Peninsula Township Board rejects Wineries of Old Mission Peninsula settlement; October 2021 | Jane Boursaw Photo
Peninsula Township Board rejects Wineries of Old Mission Peninsula settlement; October 2021 | Jane Boursaw Photo
Feel free to share this post...

To view or leave comments on this story, click HERE.

Editor’s Note: OMP resident John Wunsch writes to dispel the myth that there was a winery lawsuit settlement made at the St. Joe’s meeting in October 2021. There wasn’t, and he explains why. Read on for his thoughts, and if you have something to say, write it up and send it to me, [email protected]. -jb

A story persists that there was a good settlement that some Town Board members had approved but then rejected at the infamous St. Joseph meeting in October 2021. The fact that the Township’s rogue attorney “approved” something that no board member approved is one of the reasons he is being sued for malpractice.

Old Mission Gazette is Reader Supported.
Click Here to Donate and Keep the Gazette Going.

It is documented in a sworn statement by Township Clerk Becky Chown, who participated in the mediation sessions, where she states:

” … no Township Board members agreed to a settlement. Acting alone without authorization from the Township Board, the Township’s former attorney did so after the day’s negotiations fell apart and my fellow board member and I left.”

There is a very clear record that no board member approved any settlement.

Yet, some members of the community insist otherwise. Their story goes that the Board was ready to accept a settlement offer, but because of public concern expressed at the meeting, they lost their nerve and rejected the settlement. Since settlements made in mediation are confidential, no one except the direct participants could know what the settlement contained. So … how do promoters of the myth know it was a good settlement?

Remember, the Township Board at the time, which unanimously rejected the settlement “approved” by their attorney without authorization, included two winery industry members, both grape growers. If it had been a reasonable offer, wouldn’t they have voted for it?

Since only those directly involved in previous settlement discussions knows what the settlement offer was, claims that the previous board turned down a perfectly reasonable settlement are simply speculation and specious rumor.

Let’s stick to the facts based on what we can know, and avoid myths.

-John Wunsch, Old Mission Peninsula resident

Also Read…

To view or leave comments on this story, click HERE.

Old Mission Gazette is reader-supported. Click here to donate and support local journalism
Bay View Insurance of Traverse City Michigan

3 COMMENTS

  1. What is the purpose of this editorial. PTP board member John Wunsch states correctly that the board unanimously voted against the proposed settlement. This is true. He also states, “There is a very clear record that no board member approved any settlement. Yet, some members of the community insist otherwise.” What members of the community insist otherwise?
    Actually some of us were hopeful prior to the St. Joseph board meeting when we viewed the meeting agenda. “3. Closed session per MCL 15.268(e) to discuss the proposed settlement agreement that was created as a result of numerous meetings between representatives from WOMP and Peninsula Township and to review written documents prepared by attorney.”
    So $50MM later what is different than the original demands of WOMP. They wanted expanded retail sales ( a nothing burger), host events like weddings (lower peninsula traffic as patrons stay at one location vs. driving from vineyard to vineyard), amplified music (still within zoning ordinance rules), restaurant service ( maybe serving food with alcohol is a good thing), and longer hours of operation.
    Our leaders wasted three years of time and spent down our treasury. And worse gambled against reasonable winery requests and put us property owners potentially on the hook for a massive assessment. And yet a PTP board member is now so concerned about trying to correct a so called “myth”.

  2. Thank you, John, for once again shining a light on the truth.

    The problem with the lie being told about the township turning down a proposal at the St. Joseph meeting is that it continues to slither ugliness into conversations that erode trust in our township board AND divide OMP stakeholders. Some people argue that all of that is in the past but as long as the lie keeps breathing, it will continue it’s destruction in our community. So, John, please continue to call out this false narrative; we cannot allow lies to become our norm.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here
  
Please enter an e-mail address

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.