(Community Matters 178) Ford/MAEDA Attorney: Cannot See Supreme Court Granting Leave in Marshall Case

Marshall Attorney Richard Lindsay, on the MAEDA/Ford legal team, returns to Community Matters after the latest developments in the long legal drama surrounding Ford's BlueOval battery plant development. 

In late February 2026, the Michigan Court of Appeals reviewed and re-released its standings on the case - a directive sent by the Michigan Supreme Court in 2025.

Shortly after that decision, the Committee for Marshall - Not the Megasite announced it would take its case back to the high court.

Lindsey offers his perspective on what could happen next in the case.

Episode Resources
City of Marshall
BlueOval Community Matters episodes

ABOUT COMMUNITY MATTERS
Former WBCK Morning Show host Richard Piet (2014-2017) returns to host Community Matters, an interview program focused on community leaders and newsmakers in and around Battle Creek. Community Matters is heard Saturdays, 8:00 AM Eastern on WBCK-FM (95.3) and anytime at battlecreekpodcast.com.

Community Matters is sponsored by Lakeview Ford Lincoln and produced by Livemic Communications.

Transcript

Welcome And Where To Listen

Richard Piet 0:01

This is Community Matter Saturday Get Together on 95.3 FM. We are also waiting for you anytime at Battle CreekPodcast.com. And a new item for you to look for, you'll find us too now where podcasts are delivered. The directories, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, whatever's your favorite, just search Community Matters, Calhoun County, and you can subscribe there as well. There was movement since uh we all were together last as it relates to the lawsuit in Marshall, focused on the major campus, the blue oval plant, etc. Richard Lindsay is attorney from Marshall for Ford and Meta, and he's back with us today to give us that point of view. Hello, Richard.

Richard Lindsey 0:48

Hello, Richard. Good to be with you again.

Richard Piet 0:50

Well, welcome back. Uh, you haven't been bored over the last several months, have you?

Hiring Locally And Production Timeline

Richard Lindsey 0:55

No, it's it's been it's been exciting. And in addition to the uh to the lawsuit, which we did have a development last week, it's been exciting to watch Ford move towards getting started with production in the middle of this year. And again, one of the really exciting things has been well, two exciting things, that they're now our largest taxpayers, so actually paying taxes, and they're actually hiring local. So in a recent newsletter, they emphasize that they're hiring within 45 to 60 miles of Marshall, and most of the employees they're hiring for full-time employees are local hires. And so this is why we did this was to have these good paying jobs with good benefits, and it's it's really exciting to see that come to fruition.

Appeals Court Win And Next Steps

Richard Piet 1:36

I saw the same newsletter that you did and uh saw that radius that was illustrated in it, that 45 to 60 miles. Also saw some posts on social media indicating that the hiring was underway, and so the work in earnest, I guess, uh maybe just shy of that with the with the actual production not yet started, but we're headed in that direction, is the point. And that has uh not seemed to have been affected by all of this uh legal back and forth that's been going on. Is that your observation?

Richard Lindsey 2:11

Yeah, my observation has been that the there was, I don't think, any doubt from the beginning that this was going to move forward. And you and I talked two years ago about what how this was gonna end up, and I think it's ending up exactly where we expected, which is MAEDA and the City of Marshall have been successful at each level. So if you're keeping track now, twice in the circuit court, uh we just received a positive court of appeals decision that basically reaffirmed in a three to zero agreement what the prior finding had been. So that's two in the court of appeals. And from press releases yesterday, it looks like the committee is going to ask for leave to file again in the Supreme Court. And my prediction is because the court of appeals squarely addressed what the Supreme Court asked the court of appeals to address, my guess is that leave will not be granted to the Supreme Court. And just to refresh people's memories, it was the Supreme Court said, go back, consider this Clam Lake decision. We that was the only issue in front of the court, and so the court of appeals reissued all of its findings before and said basically we reaffirm on these things, so all the other issues, but on that JPC Joint Planning Commission issue on the court of appeals said, first of all, there's an agreement, everybody. Read the agreement first, right? And the agreement clearly says the city of Marshall's zoning ordinance applies, and the city council has final control of these things. So reaffirm that again. And then also something that wasn't raised by the parties but was raised by the court, which the court has the absolute authority to do that, is that the JPC was not a separate unit of government uh within the meaning of the statute that this was created under. So it wasn't even possible for the city and the township to transfer this authority, as the appellants argue. And so I think completely deflated that idea whatsoever. And so at this point, we have a completely solid Court of Appeals decision. Again, three to zero published opinion. They really, there's not anything more strong that they could have done to emphasize their position. And the system in Michigan is you get one more shot at the Supreme Court at this point. And so they're gonna take that shot, we'll respond, and I think we'll end up in about six months with this being finally completed, is my prediction.

What The Joint Planning Commission Does

Richard Piet 4:31

Yeah, there was uh a statement issued by the committee, and the biggest news, I suppose, in there was the notion that they will go back to the Supreme Court again. So you're prepared, as you've just said, to uh to deal with that, were that to eventuate, and we're gonna talk with that side of things here soon. But in the meantime, this is the way it is, uh, this is the way you expected it to be, and this point of contention, this joint planning commission thing that this whole back and forth, more recent back and forth, has centered on, uh talk about that from your point of view. If the joint planning commission was created to help determine the zoning here, but yet both entities, Marshall and Marshall Township, still have purview in this area. What's the point of the JPC and uh help us understand that?

Why The City Has Final Zoning Authority

Richard Lindsey 5:24

The JPC was created under the 425 statute. So there's a uh PA 425 that allows this to take place, and what it was created to do was to govern the things that a planning commission would do in a city or township, and so it has a role, and most definitely has a role, and it is it reviews certain items under the Marshall City zoning ordinance that the planning commission would review in other places in the city. So this is N425 transferred property within this location, and it reviews um site plans, it reviews zoning changes, special use permits. I don't have a definitive list in front of me, but there's five or six things that it reviews. And interestingly, in other areas in the township that have been transferred, so north of 94, the township ordinance applies, and so the JPC does the same thing, but it follows the township ordinance, and that's reflective of what the deal was worked out between the city and the township of this, and it has been done this way now for a number of years, number of different transactions. Part of what was submitted to the Court of Appeals was township resolution from a few years ago, recognizing it was advisory, and so you know the parties have recognized that, and the change was that there was an election in the township, and new people came into the township, and they're looking back at what the former township people did, unhappy. You know, I don't know exactly the circumstances, but they're interpreting it differently, and that doesn't mean that the agreement changed, it just means that they're looking at it differently. And really, the remedy is of this agreement is it's a 2029 expiration agreement. In 2029, presumably in mid-2028, they'll they should start renegotiating it. And if they don't like what they have right now, they can you know negotiate it into a different deal. But the deal that's there now is what was in place at the time, and that's what's binding on the parties. So, in the context of what happened here, the JPC denied the zoning change, so that was their recommendation to the city, and the city council declined to follow their recommendation, which is their right under the city zoning ordinance, and so that was final. The city's decision was final, and nothing has changed, you know, before or after, you know, other than again different people getting elected to the township that come to a different conclusion.

Richard Piet 7:46

Yeah, and so the Joint Planning Commission is really a review authority and makes recommendations.

Richard Lindsey 7:52

Correct. Yep, and it I and again, I could think of other circumstances. I I was involved in fire prior discussions with the JPC relative to a piece of property that's across from Denny's in Marshall, if you're familiar with that. So it was owned by Oaklawn at the time, and JPC made a number of different changes to the zoning ordinance as it was as it was modified, and then ultimately when it went in front of the city council, the city council made some more changes to it. And so this is not new, this is not unique. And if you think through what they're saying, a zoning ordinance has to be approved by a legislative body, and so how the JPC would have been final, it just defies logic. Somebody would have had to give the final approval for it. There's I just nobody anticipated that JPC was the final authority, and so it's really looking back at something now at this point, years after it happened, and saying, well, you should have done this, and this is not what the contract, it's not what the law provides.

Referendum Questions Narrowed By Courts

Richard Piet 8:52

So and of course, that the whole question of a referendum and signatures for the ballot, and none of that got any further in all these discussions because the Court of Appeals and thus uh I suppose the Supreme Court were focused on this JPC question and none of those other things came up. Could that come around again? And is that a concern?

Clam Lake, Precedent, And Supreme Court Odds

Richard Lindsey 9:14

So I don't think so. So my interpretation, which was backed up by a long footnote at the end of the Court of Appeals case, was that the only thing that was opened up by the Supreme Court was this narrow JPC issue. So they what they said, what the court of appeals said was we're gonna go ahead and recite everything that was in our prior opinion just to make absolutely crystal clear that we're ruling on all those things again. Yeah, but we don't believe that we had to, and we believe that the statement of the appellants that all the issues were opened up by the Supreme Court is just wrong. And so my thought is that the only issue in front of the the Supreme Court at this point would be this JPC issue. That having been said, as you've learned with this in other cases, I mean it Mr. Doobie will argue what he argues, and you know, we'll we will respond in kind.

Richard Piet 10:05

So this other case, the clam like case, was brought to the attention of the court because there was thought to be, by some, some relevance in that case to this one, but the court didn't see that either.

Richard Lindsey 10:21

And I guess the thing that was interesting, the Supreme Court had the ability to make the finding that the court of appeals was right, but did so on alternative grounds, and they and they could have affirmed. And so I'm you know, I don't I can't see inside their uh collective heads, of course. And you know, basically their their order was a one-paragraph, one-line order, but it looked like they wanted to just make absolutely sure that that issue was covered by the parties. And when Mr. Doobie and the appellants raised it, it was after everything had been already briefed before in the Court of Appeals. That issue was never raised in in the Court of Appeals before. And so it was really a new, I would say the the the kind of the concept had been raised before, but not the clam lake case. And so Supreme Court, I think, probably is intending to make the law crystal clear on this case, and you know, obviously lot riding on this, you know, from the state of Michigan and you know, billions of dollars of investment by Ford and by by the state of Michigan, and wants to make make sure things are crystal clear.

Richard Piet 11:26

So let's talk about your purview about the Supreme Court, your thought that they won't hear this. We presume then that the chances, in your opinion, the chances of them listening to this now are less than they were the first time around.

Statewide Impact Of 425 Agreements

Richard Lindsey 11:42

Yeah, I mean I'm reading it as Court of Appeals, go back and consider this. And you know, there was not much else in the opinion, right? Go back and consider it, and that's been done, and they issued uh you know, well thought out comprehensive opinion, three to zero, all the judges unanimous. And again, when it's a published decision, that means it's intended to be you know binding as precedent in the state of Michigan. So it's got all the hallmarks of you know, back to the Supreme Court, we did everything you asked us to do. So there you go. It's it's back to you to take a look at it and see if we did anything incorrectly. But I don't know what that would be at this point. I really, really don't. And it was interesting that I did not, so the township ended up filing uh a motion to intervene, which was denied, but they filed an amicus brief, so it's like a friend of the court brief. And really they argued, as others have, that if you read this agreement to create this 425, if you read the first part of it, it says one thing, and that's the end of their argument. They never addressed the second part, which clearly is the appendix that's attached, and it's subject to the things in that appendix, and that's where you have the provision that the city of Marshall zoning ordinance applies in certain areas, and then the Marshall Township zoning ordinance applies in other areas. And it just they don't address it. And the court appeals said that's the agreement you guys reached, and we we have to follow the agreement the parties reached.

Richard Piet 13:07

So let's all these conversations we've had have focused really on Marshall, on Calhoun County, and the uh nexus of this uh issue. But let's zoom out a minute, and you referred to this, alluded to it a moment ago. What's the precedent here, if any, in all of this as it relates to future development in Michigan? Is the state watching this? Are there certain aspects of it that uh development leaders are keenly watching? What's your view on all that?

Data Centers And Local Moratoriums

Site Turnover And EV Platform Hype

Richard Lindsey 13:40

I don't have a lot of insight into that, but I will tell you the the little bit that I've learned is that the relationship between the cities and the townships is very important for development in the state of Michigan. So you think about where the available land is at and it's in the townships, and where the services come from, and it's in the cities, and so they have to cooperate. And the 425 statute that we talked talk about, this public act 425, was intended to be a way for them to find a truce, not have annexation, and to have a truce and to basically allow them to work with each other. And so, what this looks like for the rest of the state of Michigan is and this is gonna come up with data centers now, which is the current topic, but you can't locate in a township if there's no water and sewer, uh, any kind of industrial concern. And so you have to have a relationship through a 425 agreement, and so these agreements become very important, and so the details of how all this works out, I think, is being watched closely. And it's it's also important, and I've learned from dealing with site selectors in that are dealing multiple states, is that other states don't have these 425 agreements, and so if you are GM and Forge, you grew up here, right? So so you're they've been around for a long time. But if you're for whatever manufacturing concern and you're gonna come put a whatever you're gonna make in Michigan, all of a sudden you have to deal with this 425 agreement. What is exactly does that mean? And again, what happened with Goshen in Goshen, the township changed, township board changed, they then tried to terminate agreements that have been in place with a prior township board and ended up in a lawsuit that ultimately in federal court and companies like predictability, and so that's what has to be ironed out with these 425 agreements is predictability, you know, for the company to be able to invest in the in the community.

Richard Piet 15:35

It doesn't go away, right? I mean, these concerns are still around, and uh you point out data centers, that is the next big question. And boy, there are entities around Michigan that have said, nope, we're not gonna have any hearing moratorium on them. And if there's not, there are some municipalities that are being encouraged by residents to to do so. Right, absolutely, absolutely. This probably won't be the last time we talk about this. No, right, right. All right, well, uh, we'll stay in touch, of course, and you pointed out the hiring is underway, and the construction is nearly done, right?

Richard Lindsey 16:16

Yeah, I mean the the process right now is that MAEDA had the site ready, which was the the bulk of what MAEDA was asked to do by the state. That's been done for a while, and so we are in the process of transferring various aspects over to the city of Marshall. And again, the the things that made us constructed the sewer system and the water system, those things are being used now by Ford. You know, they are to point that again, Walbridge was the general contractor, and Walbridge is in the process of turning things over to Ford. So we are a couple months out from production, uh, which is which is very exciting. The other thing that's very exciting, and I'm a car guy, right? And so watching the announcements have been there's been a bunch of announcements recently by Ford about the Universal EV platform. Yeah, and so that's the new structure that's gonna carry this LFP battery, and then Ford's gonna build this $30,000 vehicle on top of it. And I I can't wait for them to announce it. I check my social media every morning to see when they're gonna announce it. You know, I've asked the four people, why don't you bring it to Marshall? I'm not sure they're gonna they're gonna do that, but yeah, very exciting to see that move forward.

Richard Piet 17:23

I'm curious about it too. Uh I'm curious to see. And here we are, kind of in the middle of it.

Closing And Next Check-In

Richard Lindsey 17:29

Yeah, very much. I know every one of the articles mentions LFP batteries made in Marshall, Michigan, Michigan, which is very cool.

Richard Piet 17:35

All right, Richard, we always appreciate your uh point of view, and uh we'll stay in touch.

Richard Lindsey 17:40

All right, thanks, Richard. Good to join you.

Richard Piet 17:42

Attorney Richard Lindsey from Marshall on Community Matters.