Winery Lawsuit: Errant Email Reveals Secret Action Plan, Shadow Alliances, Forced Recusals and Well-Funded PR Campaign

An errant email is making the rounds on social media that reveals some behind the scenes alliances involving the Citizens Coalition of Old Mission Peninsula (CCOMP), an op-ed writer, a PR firm, and the ongoing winery lawsuit.

The packet for the March 10 Township Board meeting includes correspondence from Todd Wilson to the Peninsula Township Board. Wilson inadvertently received an email from Fred Woodruff, secretary for CCOMP, that was likely meant for Todd Anson, who apparently has been working behind the scenes with the Coalition and Kent Wood of the PR firm Borealis Strategic, LLC, a PR and lobbying firm working with the Wineries of Old Mission Peninsula (WOMP). Anson has previously written op-eds for the Gazette, and more recently, has been posting them on the NextDoor app.

In his note to Township Board members, Todd Wilson writes:

Dear Peninsula Township Board Members,

Please see the forwarded email and associated attachments. I received this email in error last week. It was likely intended for Todd Anson, because he shares my first name and has authored articles in our local Gazette online newspaper that align with the attached action plan.

It is important for the Township Board and the peninsula residents to see and understand this information, so please consider including it in the next meeting packet and provide any helpful explanatory insight.

It could allow for greater transparency into the actions and motivations of a few individuals and the Old Mission Citizens Coalition, who claim to be “just concerned citizens,” when in fact they seem to be working with a WOMP-funded PR firm in a concerted manner to discredit members of the Township Board, Protect the Peninsula, Preserve Old Mission, and others in our community.

It begs the question: are some of these individuals also receiving WOMP funds for their efforts to do an end run around our elected board and promising legal appeal process?

Yours Truly, Todd Wilson

Below is the email that Todd Wilson inadvertently received, also included in the Town Board packet. As mentioned, it was sent by Fred Woodruff, secretary of CCOMP, to Deb and Todd Wilson (though likely meant for Todd Anson), Fred Swaffer (President of CCOMP), Bern Kroupa (Treasurer of CCOMP), Cheryl Kroupa, and Amanda Danielson (Board member of CCOMP, who recently wrote this opinion piece).

Note that Kent Wood, mentioned in Fred’s email below, launched Borealis Strategic, LLC, in 2019 after stepping down from his role as director of government relations at the Traverse City Area Chamber of Commerce. Borealis Strategic, LLC is a government relations and advocacy consulting firm specializing in issue advocacy, lobbying, government relations, issue monitoring and research, and advocacy communications.

As mentioned, Borealis Strategic, LLC handles public relations for the Wineries of Old Mission Peninsula (WOMP), and possibly the Citizens Coalition of Old Mission Peninsula, based on the wording in Fred’s email below.

The JDA mentioned below is the 2021 Joint Defense Agreement between Peninsula Township and Protect the Peninsula, which Township Supervisor Maura Sanders explained in her weekly note here.

Fred Woodruff writes:

Todd (presumably Todd Anson -jb): As you contemplate your next letter concerning the JDA, look at the Time line we (mostly Amanda, Bern and Kent Wood) have constructed that suggests that JDA is [no] longer in effect because it was signed by the Township’s old lawyer before he was fired and after Judge Maloney denied PTP petition to intervene and before the Circuit Court allowed PTP to intervene to defend the interests of 11 individual “members”. Fred

Attached to Fred’s email in the Town Board packet are two documents: 1) a timeline of the winery lawsuit; and 2) an action plan that includes challenging the JDA, a suggestion that the Township should seek alignment with the wineries, a financial settlement strategy, forced recusals of three board members, and the demand for a written technical plan for how the WOMP judgment will be handled in the upcoming budget.

Here are the two attachments:

Attachment 1: Time Line of Winery Lawsuit

• Aug-Sept 2021: Parties engage in ~25 hours of mediation; mediator announces agreement on Sept 13.
• Oct 6, 2021: Packed special meeting at St. Joseph Church; township board votes 7-0 to deny the mediated settlement; court later fines the township for attorneys’ fees.
• Oct 21, 2021: U.S. District Judge Paul Maloney denies PTP intervention at that time.
• Oct 27, 2021: Township and PTP execute a Joint Defense Agreement shortly after intervention is denied.
• June 3, 2022: Court grants summary judgment: many winery ordinances ruled unconstitutional and/or preempted by state law.
• July 27, 2022: Sixth Circuit allows PTP to intervene; damages trial delayed.

Attachment 2: Action Plan – Letter Deliveries

Monday, February 9, 2026

Letter 1: Financial/Administrative Treatment of WOMP Judgment

• Recipients: Assessor, Supervisor, Clerk, Treasurer.
• Content: Request a written plan for tax roll treatment of the judgment, FY 26-27 budget treatment, and March 31 financials. Deadline for response: Feb 16.

Letter 2: Agenda Demand + Board-Level Accountability

• Recipients: Entire Township Board.
• Content: Request a dedicated agenda item covering the treatment of the WOMP judgment and insurance recovery status.

Tuesday, February 10, 2026

Letter 3: Alignment Letter to WOMP (Settlement Framework)

• Recipients: WOMP leadership/counsel.
• Content: Propose alignment; acknowledge the request to “take out PTP” but sequence it strategically. Suggest a reduction in damages tied to a Consent Judgment using Tower/Cable funds ($2.4M), insurance proceeds, and potentially PDR funds ($8M).

Friday, February 20, 2026

Letter 4: Terminate Joint Defense Agreement (JDA)

• Recipients: Entire Township Board.
• Content: Request termination of JDA with PTP; outline concerns regarding PTP messaging and POMP fundraising compliance.

Letter 5: Recusal / Conflicts Under 2010 Code of Ethics

• Recipients: Isaiah, Julie, Becky.
• Content: Request recusal from WOMP/Ag zoning matters.
• – Isaiah: Mother’s deposition testimony.
• – Julie: Mother’s substantial donations to POMP (>$100,000). (Editor’s Note: I believe this may refer to the group “Preserve Old Mission,” which sprung up in response to “The 81” development. -jb)
• – Becky: Public statements suggesting prejudgment.

Early March 2026

Letter 6: Planning Commission Pathway

• Content: Confirm Mansfield engagement for Agricultural Ordinance rewrite.

Mid-Late March 2026

Follow-Up: “No Plan – No Confidence”

• Content: Escalation if questions remain unanswered before the March 31 budget adoption. Explicitly note the risk of judgment bond millage impacts.

---

When I posted a link to Amanda Danielson’s opinion piece on NextDoor and Facebook, Township Board member Isaiah Wunsch posted a comment on those links, as well as on the post on the Gazette. Scroll to the bottom here for his and others’ comments.

Isaiah writes:

Residents and readers, please refer to page 92 of the township board packet to find a leaked email that looks an awful lot like Amanda conspiring with Bern Kroupa and OMCC’s lobbyist Kent Wood in a concerted effort to manipulate public opinion, smear my family’s farm among other defamatory attacks against public officials, and coerce the township board. 

Interestingly it looks like the leaked email was intended to be sent to Todd Anson, who claims not to know what OMCC is, in order to coordinate the wave of media that we are seeing in real time. I wonder who else is part of this astroturfing? If Todd is blatantly lying about his involvement with OMCC in order to manipulate you, I wonder what else he and his contemporaries are lying about?

Apparently Amanda and her colleagues with the OMCC; a collection of failed political candidates, former township officials who developed and passed the very ordinance amendment that triggered judge Maloney’s $49 million financial judgment against the township, and folks who look at these as their thought leaders, are only concerned with the wellbeing of farmers who will cave to their demands and stay in line.

If you believe that all farmers support the OMCC agenda, please understand that an article of faith among many farmers on the OMP is that Wunsch Farms has suffered from years of nuisance regulatory complaints in addition to apparent tampering with our business relationships as retaliation for my involvement with Peninsula Township—remember how we lost our 30 year marketing relationship for apples a couple of years ago? That termination occurred two weeks after Bern and Cheryl Kroupa’s “farmer letter” was signed by the same processor who terminated our contract. I do not have concrete proof that they defamed our business, but the timing was very suspicious.

The reason that many farmers do not speak up is that they fear similar reprisals if they speak out against OMCC and its policy positions. These folks are not pro-farmer—they have no scruples, no integrity, no honor and will seek to crush any farmer who voices dissent from their position.

You are being targeted by a well-funded lobbying and PR campaign. OMCC has hired a planning firm to re-write the township’s zoning ordinance without public input. You should be asking yourselves some serious questions. I do not expect the OMCC to respect me—in fact, I am sure that I will be subject to further retaliation just for making this post. However, I do expect them to respect the voters and residents of this community. Their lack of respect for transparency, honesty and process is frankly appalling. I hope that this serves as a wake up call to our residents.

---

There are a lot of comments on that post, so hop over to read the rest, including from Fred Woodruff and other members of the Citizens Coalition of Old Mission Peninsula.

To read the packet info from Todd Wilson referenced above, click here.

Also Read…

Supervisor’s Weekly Note: Joint Defense Agreement Between Township and PTP Explained

Opinion: Old Mission Peninsula’s Future Depends on Protecting Farmers, Not Just Farmland