Peninsula Township has roughly 6,000 residents. In July 2025, a federal judge ordered the township to pay the Wineries of Old Mission Peninsula, a group known as WOMP, close to $50 million in damages over zoning rules the court found unconstitutional. That isn't background noise for anyone shopping the peninsula right now. Michigan Public reported in December 2025 that state tax assessors would use 2026 homestead values to calculate how much of that judgment lands on individual property tax bills, with the charge showing up on summer 2026 statements. If you're comparing a listing on Old Mission Peninsula to something similar in Leelanau or Elk Rapids by price per square foot alone, you're missing half the math.
What the Wineries Actually Sued Over
The dispute goes back to 2020, when WOMP challenged a Peninsula Township ordinance that restricted private events, amplified music, full restaurant service, extended hours, and capped how much outside grape and juice a winery could use in its wines. Judge Paul Maloney of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan eventually ruled the ordinance unconstitutionally vague and awarded damages for the years the restrictions were in place. The township had already repealed the ordinance in question by the time the ruling came down, but the money owed for the restriction's past effect stood. That's the number that turned into a nearly $50 million judgment.
The Appeal Isn't Over, and Neither Is the Final Number
Here's the part a listing sheet won't tell you: none of this is resolved. On February 13, 2026, Peninsula Township filed a 100-page appeal arguing the case unraveled on a vagueness finding that shouldn't have carried the weight it did. Protect the Peninsula, a citizens group that intervened in the case, is defending alongside the township. In February 2026, five outside organizations, including the Michigan Townships Association, American Farmland Trust, the Michigan Municipal League, the International Municipal Lawyers Association, and the State Bar of Michigan's Government Law Section, filed amicus briefs warning that letting the ruling stand could unsettle municipal zoning authority statewide, not just in Peninsula Township.
In March 2026, Judge Maloney agreed to stay collection of the damages and waive the bond typically required while an appeal is pending, so the township doesn't have to hand over the money yet. That doesn't make the exposure disappear. It just means the number is frozen mid-fight. Add to that a second, related lawsuit: in November 2025, Bonobo and Bowers Harbor Vineyards sued the township in Kalamazoo, arguing they'd already won the right to run event centers based on the first case. Protect the Peninsula tried to intervene there and was denied twice, then appealed to the Sixth Circuit and was granted expedited review. As of an Old Mission Gazette update this month, both the original appeal and the newer case remain pending in front of the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati.
A buyer who treats the figure on this year's tax bill as the final word is guessing. It could grow if the appeals fail. It could shrink or vanish if they succeed. Either way, it's live.
A Second, Older Restriction: the PDR Easement
Separate from the lawsuit, and much older, is a mechanism that has nothing to do with litigation and everything to do with what a parcel is legally allowed to become. Peninsula Township's Purchase of Development Rights program has run since 1994, funded by a 2-mill tax that voters renewed in 2002 and again in 2022. By the 2022 renewal vote, the program had purchased development rights on 3,291 acres outright, and the Grand Traverse Regional Land Conservancy counted roughly 6,042 acres under some form of development protection when PDR easements are combined with other conservation agreements, about a third of the township's total 17,755 acres. The township's 2023 parks and recreation plan sets an eventual target of preserving around 9,000 acres.
Land enrolled in PDR carries a conservation easement recorded against the deed. That easement permanently blocks subdivision and most residential development on the parcel, regardless of what a future owner wants to do with it. This has nothing to do with the winery litigation. It's simply the other invisible constraint buyers run into on the peninsula: acreage that reads as development potential on a map may already be legally frozen as farmland, and that restriction doesn't expire when the property changes hands.
Two Different Constraints, Side by Side
| Litigation exposure | PDR easement | |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | a share of the pending ~$50 million judgment against the township | a permanent restriction on subdivision recorded against the deed |
| Who it applies to | most homesteads in Peninsula Township, through the tax assessment | only parcels specifically enrolled in the program |
| How long it lasts | uncertain, tied to the ongoing Sixth Circuit appeals | permanent, and it transfers with ownership |
| Where to check it | your current township tax bill and the assessor's office | title work and the Grand Traverse County Register of Deeds |
What to Ask Before You Write an Offer
- Ask the seller's agent or the township assessor whether the current tax bill includes any assessment tied to the WOMP judgment, and whether that figure is expected to change with the pending appeal.
- Have your title company search specifically for a recorded PDR conservation easement or any other development-rights restriction on the parcel, not just standard title exceptions.
- If the property includes agricultural acreage, ask whether it's zoned agricultural or residential, and whether any portion has already been sold into the PDR program.
- Ask your lender how a pending municipal litigation exposure factors into their appraisal or underwriting, since practices vary.
- Build a little extra time into your due diligence period specifically to get answers on both of these from the township directly rather than relying on secondhand summaries.
What This Means If You're Comparing Neighborhoods
None of this is a reason to cross Old Mission Peninsula off a list. The vineyard views, the orchard acreage, and the water frontage on both bays still command a premium that buyers elsewhere pay more to approximate without ever getting it. What it means is that the due diligence period on this particular peninsula has two extra questions that a Leelanau or Elk Rapids buyer might not need to ask in quite the same way: what does this year's tax bill actually include, and does this parcel carry a PDR easement. Both are answerable before you close. Neither shows up in a listing description.
A Few Direct Questions
Is the $50 million judgment final? No. Peninsula Township, Protect the Peninsula, and WOMP have all filed appeals, and the Sixth Circuit has not ruled. Collection of the damages is currently stayed.
Does every Old Mission Peninsula property carry a PDR easement? No. Only parcels the township has specifically purchased development rights on are restricted this way. Many properties on the peninsula carry no such easement at all.
Will any of this affect my closing or my mortgage? It can affect carrying costs if a tax assessment tied to the judgment is confirmed on the parcel, and it can affect what you're legally able to build if a PDR easement is attached. Ask your lender and title company to verify current status on both before you're at the closing table, not after.
If you're weighing Old Mission Peninsula against Leelanau, Elk Rapids, or a move-up home closer to town, I'd rather walk you through what a specific parcel actually carries than let a listing sheet do the talking. Mike Annelin has been tracking both of these mechanisms as they've developed this year. Let's Connect and go through the details on the property you're actually considering.
