Background
Schell Road, LLC purchased 80 acres in Grant Township intending to operate a gravel mine. It submitted a special-land-use application in September 2022 and supplemental materials in December 2022 and January 2023. Township officials concluded that the municipality’s mining regulations, which had not been amended since 1998, needed revision to reflect changes to Michigan law and delayed consideration of the application while amendments were prepared.
Schell Road sued for mandamus requiring the zoning administrator to process its application and the Planning Commission to hold a hearing under the former ordinance. After the Township adopted amended mining regulations, Schell Road added claims alleging that the amendments were enacted in bad faith to defeat its project and exceeded the Township’s authority under MCL 125.3205. The circuit court granted summary disposition to the defendants, finding the application incomplete, the amendments adopted without bad faith, and the revised ordinance valid.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals affirmed. Schell Road was not entitled to mandamus because its application remained incomplete under the former ordinance. Among other omissions, the reclamation plan lacked required phasing and timing information, and the record did not establish that required plans had been submitted to the designated county entities. Without a complete application, Schell Road had no clear legal right to a hearing and the defendants had no clear legal duty to hold one.
The court also held that the amended ordinance applied to the application. Although Schell Road’s proposal prompted the Township’s review, the record showed that officials acted to clarify outdated, generally applicable mining regulations and incorporate MCL 125.3205’s standards—not to manufacture a defense to the lawsuit. The ordinance validly required information bearing on market need and the potential for very serious consequences, including effects on nearby property values and haul routes, because those matters track the statute’s criteria.
Key Takeaways
- A mining applicant cannot compel a public hearing by mandamus unless it satisfies all prerequisites necessary to establish a clear legal right to that hearing.
- An ordinance amendment is not enacted in bad faith merely because a pending application prompted the municipality to update its regulations.
- MCL 125.3205 permits local application requirements reasonably directed at resource need and whether mining would cause very serious consequences.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that Michigan municipalities may update outdated mining regulations while an application is pending when they act for legitimate, generally applicable reasons. It also underscores that applicants should document strict compliance with every submission requirement before seeking the extraordinary remedy of mandamus.