But the fight is not over yet

Photo: Sharon Township Hall. Photo credit: David Burdette, Wikipedia

TL;DR (too long, didn’t read)

• July 17, 2023: The Sharon Township Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to deny Stoneco a special permit to mine 400 acres on Pleasant Lake Road.
• 29 August 2023: Stoneco filed an appeal in Washtenaw County District Court on August 24, seeking to overturn the Town of Sharon’s decision to deny a zoning change permit. The next day, Stoneco filed suit alleging that the town had violated Stoneco’s civil rights.
• 25 April 2024: Judge Connors heard oral arguments on the briefs filed by both parties. He said he would issue a written decision.
• 9 August 2024: Judge Connors denied Stoneco’s appeal, stating that Sharon Township’s denial of the motion was a “decision, finding, ruling and order that was permitted by law. In addition, Sharon Township has held numerous hearings, conducted investigations and allowed further submissions from (Stoneco).” In conclusion, the Court finds that the decision, finding, order, and order denying the motion are supported by competent, substantial, and cogent evidence throughout the record.“
• The municipality’s attorney will file a motion to dismiss the lawsuit also filed by Stoneco because it is not supported by any wrongdoing on the part of the municipality.
• Stoneco is expected to appeal the decision.

In a recent lawsuit, Michigan Materials and Aggregates Company (doing business as Stoneco of Michigan) appealed the denial of a special land use permit for a proposed sand and gravel mining operation by Sharon Township.

The case centered on the township’s decision to require Stoneco to demonstrate a need for the natural resources in question, both for their use and for their commercialization. Stoneco claimed that this requirement, as well as the assessment process used by the township, were inconsistent with Michigan law.

However, Sharon Township argued that their decision was legally sound, based on thorough evaluations and supported by strong evidence. They assessed the need for resources and the potential consequences of mining, including impacts on agriculture, local businesses and pedestrian safety. The township stressed that Stoneco had not provided sufficient evidence that existing operations could not meet the need for those resources, nor had it convincingly demonstrated that the proposed mining would not have serious consequences.

The 22nd District Court, presided over by Judge Timothy P. Connors, reviewed the case, which included approximately 2,000 pages of documents and legal filings. The court found that Sharon Township’s decision was supported by competent, substantial and cogent evidence. It found that Stoneco had not adequately met the burden of proving the need for resources in the market served and the absence of very serious consequences of the proposed development.

Ultimately, the court upheld the Town of Sharon’s decision to deny the special land use permit, affirming that it acted within its legal authority and followed appropriate procedures. This ruling underscores the importance of strong evidence and thorough evaluations in land use decisions, especially when environmental and community impacts are at stake. The appeal was denied and the court order was officially issued on August 9, 2024.