|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
April 8, 2004Moving vehicles forbidden for ClousJudge also puts case on fast trackByRecord-Eagle staff writer TRAVERSE CITY - No vehicles. No machinery. Not even a tractor. Bill Clous, president of Eastwood Custom Homes, can run or walk on the 360 acres of property he owns between Hammond, Three Mile and Townline roads, but that's it until a circuit judge resolves a case of alleged environmental violations against him. Clous, who maintains he intends to farm, not subdivide the property, cannot even use agricultural equipment. Last year he planted some acres in wheat and leased some acreage for field corn. He has said an agricultural exemption allowed him to move earth and take down trees without permits. The worst thing that happens is the wheat matures and the little critters whose wetlands got destroyed get to eat it," said 13th Circuit Court Judge Thomas Power at a hearing Wednesday. Power also put the case on a fast track, vowing to hold trial in June even if it has to be held on weekends. Under ordinary circuit court scheduling, the case would have gone to trial in early 2005. Clous' attorney did not object. "I think what he did was rational. He essentially granted the preliminary injunction, but he's put this on a rocket ride to trial," said Matthew Vermetten. Power's order differed from a preliminary injunction sought by Grand Traverse County Prosecutor Dennis LaBelle and environmental attorney Christopher Bzdok. They filed suit in January seeking to force Clous to restore portions of the East Bay Township property where he is accused of flouting soil erosion and wetland control laws. Now, they will have to win at trial in order to force those measures. LaBelle and Clous last month settled a district court case for $75,000 in cash and in-kind donations for Clous' alleged failure to obtain soil erosion permits on the property. Power said LaBelle and Bzdok failed to prove that immediate harm will occur at the property if restoration efforts are not taken immediately, including the construction of water retention ponds. "Most of the problems being discussed are things that occurred in primarily 2001 and in 2002," Power said. "If there was something of an emergency, it already happened." Power said the requested measures would be too complicated for the court to enforce and would have been unfair to Clous before his trial. Power also said he worried that if Clous had machinery and vehicles on the property for restoration work, he might try to use them for some other purpose. "We do have a history of non-compliance with stop work orders," Power said. LaBelle had a darker assessment of whether Clous could be trusted. "I wouldn't give him $2 and a gas can to go get me gas if my tank was empty," LaBelle said. Vermetten responded by saying he wouldn't respond to LaBelle's comment about Clous. "It's very disappointing that (LaBelle) has to find himself doing that," Vermetten said. After the hearing, LaBelle invited passersby to call his office if they see machinery or vehicles on the property. Vermetten said the vast majority of issues in the circuit court case will be settled in negotiations with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality over alleged wetlands violations. But Vermetten said he could not discuss negotiation details - even with Power - because of an agreement he made with the Michigan Attorney General's office. Vermetten said that agreement is within a "nanosecond" of being executed, but Bzdok, who sat in on a meeting between Vermetten and the DEQ in March, disagreed. "The meeting I was at didn't look like a nanosecond to settlement," Bzdok said. A spokeswoman from the DEQ did not return a message seeking comment.
|
|
