Trending
ESCANABA -- The clock is ticking on the future of zoning in Delta County, but an answer as to whether the county will continue to manage zoning for nine townships is expected before the end of the year.
“I will remind the townships that I did make a promise to Mr. Barron that if we didn’t have this done by December, our last meeting in December, I was going to vote to get rid of the zoning,” said County Commission Chair Patrick Johnson, who indicated he will be leaving his position with the county by the end of the year, at a committee of the whole meeting Friday. “So I want to get this done. I don’t wanna continually investigate, investigate, investigate, and leave it up to somebody else to make this decision. So, we, if we can’t make a decision. We’re going to lose zoning -- if I’m the swing vote.”
The move to abandon zoning for the townships currently under the auspice of the county was spearheaded by commissioners Bob Barron and Dave Moyle. Barron, who was present Friday and has arguably been the loudest proponent of abandoning zoning, has had multiple issues with zoning for development projects, including a failed attempt to establish a land-based ice racing track in Escanaba Township that ended up in Delta County Circuit Court. Both Barron and the township filed legal challenges in court during the dispute, which ended in 2015 after roughly four years.
Escanaba Township maintains its own zoning and would not be affected by the commission’s decision. Moyle was not present at Friday’s meeting.
The nine townships that would be affected by the decisions, however, were well represented at the meeting. The townships sent representatives of their own and were also represented by Ginny Dahlin, Bay de Noc Township supervisor and president of the Delta County Township Association, who presented the commission with emails documenting a vote from the townships to keep county zoning.
“Each township was given four options so that they could make a decision on what they wanted to do. All nine townships voted to keep county zoning,” she said.
Dahlin told the commission that her township instituting and managing zoning would be too expensive for the small residential and agricultural community. Her statement echoed many that had been made by other townships at past county meetings on the issue.
Cost was a major issue for the commission, as well. Not including the cost of some assistance from the Central Upper Peninsula Planning and Development Regional Authority (CUPPAD) that has not been estimated and any related legal fees, the county is looking at an upfront cost of $21,279 to update and continue to offer township zoning. The costs include $7,800 for a zoning layer in the county’s GIS system, $600 for the creation of a new Americans with Disabilities Act compliant zoning map, $780 to train staff how to maintain the zoning records, $350 for CUPPAD to purchase and maintain software, $3,250 to create a new zoning ordinance -- not including the final rewrite, which will come at an additional cost -- and $3,499 for a new large format printer.
Currently, the townships pay the county a fee of 75 cents per parcel for zoning annually. To pay for the costs, the county is asking the townships to raise the fee to $2 per parcel. Under that plan, Baldwin Township would pay $2,566, Bay de Noc Township would pay $2,362, Brampton Township would pay $1,766, Cornell Township would pay $1,854, Ensign Township would pay $2,080, Fairbanks Township would pay $1,600, Maple Ridge would pay $2,720, Nahma Township would pay $2,336, and Wells Township would pay $6,170.
The individual supervisors present Friday asked to take the new figures back to their respective township boards for final approval, but overwhelmingly expressed they expected the cost to be approved, as it would be less expensive than the townships taking over zoning themselves.
Johnson indicated that the townships agreeing to the costs was enough to swing his vote back in favor of zoning, however Barron said costs were not the issue.
“We’re working on the costs when we should be working on whether we should have zoning or not,” he said.
Barron made a number of arguments against zoning, most of which were challenged by county staff or county planning commissioners.
Barron argued the county had little power to enforce zoning, as counties have fewer police powers than townships. Police powers are typically related to things like blight, noise or other nuisances and are generally unrelated to zoning, as zoning enforcement usually happens prior to a development through things like public hearings, conditional use permits and variances.
Legal zoning enforcement is generally only an issue if a landowner is acting with complete disregard for the zoning ordinance. Examples would be a developer building something other than they indicated they intended to build, such as a barn or dwelling instead of a garage; using building materials that are prohibited in certain zoning designations, such as vertical siding, which in some communities is prohibited in higher density residential areas; or engaging in a prohibited use, like keeping livestock in zones where livestock is not permitted.
The past Delta County prosecutor, who also served as the county’s legal counsel, indicated he would not pursue cases against landowners who were not complaint with the county’s zoning ordinance. According to Johnson, neither Acting Prosecutor Lauren Wickman nor Diane Kay-Hougaboom, who are both seeking election to the open prosecutor’s seat on Nov. 8, have been approached about whether or not they would enforce the ordinance.
Who would be responsible for legal fees in court was a concern for Barron as well as for the townships. Communities that maintain their own zoning are responsible for paying for their own legal fees as well as any judgements against them if a zoning decision is challenged in court. If the county manages zoning, that liability rests with the county.
However, this was not the first time the issue of legal liability was raised.
“Previously … the board had mentioned that if they did continue doing zoning that the townships could have a contingency fund set up for any issues in their own townships. I don’t think that’s a bad idea. I think that’s a good idea and that would help support the county and not have to put all the bills on them,” said Dahlin.
The Nov. 8 election could have a greater impact on the future of township zoning than just whether or not the county prosecutor would enforce it. By the Dec. 6 meeting, either Barron (R) or Commissioner Theresa Nelson (D) will have been forced out of the commission as a result of a quirk in the county’s redistricting that left the two incumbents vying for the same seat. Nelson has repeatedly made statements that were in support of the county continuing to manage zoning for the nine townships.
Moyle (R) is also up for reelection, and will face off against independent challenger Kelli VanGinhoven. Moyle has indicated in forums and written interviews that he is not opposed to continuing zoning for the nine townships so long as no communities who zone themselves foot any part of the bill. VanGinhoven has expressed similar views with regards to the financial responsibility, but has not advocated for the wide-scale repeal of the county’s zoning ordinance or allowing communities to abandon zoning altogether.
Robert Peterson (R), who is running unopposed for the District 5 seat opened by the redistricting, told the League of Women Voters in a written interview for their voter guide that zoning should be the responsibility of the townships. He did not take a stance on the future of the current zoning ordinance.
If the new county commission votes to repeal the zoning ordinance and leave zoning up to the townships, the action will not take effect immediately. The county is expected to assist the townships with the transition, which could take a year-and-a-half to complete.