on Old Mission Peninsula. In pledging his support, candidate Milliken may look to the other three candidates to aid in his nephew’s project on Seven Hills.
Info on Candidates:
Sheila Johnson – Interview Response:
Why are you running for this position, and what qualifications do you bring to the role?
“… We also purchased a farm on the Old Mission Peninsula last summer, so I have a unique perspective as a resident, business owner and (novice) farmer.” Recently, a sign was posted in front of that farm: “Rosie’s Farm & Vineyard.”
Kate Jerman – Interview Response:
Should they (wineries) be required to support OMP farmers via collaborations and/or using locally-grown produce?
“I fully support using locally grown produce. As an OMP farmer, I currently use this supply chain to sell our crops.”
I have to admit, I missed this one…. “As an OMP farmer, I currently use this supply chain to sell our crops.”
It wasn’t until this post on NextDoor — “Garry Mannor, the partner of Kate Jerman, has made numerous demands including one last week for the township to ignore its zoning ordinance and grant him permission to build a winery under ordinances that no longer exist” — that I realized I missed her statement in her Gazette questionnaire related to her business relationship with the wineries.
Comments were made in support of Jerman along the lines that just because she has a relationship with Garry Mannor, that doesn’t mean she’s involved in the business. (Unfortunately, it appears that comment was removed, as I can’t find it.)
That comment concerned me, so I conducted a Google search of candidate Jerman. Her LinkedIn profile lists “OMP Farmer & Quality Assurance Manager – Fernweh Vineyards & Burnette Foods, Inc.” If she was not associated with Garry Mannor’s business, why would it be listed on the profile?
Fred Swaffer – Interview Response:
Why are you running for this position, and what qualifications do you bring to the role?
“…. I am a retired Air Force Officer, Gulf War veteran, and recently retired after 33 years as a 787 International Captain with American Airlines. I am also a small business owner.”
I just can’t get my hands around why candidate Swaffer, who has a farming operation tied to his small business venture, did not mention being a farmer or his farming operation, in his responses.
Link to his farming operation: About | Old Mission Cultivars, LLC
“Our 5 acre hemp farm is located on Old Mission Peninsula in Traverse City, Michigan. This region is renowned for its wine-grape varietals … an ideal situation for cultivating hemp.”
JP Milliken (no questionnaire response returned):
Candidate Milliken already has someone scratching his back, as his nephew, Jay Milliken, provided a personal account of him on NextDoor: “My uncle Dr. JP Milliken… to the township board.”
Yet, a different post on NextDoor indicated: “A FOIA of township email exchanges would amply and incontrovertibly demonstrate that JP Milliken has on numerous occasions demanded that the township ignore federal, county and local regulations in order to allow him to move forward with reconstruction of a residence on the shoreline.”
So, this is how I view candidate Milliken. First, if elected he is receiving a blank check by Old Mission Peninsula residents, as he has never identified his positions, thus he cannot be held accountable for his actions, since he never committed himself to a position.
Second, his nephew is affiliated with Seven Hills, which is looking to expand its microdistillery to also operate as a microbrewery. My concern is that if elected, candidate Milliken will turn around and scratch his nephew’s back and aid him in working through the zoning issues. (Who knows, JP might even revisit the “boutique lodging experience,” which called for 10 lodging rooms on the property.)
Finally, candidate Milliken appears to have his own agenda item as relates to the reconstruction of his shoreline residence. It wasn’t until the post regarding the FOIA request that we had any communication from candidate Milliken. And while I was happy to see that he finally came out of hiding, he has yet to communicate his responses to the Gazette’s questionnaire.
In wrapping up this opinion piece, I would ask each of you to go back and read the candidates’ questionnaire responses. Now that you have a better understanding of their backgrounds, look at how they danced around some of the questions. In particular, look at the questions regarding the wineries.
An observation, if I may — look at the responses from candidates Queeny, Alexander and Wunsch regarding the wineries. All three of them answered “No” to the initial three questions.
Candidate Sanger responded that “These questions pertain to issues in the lawsuit … I can state that I understand the position of many citizens as follows: 1)They are opposed to wedding-type events and full-service restaurant operations. 2) They are opposed to staying open until 2 a.m. 3) They support OMP farmers by using locally-grown produce.”
Then look at how candidates Jerman, Johnson and Swaffer danced around the answer by either trying to justify the position of the wineries since other establishments on Old Mission Peninsula are presently operating that way, or by redefining the question so they don’t have to commit to the answer, or put it on the back of the Judge, or by providing a response which wasn’t directly a “Yes,” but did imply the “Yes.”
Finally, go back to the above tables, review the data and ask yourself if you want to live in any of those wine regions … that lifestyle could be closer than you think.
-Jim Floraday
(Read all Peninsula Township Election 2024 News, Opinions and Candidate Questionnaires here. Read all winery lawsuit news and opinions here. -jb)
Also Read…
SUPPORT YOUR INDEPENDENT LOCAL NEWSPAPER: I started Old Mission Gazette in 2015 because I felt a calling to provide the Old Mission Peninsula community with local news. After decades of writing for newspapers and magazines like the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Family Circle and Ladies' Home Journal, I really just wanted to write about my own community where I grew up on a cherry farm and raised my own family. So I started my own newspaper.
Because Old Mission Gazette is a "Reader Supported Newspaper" -- meaning it exists because of your financial support -- I hope you'll consider tossing a few bucks our way if I mention your event, your business, your organization or your news item, or if you simply love reading about what's happening on the OMP. In a time when local news is becoming a thing of the past, supporting an independent community newspaper is more important now than ever. Thank you so much for your support! -Jane Boursaw, Editor/Publisher, Old Mission Gazette
To keep the Gazette going, click here to make a donation.
To view or leave comments on this story, click HERE.
Thank you, Jim for writing this – really puts it in black and white!
As a side note, while it seems that farming & the winery lawsuit have become focal points of the trustee election, let’s please not forget that there are several other items that new trustees will need to be concerned with (ie roads, shorelines, managing the township finances in a responsible manner, evaluating the office organization, updating/creating policies & procedures, 5 & 10 year budget projects with cash flow models, updating our zoning, improving communications with residents, etc, etc, etc). I will be voting for candidates who have reached out to me so they understand what is important to my quality of life, candidates who are in this for the long haul (ie the full 4 years), candidates who will represent ALL residents, and those who are willing to spend the obscene amount of hours that will be necessary for them to come up to speed on all the facets of being a board member.
Thank you Jim, that was a lot of work and very nicely done! Our township may be unique in its ratio of and land area to shoreline, we’re a thin finger of land with one way in and out. The tourist traffic generated by the wineries if they get their way simply cannot be handled. The wineries knew the geography and its limitations and the zoning constraints the residents wanted when they began operations and were fine with the situation. I suggest if they want more revenues, they open additional venues off the peninsula.
Respectfully Jim, I think you misunderstand Sheila Johnson’s intentions (I can’t speak to the others you mentioned) It’s clear most candidates in this election have a dog in the race or an axe to grind. That’s why I wholeheartedly support Sheila, a candidate willing to approach each matter brought before her without any pre conceived notions or long standing grudges. Not sure why preserving farmland on the peninsula is a negative? We are all here because we love the Peninsula. It’s funny, I’ve always felt welcomed here, but all of this election fodder makes me feel like because I moved my young family here “only” 7 years ago, my family, my opinions or visions for the future aren’t welcome at all. My family and I are very happy here and will be here to help preserve its future, as will my neighbor Sheila Johnson. We chose to start fresh here on the peninsula, and perhaps a fresh set of eyes is what we need.
This journalistic hack job is just as bad as the daily political flyers we receive in the mail and TV spots. Among the few true statements is that choosing our board members will affect our future on OMP. The choices are the incumbents who have shown with their votes how they consider farmers and the future of farming vitality and the challengers who understand the present farming situation on OMP. Wunsch, Sanger, and Shanefelt all voted against the wishes of 40 farmers on Amendment 201 and Alexander voted against the Special Use Permit for Lightwell Farms. If you don’t understand the present you cannot predict the future. Do we want farmland sold to developers or PDR protected farmland going fallow? Clinging to the past will not move us forward in the right direction. I am voting for Jeman ( a farmer herself), Swaffer, and Milliken. We need leaders who understand what is going on with present day farming. As a side note please listen to the you tube live stream of the Twp Boards Ag Advisory Committee selection meeting from Oct. You will learn from 11 farmers about the facts of farming on OMP vs. this Floriday’s fictional article. Go to the Township website for the link.
Oh, and Floraday, do you really not understand the difference between the industrial crop of Hemp and Marijuana? Shame on you for your intentional insinuation against candidate Swaffer.
I’m not the one who mentioned “marijuana”, you did. What I did mention was that
“I just can’t get my hands around why candidate Swaffer, who has a farming operation tied to his small business venture, did not mention being a farmer or his farming operation, in his responses.”
He seems to give more credence to being a small business owner than a farmer, when I my eyes they should be equally weighted. Your comments to me are centered on farming and leaders understand what is going on with present day farming. If the theme of farming is so important to this election then why didn’t candidate Swaffer identify himself as a farmer?
Something is wrong here… why didn’t candidate Swiffer share in his responses to the questionnaire that he was a farmer, that he grows hemp? We still don’t know the answer….All he had to do in his questionnaire response was mentioned that he was a hemp farmer and encouraged those not familiar with the crop to learn more about it with a statement like “for those not familiar with hemp, this link will educate you on the importance of this crop and its many benefits”.
Hemp vs. Marijuana: What’s the Difference?
Had he mentioned being a farmer then I wouldn’t have mentioned it, however, he elected not to share that information…I just wonder why?
That’s not the only thing he insinuates. Take for example that JP Milliken would scratch his nephews back. There is absolutely no evidence of that. In fact I would guess that unlike other current members of the Board he would recuse himself if a situation arose with regard to his nephew’s business.
Dave Sanger does not see a need to recuse himself when voting on a zoning ordinance he might be called upon to enforce. And he did not move against the Wunch family truck on center rd for two years until a complaint was made that he had in fact cited another farmer down the road for a small sign. Shouldn’t he have recused himself from that enforcement effort since he was waiving a fellow board member’s family’s farm violation.
So rather than insinuate a conflict how about addressing a real one with two of your candidates.
Since when is it a sin to own a vineyard. Sheila Johnson is trying to improve her farm and all you can do is through dirt on her difficult effort to save more farm land.
And what is wrong with selling you grapes to WOMP. In fact the wineries were required to buy grapes from local vineyards. And when that was found to be unconstitutional by the court the town enacted a new ordinance which REQUIRES the wineries to buy less grapes from local farmers. Perhaps since you seem so anti farmer you supported that. I would like to remind you and others cheering you on that 90% of the farmers here tried to tell the incumbents , Wunch, Armin and Sanger running for reelection that this was not a good idea. You show your disdain for farmers in so many ways which makes your whole diatribe worthy of the trash heap.
I find your response based solely on opinion; you don’t even consider the issues facing farmers in the top ten wine regions.
For example, your comment: “That’s not the only thing he insinuates. Take for example that JP Milliken would scratch his nephews back. There is absolutely no evidence of that. In fact I would guess that unlike other current members of the Board he would recuse himself if a situation arose with regard to his nephew’s business.”
I never said there was evidence that he would, what I said is that he has a blank check since he has decided not to complete the questionnaire. Additionally, how is your statement “In fact I would guess that unlike other current members he would recuse himself if a situation arose with regard to his nephew’s business” any different than my statement? Both statements are a matter of opinion, thus there is absolutely no evidence that either of us are correct. However, what I know is fact is when one does not provide the information, we all so desired in his responses, then one has to make their own opinions and judgments. And mine is that he is not looking out for me, he has an agenda.
You asked: “Since when is it a sin to own a vineyard”. I never stated that; what I have an issue with is that she did not divulge that she was a vineyard owner. The fact is that had she stated that then I wouldn’t have mentioned it. Based on the present climate as relates to the wineries, I think it’s important the residents know she is a vineyard owner.
You asked: “What is wrong with selling you grapes to WOMP”. Nothing is wrong with selling grapes to WOMP. However, those who are selling grapes to WOMP should, based on your thought process…if elected, recuse themselves when voting on any item related to wineries.
Finally, you stated that I am “anti farmer”. Where in any of the information, did I state being anti-farmer? You are implying that is what I am, when in actually I’m “anti-winery growth”. Fact is that four of the issues facing the top ten regions are directly related to farming: Pressure to convert agricultural land to tourism uses, Rising land prices affecting new farmers, Changes in traditional farming community character, and Development pressure on farmland.”.
You further state: “You show your disdain for farmers in so many ways which makes your whole diatribe worthy of the trash heap.” I am only sounding the alarm for what I fear and that is that OMP will be facing the same issues that the top ten wine regions are facing. Truly, that is not what I want to happen. You are showing “your disdain” for the future of OMP farmers if you ignore these four challenges being faced by farming in the top wine regions.
Just take some time to step back, take a deep breath, clear your mind, and reread only the part regarding the top ten wine regions. Be objective and ask yourself could this happen on OMP? Is this what I want to happen on OMP?
Perhaps Curt and Lou, who seem to enjoy offering lengthy commentary on nearly everything can explain their support for a ticket only 2/3 of which has responded to OMG’s basic questionnaire and which, ironically, claims it “Believes in Sensible Solutions not Lawsuits” given that, in fact, WOMP and its 11 winery members filed the lawsuit against our Peninsula Township.
Kent, Old Mission Gazette is not our only form of obtaining information on candidates for the TWP board. Among other forms are attending Twp board meetings, attending Planning Commission meetings, Twp you tube livestream of meetings, Comments by candidates and citizens on Nextdoor and Gazette, on at Meet and Great meetings.
My support is based on hearing them at various forums and asking them questions. I also have many hours of watching and living with the current incumbents. So on balance I feel that these three will bring a common sense approach to peninsula issues. They will make sure that the various administrative personnel with authority over our lives are managed and not allowed to make their own rules as they go along. They will make sure that citizens concerns are heard and will try to reach agreement without forcing citizens to expend enormous amounts of their own money in litigation with the township having a bottomless pit of money which is our money.
Instead of an attitude of you can’t do it because we say so they will have an attitude of how can we make this work for you. They will not be ruled by a few wealthy individuals who thwart any new ideas be it for farming or development. Just reading posts lately by some of these folks it is clear they do not see the future of agriculture as an evolving business. With PTP currently calling the shots I want people who are not under their sway. I hope this answers your question.
Excellent piece, Jim. Thank you so much! (The charts are extremely helpful.)
“The wine country tourism boom has its downside, exemplified by traffic congestion on State Route 29, particularly on summer weekends, when the number of tourists often exceeds the carrying capacity of the road.”
That’s it. That’s all I need. Until we have honest conversations with ALL stateholders about the damage increased tourism will inevitably have on OMP and ways in which we can negate the damage, I am no longer interested in hearing nor talking about large events, extended hours of operation, and no restrictions on hours and music at the wineries.
Reminds me of an article I recently read in “New York Magazine.” The title, “To Buy a Mountain Range” and it’s subtitle, “A group of billionaires is maneuvering to secure acres of prime public land in Montana for personal use. Can anyone stop them?” While the situations are quite different, there are hundreds of other stories that tell of our relentless desire to gobble up land for commercial purposes. There must always be people who safeguard our beautiful land or one day, we’ll wake up and it will all be gone.
Under their stewardship, I trust Julie Alexander, Warner Queeny, Dave Sanger and Isaiah Wunsch to continue the important work of preserving the beauty of OMP while also ushering us into the future.
Journalistic hack job is right. Jim and Jane you should both be ashamed for writing this garbage and publishing it. To call this an “opinion piece” is a joke. Just like The Old Mission Gazette, a total joke. Have some integrity, do some homework, state some facts. Nextdoor.com and Old Mission Gazette is about as biased as I’ve seen these days. Zero credibility.
I would have thought your comments would have been a little more civil. First, your comments should be directed to me, not Jane. I utilized the Old Mission Gazette as I believe it has a larger audience since my comments on nextdoor are only available to the members of the political group. Jane deserves accolades for sticking to her computer and pushing all of these pieces out to us before the election. Truly, she throws in photos to break up the black and white and adds links to previous items. She deserves yours and everyone’s sincere gratitude.
I think you have just shown your true colors. When on has there back against the wall, instinct is to come out swinging, you swung for the wrong person and you’re hitting nothing but air.
You state “do some homework, state some facts”. There’s as much research (homework) in this as there was in my thesis. Look at the data, look at the facts. And finally, look at the articles posted in the Gazette. I’ve seen opinion pieces on both sides. Your uncle, like all the candidates was given an opportunity to answer the questionnaire. Initially, three individuals did not respond. After the primary, two did and Jane posted their responses. Had your uncle responded she would have posted his. If you have anyone to be hacking away at…possibly it is him
Jay,
I appreciate your desire to speak your truth. There are probably many things that we can agree on and many that we can agree to disagree on. However, the First Amendment is not up for discussion.
Jane is a credentialed journalist. She is also, selflessly, operating the Old Mission Gazette. Jane posts the opinion pieces she receives. She also allows for open commenting on these opinion pieces and all other articles she writes. Jane is a treasure to our community. If you have an opinion to share, please write it up and submit it to Jane for the community to read and engage. Please refrain from attacking a beloved member of our entire community.
Jay, I don’t understand your sense of humor. The things you label “jokes” are actually sources of information available to residents of OMP. NextDoor is a for-profit entity that allows the voicing of facts and opinions within codified civility guidelines. The Old Mission Gazette is a public service entity published by a civic-minded journalist we’re lucky to count among our residents. Do you read op-eds in the Wall Street Journal and disparage Rupert Murdoch for publishing opinions you don’t agree with? Your ire would be better focused on the authors rather than the publishers. Leave Jane alone! Better yet, counter-arguments in which you posit a more comprehensive set of facts or superior train of logic, rather than personal attacks, would be more likely to win convert to your point of view. Your verbal venom is weak and self-revealing.