08/26/2007

Forum

East Bay, Omni both need repairs

BY CHRISTOPHER WRIGHT

After reading the (Aug. 21) article "GT Bay Planned settlement is not a done deal” I was motivated to comment.

Although I know nothing of the negotiations between Omni Hospitality of Medina, Ohio, owners of the Cherry Tree Inn and the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality regarding resolution and settlement for violating the inn's state-issued beach grooming permit, I was impressed with the decision by the East Bay Township Parks Commission to not approve the proposed settlement.

The attorney for Cherry Tree Inn is quoted as stating he will follow up with the commission to see if there is a specific concern his client can address.

My understanding is that citizen action and involvement by the Grand Traverse baykeeper and others prompted the state to enforce terms of the permit.

Perhaps this is an excellent opportunity for the state of Michigan to communicate an estimate of the monetary value of environmental damage attributed to the violations.

Suppose, hypothetically, Omni Hospitality said to itself, "It is easier to ask for forgiveness after violating the permit than to seek state approval to extend the coverage area, so let's go ahead and ignore the limits imposed by the permit.”

I do not expect a company such as Omni — which is, after all, in the hospitality industry — to be so willfully irresponsible toward its Traverse City community; however, perhaps even Omni lacks sufficient information on the extent of the monetary damages it caused to the ecology of Grand Traverse Bay.

The state of Michigan could serve several parities here by clearly communicating the cost of environmental damages. The total cost of this hopefully one-time incident includes direct expenditures by three sets of interested parties: 1) expenditures by Omni for its contractor and legal counselor, and restoration and monitoring cost; 2) expenditures by federal and state officials associated with investigating and documenting the violation; 3) expenditures by local officials, watershed citizens, and the Grand Traverse Baykeeper.

Missing is the monetary damages to the coastal resources of East Bay.

Congratulations to the parks commission for delaying action until its questions are addressed. In the interim, perhaps this is an opportunity for the DEQ and Omni to report the monetary damage caused to the ecology of East Bay.

This way, everyone will be able to assess the reasonableness of the fines and proposed settlement of the violation. The DEQ must have an in-house formula used to determine the level of fines that serve as an effective deterrence for choosing to violate terms of a permit. For example, the penalty should exceed the estimated ecological damages by a factor five or more.

Perhaps other establishments that want to follow the poor example set by Omni will be less inclined to ask for "forgiveness after the fact.” It is, after all, in the long-term financial interests of the hospitality industry to invest and protect our water resources.

Omni has the opportunity to become a leader in its industry and not only restore East Bay but also restore its reputation.

About the author: Christopher Wright, of Durham, N.H., is a former Traverse City resident. He served as executive director of the Watershed Center Grand Traverse Bay from 1995-2002.

About the forum: The forum is a periodic column of opinion written by Record-Eagle readers in their areas of interest or expertise. Submissions of 500 words or less may be made by e-mailing letters@record-eagle.com. Please include biographical information and a photo.