This was the first meeting attended by new Trustee, Zachary Panak, who was appointed on July 6. Also attending were Andrew Haystead, Supervisor; Sharon Pero, Clerk; Deserre Sauers, Treasurer; and Terri Curtis, Trustee.
During the second Public comment period, IHCC was represented by four succinct and well-worded statements. Each statement was crafted to remind the Board that this application to place a gravel mine next to Watkins Lake is uniquely troubling and inherently meets the designation of “very serious consequences”. The statements also assured the Board that IHCC is aware of the legal proceedings that may inevitably follow a denial of the mine’s application, and that we are ready to support the Board through our ongoing research and expert testimonials, as well as through our fundraising efforts. Excerpts from the statements follow:
Sybil Kolon, IHCC President, introduced the comments with a brief reminder of the key questions: whether, under Michigan law, approving Levy’s permit is in the township’s best interest, and whether a decision to deny this permit could be successfully defended if challenged in court.
“The question in front of you is actually quite narrow: Is this the right location for this particular mining proposal?
This isn’t a vote on whether gravel mining is good or bad or anything else. State law protects gravel mining in Michigan. BUT it also gives local governments an important responsibility. It asks you to evaluate this specific proposal at this specific location and to decide whether it would create very serious consequences.
In other words, your job is not to decide whether gravel mining belongs somewhere. Your job is to decide whether this mine belongs here. And when you compare this proposal with other gravel mines, the differences in location become impossible to ignore.”
Bill Patteuw, IHCC member, followed by addressing whether the proposed Levy mine is inevitable. “In conversations that many of us have had with you and other Township officials, we sometimes get the impression that some think you really don’t have any choice to deny the permit: that there’s this huge company, they have tons of lawyers and consultants and money, that one way or the other they’re going to force this mine on the township, and that your only option is to try to get some concessions from them to reduce the damage.
I understand that feeling, but the law says otherwise. The Township ordinance is very clear: the conditional use permit cannot be issued unless the applicant proves that there are no very serious consequences and that there’s need for the gravel. The burden is on the applicant, on Levy, to prove it, not on you and not on us. Then the state law, the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, goes farther: it defines what very serious consequences are.
So is the mine inevitable? The law says no, the facts say no, and more than 850 Norvell Township property owners and residents say no.
But the real question is whether Levy has proved that there would be no very serious consequences. Based on the evidence, the answer is clear: Levy has not met that burden, and this permit should be denied.”
Emily Foley, IHCC Board Member, contrasted the difference between Pleasant Lake Aggregates (PLA), recently visited buy the Norvell Township Board, and the proposed mine adjacent to Watkins Lake State Park. She outlined stark differences between PLA and the proposed Levy-Norvell Mine. “Those differences go to the heart of the question: whether this proposal, at this location, would result in the very serious consequences that give you (the Township Board) both the authority and the responsibility to deny Levy’s permit.”
And finally, Nicky Kennedy, IHCC Member, “addressed one of the big concerns from the township officials we’ve talked to: what happens if you deny the Levy permit and they sue?
We’ve consulted with a lot of lawyers about that question, and they all agree: if you have evidence in the record of very serious consequences, you’ll win in court. They tell us that the legal standard is “substantial evidence”—that the courts will uphold a township decision that’s backed up by substantial evidence.
Do you have that evidence? Yes, you have it now and you’ll soon be getting more. The evidence you already have includes the comments we submitted last meeting, the reports we’ve provided, the letters from residents and other government agencies—that’s the only evidence you’ll need. And we’ll be submitting more; we have at least three experts who will soon be submitting reports that all show very serious consequences.
Levy is trying to woo you and intimidate you at the same time. Don’t let them do either. Please do what’s best for the township and deny the permit. We will help make sure you win in court.”
We encourage you to read the full text of these comments with supporting Fact Sheets. They will inform you with accessible information and strengthen your resolve to stay in this very winnable fight! The full text of the comments along with the Fact Sheets have been submitted to the Norvell Township Board to be added to the record for the Board’s consideration.