MR. COOPERS COURT RULING.....

[Colleen Plummer]

This is my own personal opinion. The following is Coopers statement from his ruling: "It is important to understand that the rulinq by the Court'..does not
constitute the Judge substituting his own opinions for that of the Zoning Board of
Appeals. Further, a determination on any. particular issue by the Zontng Board of
Appeals MAY have entailed reasonable arguments and evidentiary support and
opposition by the competing parties on each issue. Further.Jt is not the Court's job t~
decide which argued position is the preferable or otherwise better decision. Instead,
. .
the Court must determine whether a determination has a reasonable basis in relation to
the evidence relied on."

. .
*Just one portion of CARRE'S evidence Mr. Cooper is referring to: A portion of Mason County's Comprehensive Plan: "Scenic Natural and Agricultural Landscape Character Preserved
The most common landscape view in Mason County continues to be a
mix of woods, meadows, wetlands, river and lakeshores, and farm fields.
Rather than succumbing to sprawl and the attendant loss of scenic and
natural visual character that is occurring throughout the rest of the State,
the alluring characteristics that initially attracted residents and tourists to
the county have been maintained, and in some cases enhanced. (The
visual character of a community is set by the style, size and upkeep of its
homes, businesses and civic places such as parks, stores, schools and
government buildings. It is also set by the presence or absence of water
and vegetation, hills and highways.)
The rural landscape does more than simply provide scenery. The benefits
of nature to residents’ mental well-being and the attraction for tourists are
important. Farming continues as a viable economic sector. Woods and
fields help with water infiltration, maintaining biological diversity, and
providing habitat for wildlife. Property owners have coordinated the
retention of green space connections to create ecological corridors,
enhance recreation, and provide a more continuous natural scenic view." ** This recognized by county planners and considered serious enough to be included in the comprehensive plan, I ask why would this judge render the opinion he rendered? 50 story "machines", blades moving at times pushing 200 mph.+. Sited close to deadly sour gas lines ignoring these facts: #1.) Current setbacks DID NOT include the 160' blades making the turbine that much closer to homes/property owners/gas lines. #2.) Testimony from the one time managing engineer of those very gas lines stated vibration alone, not even a direct hit, would cause the rupture of the lines under 900 lbs. psi." This wind project would not have gone away even if the judged had ruled differently, what I wanted was to protect our homes/havens to have quality of life just like every other resident. I don't think that is to much to ask for. Maybe I'm missing something, but I feel like this judge missed an opportunity to set a seriously needed example of treating others with mutual respect making these big companies and our county government recognize the little guy has a right to quality of life. Not just the majority but EVERYONE! Anyone from other communities I've shown this and other evidence to was shocked at the ruling... Myself?.... I wasn't surprised.... I've seen this type of judgement in this county more than I care to even think about... Why it took this long for him to come to this simple conclusion is beyond me... I guess we all just have our own views.... (By the way, the quotes I highlighted were copied and pasted directly from his copy of his ruling. Errors included.) I ask does this fit his explanation of his requirements in making a judgement? " Instead,
. .
the Court must determine whether a determination has a REASONABLE BASIS in relation to
the evidence relied on." I think not.... good day!

[AQUAMAN]

Many thanks Colleen, this decision does not surprise me either, part and parcel of suspicious errors of late, of a judge that perhaps needs to retire, as the reasonableness of mind is in serious doubt. But, I can see Cary S's version too. It would probably take an act of God to reverse any county ZBA or City of Ludington decisions these days, esp. in this court, whether right or wrong.

[XLFD]

Thank you for your analysis, Colleen.  I like the fact that you use the County's Comprehensive Plan as the basis of why this "wind farm" needed to be discussed as to how it could affect the county's character, and how it runs counter to the basics of the comprehensive plan.  I also learned from your posts for the first time that fact about the setbacks as regards the blades, and about the likelihood of a rupture of the sour gas lines if a 'near miss' occurred from a failed turbine blade.

I think I know why Judge Cooper took such a long time in making his decision, a theory which I shall develop shortly.

[Willy]

From the very first meeting I have wondered why the County did not follow the Comprehensive Plan. I believe that was brought up at that first meeting by many concerned citizens. It was also obvious that the wind generators did not meet all of the [9, I think] criteria for meeting the zoning ordinance so it was clear to most of us that the fix was in. As far as Judge Cooper, it seems fairly obvious that he would have been very unpopular with the power crowed if he had held up this 1/4 billion dollar project especially since the foundations have already by installed and the bribe money has been paid to the County [the community fund CE gave to Mason County]. He knew his neck was on the chopping block. So it was a easy  decision for him. Plus the fact that judgeships are being eliminated and he could be targeted as the first to go.