It has all the makings of a classic election year story.
A resident forced to jump through unnecessary bureaucratic hoops by his local government. A township supervisor too busy with his re-election campaign to respond to the resident’s calls.
And let’s not forget the farm animals.
They say you can’t fight city hall, but Addison resident Chris Lattin did exactly that and not only did he win his case, he’s getting his money back, too.
Unfortunately, it appears the 37-year-old resident should never have had to endure such a time-consuming and costly ordeal in the first place.
‘Addison Township prides itself on its rural heritage and here we are just a little family trying to run a little farm and I get nothing but over-government, too much government,? Lattin said. ‘They’re trying to control things and obstruct things . . . I just felt like this is out of control.?
It all started over the winter when Lattin was constructing a 100-square-foot ‘run-in? shed to protect the farm animals on his 5.3-acre property on Ballantyne Ct., off Ray Rd., from inclement weather.
Lattin and his family operate a ‘little hobby farm? where they raise miniature goats, donkeys and sheep to show at the Oakland County Fair. They also sell the animals? offspring for profit.
While constructing the 11-foot-tall shed over the winter, Lattin was stopped by Mike Boisvert, Addison’s ordinance enforcement officer, and told to halt construction.
Boisvert, who also serves as building inspector, told Lattin he couldn’t build the shed because it was located in his front yard between the house and the road. Lattin insisted it’s the only dry place he could erect the structure because about 70 percent of his property is considered wetlands.
The township zoning ordinance prohibits accessory buildings, like run-in sheds, from being located in the front yard. However, it does allow them when a property is zoned agricultural, which Lattin’s property is.
But although the property is zoned agricultural, it’s considered nonconforming because it’s only 5.3 acres and the minimum parcel size for that type of zoning is 10 acres.
The township has certain rules governing the addition of buildings on nonconforming properties, so in order to build the shed, Boisvert told Lattin he would have to seek a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
‘Because it’s nonconforming, I didn’t feel that I should make a move on it. I thought I’d turn it over to the ZBA,? Boisvert said. ‘I felt I needed an opinion other than mine.?
So, Lattin gathered the mountain of paperwork needed to go before the ZBA, made numerous copies of it all and paid the $650 application fee for the board to hear his case.
‘You have to submit a tremendous amount of information,? Lattin said.
It went before the ZBA in May and it was not a pleasant experience in Lattin’s opinion.
‘They were very aggressive,? said Lattin, noting the ZBA even questioned whether his was a legitimate farm because he asserted he’s protected under the Michigan Right to Farm Act, a 1981 state law which safeguards commercial farmers? rights and negates any local ordinances that conflict with it.
Ultimately, the ZBA tabled the issue until its June meeting so the members could do some research. Meanwhile, Lattin contacted the Michigan Department of Agriculture (MDA) about his situation.
Stephen J. Mahoney, a representative of the state agency, sent Lattin a June 12 e-mail which stated, ‘Livestock run-in sheds are part of a normal farm operation and (are) highly recommended for most livestock and (it) is considered a farm building or structure.?
‘Thus (the) MDA’s opinion that the ordinance as you stated conflicts with the Michigan Right to Farm Act,? Mahoney wrote.
When the ZBA held it’s June 12 meeting, the board discussed the matter further and member John Boehmer noted this case may not have had to come before them because run-in sheds are allowed in agricultural zoning.
Lattin noted he was ‘very impressed? with Boehmer because he was the only ZBA member to visit his property, take a look around for himself and ask questions.
Ultimately, the ZBA voted 5-0 that Lattin’s case be ‘considered null and void? and that it was ‘not meant to be in front of (the) board.?
‘I still think we were right to try to get an interpretation from the ZBA,? said township Supervisor Bob Koski. ‘I think that was a bad motion, but the motion stands. I feel we were right in sending him there.?
Koski said the fact remains Lattin’s property is nonconforming because agricultural zoning requires a minimum of 10 acres and he only has 5.3 acres.
But Lattin said that doesn’t matter because he’s protected under the Right to Farm Act, which, according to Mahoney, doesn’t say a farm has to be a certain number of acres to be protected, so the fact that the property is nonconforming is irrelevant.
‘It doesn’t matter if I’m (zoned) nonconforming agricultural, suburban farms or suburban estates, under any of those zonings they permit animals,? Lattin said. ‘Under any of those zonings, I would be protected under the Right to Farm Act. This building would still be protected.?
‘I’m a farmer. I’m in favor of the Right to Farm Act. I think it’s being interpreted a little too broadly here,? Koski said.
But Lattin said his farm, although small, operates for profit, is licensed with the state Department of Agriculture and every year has to participate in the farm census and fill out a farm tax form for the Internal Revenue Service. ‘We do farm for profit, absolutely,? Lattin said.
When Lattin asked the ZBA about obtaining a refund of his $650 application fee, he was advised to take it up with the township. Lattin went to the township office on Friday, June 13 and was told to talk with Koski, who wasn’t in that day.
On June 16, Lattin called and left Koski a voicemail explaining the situation. A week went by with no response. Lattin then left the supervisor another voicemail. Another week passed with no call from Koski.
During the third week, Lattin finally got a hold of Koski at the office. ‘He said he’d been too busy with his re-election campaign to really look into it,? Lattin said. ‘He was aware of it and he would talk with Mike (Boisvert) about it and get back with me.?
That response didn’t sit well with Lattin.
‘What really put the icing on the cake for me was when he said, ‘I’ve just been so busy with my re-election campaign. I haven’t had a chance to look into it,?? he said. ‘That is what really put me over the edge.?
When the fifth week since the ZBA meeting rolled around, Lattin met Koski July 15 at the township office and Koski told him the ZBA approved his shed because he was raising miniature animals. When the supervisor was told this had nothing to do with the size of the animals, Lattin indicated Koski was ‘completely confused? and had this ‘blank look on his face.?
When Lattin explained everything to Koski, the supervisor told him he probably was owed a refund and he would discuss it with Boisvert on July 16, then call him that day.
As of July 24, when Lattin contacted the Leader about all this, Koski had not called him. This reporter left a message for Koski that day and explained the situation to Clerk Pauline Bennett.
The next day Lattin said Koski called him ‘bright and early? to inform him he would be receiving a $650 refund.
‘One way or the other he is going to get his money back,? Koski assured this reporter.
Lattin’s still upset that it took ‘the power of the press? to get his government ‘to do what’s right? because he as a taxpaying resident ‘can’t get the time of day.?
When asked why it took six weeks for him to get Lattin an answer about his refund, Koski replied, ‘I’ve been busy as a beaver here with the election and my haying season, and perhaps it did take longer than it should have. A lot of that stuff I leave up to our building inspector to take care of.?
‘I may have been a little bit negligent. I’ve just had a tremendous amount of things on my mind,? Koski added.
‘I guess his re-election holds a higher priority than his day-to-day responsibilities,? Lattin said. ‘I guess trying to keep his job is more important to him than the actual responsibilities of the job. Hard to believe, isn’t it??
Although he’s not a political expert, Lattin had some real simple advice for Koski, ‘Do your job and you’ll keep it.?