PENINSULA TOWNSHIP — The Michigan Townships Association filed a legal brief on Feb. 20, 2026, asking a federal appeals court to reverse a $49.2 million judgment against Peninsula Township. The association argues the massive award, resulting from a zoning dispute with local wineries, threatens the future of municipal land-use regulation across Michigan.
The amicus curiae brief, submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, supports Peninsula Township in its appeal against a lower court ruling. The Michigan Townships Association, which represents more than 98% of the state’s 1,240 townships, claims the district court’s decision regarding “Guest Activity Uses” and unconstitutional vagueness could throw local zoning efforts into chaos. The case, identified as Case Nos. 25-1703 and 25-1754, stems from a lawsuit brought by the Wineries of the Old Mission Peninsula Association.
The legal dispute began when the Wineries of the Old Mission Peninsula Association and several individual businesses filed suit against the township. Plaintiffs in the case include Bowers Harbor Vineyard & Winery, Brys Winery, Chateau Grand Traverse, Grape Harbor, Montague Development, OV The Farm, Tabone Vineyards, Two Lads, Villa Mari, Winery at Black Star Farms and Chateau Operations. The wineries challenged zoning restrictions that limited their ability to host events such as weddings, family reunions and various commercial gatherings.
The MTA argued that the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan lacked jurisdiction because the wineries did not exhaust local administrative remedies. According to the brief, the businesses should have sought interpretations or variances from the Peninsula Township Zoning Board of Appeals before filing a federal lawsuit. The association stated that these local bodies act as a safety valve for zoning disputes and were never given the chance to address the wineries’ concerns.
Robert E. Thall, an attorney representing the Michigan Townships Association, described the legal strategy used by the wineries in the association’s filing. “Instead, the Plaintiffs opted for a “sue-first” approach, skirting around the basic and long-established processes for addressing vague ordinance provisions,” Thall said. He argued that the district court should have required the plaintiffs to achieve finality at the township level before proceeding.
The $49.2 million judgment represents an unprecedented financial burden for the small municipality. Peninsula Township has a population of approximately 6,000 people and operates with an annual budget of $1.6 million. The MTA stated that the judgment is among the highest ever levied against a local government in United States history.
Repaying the debt would require the township to dedicate its entire annual budget to the judgment for more than 30 years, not including interest. With a required interest rate of 4%, the interest alone would total nearly $2 million annually, exceeding the township’s total yearly revenue. The association warned that such a judgment could make local zoning unsustainable for many Michigan municipalities.
The MTA also challenged the district court’s finding that the term “Guest Activity Uses” was unconstitutionally vague. The association argued the court incorrectly applied a strict criminal law standard to a civil economic regulation. The brief stated that zoning ordinances are not required to list every possible permitted use and that the township provided sufficient guideposts for businesses to understand what activities were allowed.
Regarding property rights, the MTA argued that Michigan law does not grant landowners an absolute right to the most profitable use of their land. The association noted that the township maintained the authority to prohibit large events entirely. “The winery properties were not rendered completely unusable or unmarketable as zoned, as evidenced by their years of continued operations before and during the pendency of this case,” the brief stated.
The Michigan Townships Association has requested that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit reverse the district court’s order and judgment. The association is seeking a remand for a judgment in favor of Peninsula Township.