Letter to the Editor: More Controversy in Freedom Township

Sept. 16, 2016

Dear Editor,

I have been attending township meetings for over 11 years but never have I experienced what happened at the September 13th Freedom Township Board Meeting.

I’ve always believed it’s the duty of private citizens to speak up at public meetings on behalf of their townships and fellow residents. I did just that on September 13th – praising the Freedom Township Board for its August actions to resolve the long-standing “fence controversy” at Pleasant Lake. I also emphasized the importance of improving township procedures and processes – operations, efficiencies, and costs (time and money) – to better serve the township and its residents. I had a number of suggestions, including the need to create better procedures to respond to zoning ordinance concerns, conflicts, and changes, as well as efforts to improve meetings (time efficiencies and information flow), transparency and cost management. I am confident there are opportunities to positively impact turnaround times, conflict resolutions, and taxpayer costs for Freedom Township.

Maybe 30 minutes after I spoke up, my concerns (and the reasons I made my suggestions) were on full display. Background: At its August 9th meeting, the Board voted to accept a number of zoning ordinance revisions from the Planning Commission, including a waterfront lot fence revision to 4-foot, 50% see-through fences as requested by over 100 Pleasant Lake residents. The Board’s August vote also rejected one of the proposed amendments – to reduce the current 50 feet waterfront lot setback to 25 feet. I was so pleased with the Board’s actions, as they reflected our lake residents’ wishes, including maintaining the 50-foot waterfront setback, which is line with other township waterfront setback trends of 50 feet or more. We (lake residents) were told the only thing left were minor wording revisions by the Planner. I relaxed.

Imagine my surprise when the Planner unexpectedly showed up at the September Board meeting to present his revised wording but also to revisit the previously rejected proposed waterfront setback reduction! It felt like an effort to resell his (or the Planning Commission’s) logic and get the Board to reverse its August vote and go against not only the Board’s wishes, but also the wishes of lake residents and regional, state and national waterfront setback trends. I wondered if the Board was as shocked by this as we in the audience were; if Board members realized this was exactly the type of behavior I was speaking about 30 minutes earlier – why we need improved procedures and processes.

Lake residents in the audience were appalled and the Board rejected the Planner’s discussion and honored its August vote. Thank you, Freedom Township Board! I can’t help but wonder, though: How was the decision made to have the Planner come speak at this Board meeting? Who told him to advocate for a position that had already been rejected? How were the Planner and other Planning Commission members notified of details and the Board’s direction following its August decision? How much did the Planner’s preparation time and Board meeting attendance cost the township? No such decisions were made at the previous week’s Planning Commission meeting because not a word was said on the topic. I know. I was there. Finally, what if lake residents hadn’t been at this Board meeting to speak up? Could the Board have been swayed into reversing its vote? I’m glad I was there so I don’t have to find out.

Beth Heuser, Freedom Township Resident

For as little as $1 a month, you can keep Manchester-focused news coverage alive.

by Sara Swanson

Sara Swanson is an editor, writer and founder of the Manchester Mirror.