The "Two Unanimous Decisions" Argument

The last and strongest of the weak arguments that backers of Michigan Moto Mania continue to use in their arsenal of why people should support Michigan Moto Mania is the "Two Unanimous Decisions" argument.

So let's have a look at those two "Unanimous Decisions."

It seems to be very important of late, especially to Michigan Moto Mania backers, that all decisions taken by the Hayes Township Planning Commission should be unanimous.  I can understand the desirability of unanimity on a board, but where is the line drawn when there is no room for a dissenting opinion?

The current group dynamic of the Planning Commission has been working together like a well oiled machine as the majority of its members have been working together on this board for over ten years.  There is the occasional new face, but a core group of the members has not changed.

There seems to be an unspoken/unwritten rule among themselves that they vote in lockstep with one another, and rarely, in what few minutes I have seen of their meetings is there any dissent from the majority.  Members appear over the years to subordinate personal misgivings and vote with the majority who take their lead from the chair.

On the surface, it is desirable, and strengthens any decisions when they are unanimous.  But there is an insidious side to it as well, and dissension is not well tolerated as was demonstrated toward Bob Johnson on the Zoning Board of Appeals.  When this occurs, there is no room for independent thought and then there is a problem. 

I'm not saying that this is the case, but sometimes, at some point, the habit of unanimity among a group of individuals is evidence that the individuals in the group are "yes-men" for one or more members of the group.  Independent thought is subordinate to the group think.  It's a phenomenon and it happens, especially the longer a group is together and the dynamics coalesce.

Having made this general observation about group dynamics, now I will address the two "Unanimous Decisions."

The first "Unanimous Decision" occurred in an unannounced Special Meeting and was later found to have been an invalid resolution because it did not meet the requirements of the Hayes Township Zoning Ordinance, according to the 10 page Dreyer Letter, dated 12 March 2010 on page 2.

So, the first "Unanimous Decision" was null and void.  (Even so, the invalidity of the decision was not enough to cause work related to the now invalidated Special Use to cease - How does that work?  What was the rationale behind that?)

It was determined by Hayes Township Attorney David Dreyer that the entire process had to be done over.  What followed was an exercise in going through the motions by Doug Longenecker and the Planning Commission, and the absolute minimum required by the Hayes Township Zoning Ordinance was done in order to rubber stamp the Application for Special Use through the system in order to get it back in front of the Planning Commission so they could approve it again.  Approval was a foregone conclusion. 

In the meantime, at least one paid Hayes Township official and at least two members of the Planning Commission told several of the neighbors on separate occasions that "if this had been done right to begin with, it never would have happened," and they didn't agree with it.  There were no less than two dissenting opinions on the Planning Commission, yet when it came down to it on the second vote, they all voted unanimously. 

Either they lied to the neighbors or someone pressured them to vote along with the majority to make it unanimous.  I will not name these individuals because these were conversations that took place individually cannot be verified and are one person's word against another.  But I will say that Don Atkinson, a member of the Planning Commission, signed a petition against Michigan Moto Mania and then voted for it anyway in the second vote. 

It is my personal opinion that the vote went down unanimously because the Planning Commission wanted to present a unified front, and any that disagreed bowed to pressure from somewhere.  I also believe that The Planning Commission wanted Michigan Moto Mania to happen, knowing it was being done the wrong way again, they weighed what they considered "the greater good" against what was right and according to the Ordinance.

Yes it was a unanimous decision, but at least one documented dissenter voted along with the majority.  How many others did the same?  How many others lacked the moral courage to back up what they said to the neighbors with their vote?  It's not just teenagers who succumb to peer pressure.

According to the Hayes Township Zoning Ordinance, the neighbors had a right to appeal the "Unanimous Decision" of the Planning Commission to the Zoning Board of Appeals.  We exercised that right.  The Zoning Board of Appeals overturned the Planning Commission's decision based on the points in the Hayes Township Zoning Ordinance and Hayes Township Master Plan that were ignored by the Planning Commission in its two decisions, rendering both "Unanimous Decisions" moot.