Nice place for a wine wedding? While the settings and views all over Old Mission Peninsula are breathtaking, Peninsula Township zoning prohibits wineries from hosting weddings, live amplified music, and more — restrictions most of the local wineries there contend is at odds with their licenses from the Michigan Liquor Control Commission.
AG PRESERVATION, DIVERSIFICATION, AND THE PLIGHT OF TWO PENINSULAS Are winery weddings and on-site camping too much for Old Mission and Leelanau Peninsula farmers to ask of their neighbors? Or is outdated zoning forcing an unsustainable future for our local agriculture? By Craig Manning What is the future of agricultural land in northern Michigan? For generations, the region has been known for its farms. Traverse City is the Cherry Capital of the World, but northern Michigan’s agricultural prowess goes beyond just cherries. From apples to blueberries to hops to wine grapes, the area’s unique growing conditions have made it a treasure trove of local produce. But what happens when business from traditional farming operations isn’t enough to drive prosperity for farm owners — or even keep the lights on? It’s a question that several local agricultural owners are currently asking. From the Old Mission Peninsula wineries seeking more freedom and flexibility in their zoning, to the Leelanau County cherry growers looking to embrace the growing trend of agritourism, “diversification” is the name of the game for local ag in 2021. The dilemma that local regulators are facing, though, is how much flexibility and freedom they can offer ag businesses without giving those businesses carte blanche to commercialize their farmland. THE WINERY WAR The loudest of these battles is being waged between the Wineries of Old Mission Peninsula (WOMP) and Peninsula Township. Last fall,
WOMP — a group that includes 10 of the 11 wineries on Old Mission (Bonobo Winery is the holdout) — filed a federal lawsuit alleging that the township’s zoning ordinance unfairly restricts winery operations. Under Peninsula Township zoning, all Old Mission wineries are barred from hosting weddings or live amplified music, running restaurants or off-site catering operations, staying open past 9:30pm, and more. WOMP says these restrictions conflict with things they are allowed to do, by right, based on their liquor licenses from the Michigan Liquor Control Commission (MLCC). “We’re just asking for the rights that are allowed, and the benefits that are offered, by the state and by our MLCC permits,” said Chris Baldyga, president of WOMP and co-founder of Old Mission’s 2 Lads Winery. “These are not unique things to Peninsula Township wineries; they are things that wineries almost anywhere should be able to do on farmland.” The wineries have been in talks with the township for years — since 2008, according to Baldyga — to update the decades-old zoning ordinance. WOMP filed the lawsuit last year, an effort Baldyga calls a “last resort,” because negotiations weren’t moving fast enough. In addition to the township, another entity standing in opposition to WOMP is Protect the Peninsula (PTP). First formed in 1979, PTP is an advocacy group made up of Old Mission Peninsula residents that exists “to
10 • april 05, 2021 • Northern Express Weekly
promote and support our quality of life” on the peninsula. Last month, PTP filed a motion in federal court to “intervene” in the lawsuit between WOMP and Peninsula Township. If the motion is granted, PTP will join the lawsuit as a co-defendant, alongside the township. On March 19, PTP issued a statement urging WOMP to drop the lawsuit and instead pursue “a reasonable approach to find balance between farming, residential needs, and commercial enterprises” through Michigan’s zoning process. PTP believes that an open dialogue between all Old Mission Peninsula stakeholders — wineries, the township, other farmers, homeowners, and peninsula business owners — would allow those parties to find common ground and craft a compromise in the form of new zoning rules. The group argues that WOMP’s lawsuit is precluding these types of all-hands-on-deck discussions from taking place — first, by creating an adversarial situation, and second, by locking some stakeholders out of the process. “There can be no doubt that changing the winery zoning rules will impact more than just the 11 wineries,” the PTP statement said. “It will also impact all farmers, not just grape farmers. It will impact neighbors and competing businesses in commercial areas. It will also impact all road users. And it will impact present and future farmers, residents, and businesses. All these voices deserve to be heard.”
Cory and Elise Holman
Also urging a search for common ground is the similarly-named Protect the Peninsula Farmers LLC, a recently formed organization of local “farmers and people who support farmers, who want to express our view with regard to the winery issue on the peninsula.” In a recent letter sent to Northern Express, that group suggests it’s the township, not the wineries, that are precluding talks that could lead to a fair compromise on zoning. “We have been struck by all the negative
