To view or leave comments on this story, click HERE.
Editor’s Note: Michael Dettmer, on behalf of Protect the Peninsula, sent out the following note in response to WOMP’s recent settlement offer. “It is unreasonable to expect anyone to negotiate standards for new, lucrative business activities without assurance that the settlement will result in relief from the $50 million damages award.” Read on for PTP’s position. -jb
Protect the Peninsula (PTP) supports the Wineries of Old Mission Peninsula’s request for clear, balanced standards for all land uses in the Peninsula Township. PTP welcomes the Wineries’ offer to negotiate settlement in earnestness, but that requires a transparent public process. It also requires the Wineries to commit to abandoning their $50 million damages award that threatens every property owner on the Peninsula.
Old Mission Gazette is Reader Supported.
Click Here to Donate and Keep the Gazette Going.
For 40 years, PTP has ardently promoted reasonable compromise to resolve zoning disputes in Peninsula Township. During the five years this case has been pending, there have been multiple rounds of settlement discussions, all behind closed doors. PTP firmly believes that sitting down together in the same room with impacted neighbors is the only viable method for resolving complex local disputes. That has been absent from all prior negotiations in this case.
PTP hopes the Wineries’ recent offer is an opening for genuine public discourse, including engagement with all winery owners, elected Township representatives, PTP, and any other formal and informal citizen groups and neighbors who want to participate. (Editor’s Note: After I received this from Mike, the Township Board voted to enter into mediation with WOMP and PTP. -jb)
The Wineries’ proposal for new standards for noise, events, food services, merchandise sales, tents, outdoor amenities, and capacity limits for all agricultural enterprises on the Peninsula would require the Township to enact new ordinances transforming current agricultural zoning. State law requires new ordinances must be adopted through a transparent public process.
While the Wineries presented their offer confidentially and only to the Township, next steps must include a public presentation of proposed terms and the development of a public process for negotiations.
The Wineries collectively secured a $50 million damages award based on past zoning provisions that the court deemed “vague,” which the Township already repealed. The Wineries have said they might be willing to reduce only an unstated portion of this damages award in exchange for the opportunity to earn future profits from undisclosed new business activities – but only after terms for their requested zoning changes are finalized.
This is tantamount to holding the Township and its taxpayers hostage. It is unreasonable to expect anyone to negotiate standards for new, lucrative business activities without assurance that the settlement will result in relief from the $50 million damages award.
PTP remains ready to participate in any reasonable process to resolve this dispute. PTP supports clear, balanced standards tailored to this geographically unique peninsula that preserve its agricultural character and protect residential property rights.
If the proposed resolution involves amending the zoning ordinance to enact new standards, as the Wineries’ demands presumably require, the process must be public, transparent, and inclusive, and the Wineries must commit to surrendering their $50 million damages award.
– Mike Dettmer, on behalf of Protect the Peninsula
Also Read…
To view or leave comments on this story, click HERE.
Mike,
You are correct. This is starting to feel like a small group of people with vested interests at the Township and Wineries doing what is best for both of them and ignoring the people that make them successful and are ultimately paying any bill that comes from this whether that bill is in taxes or inheriting the traffic, noise, drunk drivers and speeders. I worry that WOMP will want the negotiations to avoid any vote by residents. I believe that the Township has some obligation if the payments go outside their existing operating budgets. Feels like time to learn more. I found a case of Delta Township being successful in a class action case due to a levy of fees (taxes) without voter approval. It is probably time to explore that more.
This says it all for what WOMP is trying to do with secret and behind closed door negotiations, “This is tantamount to holding the Township and its taxpayers hostage.” Maybe it’s time the citizens got a chance to vote up or down on the zoning changes WOMP is asking for w/o holding the threat of $50m in damages over our heads. This would give a clear message to the negotiations. From all the “opinions” published, it sure reads like WOMP wants the township to give them what they want over negotiating what the residents for reasonable zoning changes that don’t harm the agricultural integrity and rural character of OMP, and does not place all the liability on the taxpayers for the wineries grift. Put the questions to the people and let us vote on it.
Jim and Chris, I have looked at the Michigan Zoning and Enabling Act and can’t find wherby we citizens can vote on a zoning change. Please advise . Thanks
Hi Mike. How many active members does PTP have? Does one have to make a donation to become a member? Thanks.