To view or leave comments on this story, click HERE.
The Wineries of Old Mission Peninsula (now known as the Old Mission Peninsula Wine Trail) have responded to Judge Paul K. Maloney’s decision issued yesterday regarding the ongoing winery lawsuit.
In a Bench Opinion and Judgment, Maloney awarded nearly $50 million in damages to the wineries, citing the Peninsula Township Zoning Ordinance as unconstitutional and often vague in its regulations regarding the wineries.
Old Mission Gazette is Reader Supported.
Click Here to Donate and Keep the Gazette Going.
In a press release issued yesterday, the wineries herald the judge’s ruling as “victorious.” Read the full press release below.
Old Mission Peninsula Wineries Prevail in Legal Battle, Demonstrating Their Commitment to the Community
Traverse City, MI — July 7 2025 — The wineries of the Old Mission Peninsula Wine Trail (OMPWT) have emerged victorious in their long-standing federal lawsuit against Peninsula Township. The court’s decision reaffirms the wineries’ constitutional rights and marks the end of a 16-year battle that challenged restrictive zoning ordinances which had unjustly hindered their operations. The court awarded almost $50 Million in damages to the wineries to compensate for the profits lost from unconstitutional and unlawful ordinances.
The wineries, a cornerstone of the local economy, have always been more than just family farms and businesses – they are vital contributors to the community, supporting regional agriculture and employing hundreds across the Old Mission Peninsula. Whether welcoming visitors to their tasting rooms, hosting celebrations, or leading agritourism initiatives, these regional partnerships have been central to their mission. The wineries firmly believe in protecting and preserving local agriculture, and this commitment will only strengthen as they move ahead.
Justice Served for the Wineries and the Community
The court’s ruling is a significant win for the wineries, which had long contended that restrictive ordinances undermined their ability to grow their businesses, support local agriculture, and contribute to the community’s cultural and economic vitality. The ruling also affirms that the regulations in question were not only unconstitutional but unnecessarily burdensome to the wineries, who were simply seeking the ability to operate on a level playing field with other businesses across the state.
“This result helps clarify rules we have sought to understand for years, allowing us to continue building our agricultural business on legally approved foundations,” shared Marie-Chantal Dalese, CEO of Chateau Chantal Winery. “Now, we seek to move forward together with our neighbors in a way that continues to preserve agriculture and recognizes legal business activities.”
Chris Baldyga, owner of 2 Lads Winery and President of the Old Mission Peninsula Wine Trail, added, “This outcome allows us to focus on what truly matters – our partnerships with local farms, fostering community engagement, being responsible stewards of the land and making world-class wines. We couldn’t host small community or charity events or things like local farm to table dinners before; now, we look forward to creating more opportunities that bring us together.”
The Role of Wineries in the Township
For over 50 years wineries have partnered with local farms to sustain and diversify the agricultural heritage of Old Mission. Their partnerships with local farms have helped preserve valuable agricultural lands and create a market for locally grown products. Additionally, the wineries have become beloved destinations for both locals and tourists, offering unique experiences that highlight the beauty and richness of the region.
The court’s ruling will enable these businesses to continue their positive impact on the community without the hindrance of overly restrictive ordinances. This outcome ensures that the wineries can further support local agriculture, grow their businesses, and contribute to the vibrant, diverse culture of the Peninsula.
A Bright Future Ahead
This ruling marks a hopeful chapter for both the wineries and the broader community. The wineries of Old Mission Peninsula are eager to move forward, fostering continued growth of the agricultural heritage that defines the region. They remain committed to being responsible stewards of the land and valuable members of the community, dedicated to preserving the character and charm of Old Mission Peninsula for generations to come.
Read the full Bench Opinion here. Read all winery lawsuit news and opinions on Old Mission Gazette here.
Also Read…
To view or leave comments on this story, click HERE.
So, where is $50m going to come from?! Does this mean a MASSIVE tax hike to residents??? There isn’t that many of us, and we already pay one of the highest millages in the state…
Michael first of all you can thank the township voters for part of the highest millage in the state. The PDR program which was passed over the objection of many of us this third time around and for 20 years is the biggest fraud perpetrated on the populace.
This program is now awash in money and will go on for many more years with little or no more land put in the program. They even have money from the fund set aside for supposed law suits with regard to the PDR program. The township will not tell you if they have adequate insurance coverage or not. It’s a big secret known only to a few or they don’t know which in my opinion is worse. Why don’t they know? Seems like a simple question they could ask their insurers. They have a duty to us to let us know what they know or don’t know. No more excuses. At the meeting Thursday they need to tell us if they have enough insurance and if not where will they get the money to pay the damages.
This whole thing was brought on us by their unwillingness to compromise which they had every opportunity to do. A few people held us hostage for their selfish prideful unwillingness to seek a way that would work to everyone’s advantage. Even know they are threatening to waste more money by claiming they will most likely appeal. Pride goeth before the fall.
This $49M judgment is not the end. They will likely add more for the Wineries legal team. But the bad part is that the Wineries are sure to introduce a second lawsuit that will cover the time period from 2022 to current.. or whenever the next lawsuit is decided. The reason is that the lawsuit could only cover the timeframe from filing (2017) until the repeal of PTZO and the adoption of Amendment 201 (2022). We all know that the rules didn’t change much between PTZO and Amendment 201.. so the following trial will certainly use this case’s judgment as precedent and apply it to Amendment 201. They will almost certainly win that case.
Here’s the text from that portion of the judgment:
“The original complaint was filed on October 21, 2020. The damages period began three years prior to Plaintiffs filing their complaint, which was October 21, 2017. The damages period ran until December 13, 2022, which was the date the Township repealedthe operative PTZO and replaced it with Amendment 2017. Plaintiffs assert that Amendment 201 resembles the challenged provisions, but there has not been a judicial determination made on that issue. Plaintiffs did not and could not plead their complaint with reference to Amendment 201.”
I suggest the town board consider making a settlement with the wineries to repeal Amendment 201 and allow them to operate under the constraints of state law and not the illegal regulations of the current amendment. If they do not, it will potentially bankrupt the township and cost the innocent residents a lot of money.