To the Editor:

The Mackinaw City Village Council should vote "no" September 4 to the Planning Commission's recommendation to restrictively rezone Shepler's parcels 33 and 37 to marina commercial (MC) status, a zoning status that doesn't even provide for ferry boat transportation services, except by special permit.

I have been fulfilling a succession planning contract for the Shepler family business for the past seven months. I am chairman and CEO of Performance Learning, Inc., the Las Vegas, Nevada-based consulting and executive coaching business that I founded. Prior to that, I served as superintendent of schools for the Saginaw Public Schools, the Toledo Public Schools in Ohio, and the Seattle Public Schools in Washington.

Having attended planning commission and city council meetings regarding the zoning issues under consideration, I offer the following, based on my many years of experience working and consulting in the government and business arenas:

Elected members of the Mackinaw City Council are immersed in the arena of politics, and politics is all about who gets what. Their decisions should follow the correct moral and legal paths, based on the facts, because their collective decisions affect the lives and livelihoods of those who live in their community.

Three guidelines should guide every personal vote and collective decision: Know the facts, do the right thing, and carefully measure the probable negative consequences of failing to do the right thing. We don't have to look very far in Michigan to see the personal and financial costs related to poor judgment.

Mackinaw City government has rights with respect to zoning issues, but individual property owners also have rights, protected by the federal government and backed by case law.

Know the facts.

1. The Shepler family has owned the property and has used it primarily for passenger boat ferries and related operations for 60 years.

2. On October 10, 1977, the Zoning Ordinance Amended to include parcels 33 and 37, the parcels under consideration by the City Council. At that time, zoning for those parcels was B-3, which included motel, retail, etc.

3. In 1942, the Hotel Windermere was located on the property in question, along with a tavern and retail stores.

4. The Arnold and Star Line ferry lines are both zoned B-2, the only zoning that has current and historic primary use for passenger boat ferries. Zoning of the Shepler property is illogical given the fact that B-2 is the only zoning status that has current and historic primary passenger ferry boats as a permitted use. MC zoning status, on the contrary, would require recurring requests by Shepler's for a special use permits.

5. Reasons put forth by the Planning Commission do not appear to comply with federal guidelines and include such factors as view shed, spot zoning, and assumedly, no motel building on that sight. In all my time working with the Shepler's family and business, the complete "succession planning" emphasis has been on continuing to operate the best possible ferry service for the next century. My own observation is that if the Sheplers were not interested in the view shed, nothing has or could prevent them from constructing six 100 x 100 x 38 foot storage sheds. They have not chosen to do so.

6. The zoning map of 1984 showed property zoned as B-3, which included motel, retail, and ferry boats.

7. Zoning is a legislative act. It cannot be accomplished by "a 1988 computer glitch," as alleged by the Planning Commission.

8. According to federal law, zoning cannot be arbitrary or capricious.

9. While zoning can result in the diminution of property value, if it will significantly diminish the value of the Shepler property (and according to Greg Garver, Community Bank president, it will) then this is "confiscatory action" and, as such, requires "just compensation" to the Sheplers.

Do the right thing.

Vote "no" and reject the Planning Commission's recommended zoning of the Shepler properties to MC status, a status inconsistent with the two competitive ferry lines (Arnold and Star Line) and a zoning classification that only allows ferry service by special permit. B-2 zoning is the right and fair thing to do.

Follow the facts and avoid the arbitrary and capricious action the Planning Commission has recommended.

Measure the consequences.

The basic considerations that constitute what a municipality must take into account before restricting the use of the Shepler property include public health, fire protection, traffic, availability of public utilities, and the general welfare of the public. These criteria are set forth in the Standard State Zoning Enabling Act, first prepared by the United States Department of Commerce in 1922. It is the model for practically all state zoning enabling acts, such as the one in Michigan. To our knowledge, not once have any of these factors been raised to bolster and support the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Mackinaw City Council to restrict Sheplers' use of their property.

Because zoning is a relatively recent concept in regulating land use, the conflicting interests of government's right to limit uses of real estate and the individual owner's right to have unrestricted use of his property has resulted in considerable litigation. In this situation, the City Council must consider the original and expected purpose for which the Shepler property use was intended. The decision to restrict the use of the Shepler property to MC status is confiscatory, and as such, is highly likely to require that substantial damages are paid to the Sheplers from the Mackinaw City coffers.

The bottom line is pretty simple: Does the village council opt to follow the facts and the legally and morally correct course of action, or does it blindly follow the Pied Piper, also known as the Planning Commission, into the abyss of million dollar litigation? Don Steele Las Vegas, Nevada