MARSHALL, Mich. (Michigan News Source) – In the second hearing between Marshall residents who petitioned against the Ford Blue Oval Battery Park Plant, and the City of Marshall, a Calhoun County Judge heard arguments and anticipates a verdict at the end of the month which would likely allow the automotive plant to continue construction, or be forced to cease building. 

MORE NEWS: ‘Wild Lights’ Brighten the Detroit Zoo

In mid-July, Judge William Marietti of the 37th Circuit Court in Calhoun County provided a written opinion articulating why ultimately, the petitioners were not granted a preliminary injunction to a rezoning ordinance which allotted several hundred more acres of land to Ford’s Blue Oval Battery Park Plant.  

“The petitions’ arguments regarding the balancing of harm to the respective parties and public interest factors rests on the fulcrum that assumes the court will find the referendum petition should be advanced to the council for repeal or placement on the ballot,” he wrote in an opinion, “Since the court has not made that finding, the petitioners have failed to persuade the court that the balancing of harm  to the respective parties and public interest weigh in favor of granting the relief requested. Accordingly, the motion is denied.” 

According to a supporter of the Committee for Marshall – Not the Megasite, Glenn Kowalske, he and the group are hopeful for the judge’s ruling. 

“The good news is that if we prevail in that ruling, then the rezoning ordinance is paused and basically put on hold,” he said in an interview with Michigan News Source. “It can’t move forward which means Ford can’t move forward, which means the state of Michigan can’t force it to move forward.” 

The plaintiff, the Committee for Marshall-Not the Megasite claims to have garnered more than 800 signatures for a petition against a recent decision by the City of Marshall to rezone land for use other than agricultural land, and also allocate funds to be used towards the Ford Blue Oval Battery Park Plant in Marshall.  The defendants are the City of Marshall, and City of Marshall Clerk, Michelle Eubank, who did not grant the group a letter of sufficiency for the petition.  

While the majority of the hearing was procedural, the court did reject numerous motions by the defense to attempt to delay the hearing scheduled for the morning of August 9.  

After a brief recess, the Court decided to grant the petitioners’ request to exceed page limits and also grant the defense additional time to reply to plaintiff’s brief which was nearly 40 pages long.  

MORE NEWS: Guaranteed Income Programs Pop Up Nationwide With Help From Federal Pandemic Relief Money

“The basis for granting the motion is the brief is a consolidated effort to respond to two other briefs, it’s 39 pages excluding the exhibits,” Judge Marietti said, “Under those circumstances I think it is appropriate to allow them to exceed.” 

The legal counsel for the City of Marshall, Joseph Colaianne, requested that the defense also be given a similar opportunity. 

“In light of the petitioners filing a 39 page response brief, we would also have the right to file a reply brief,” he said, “We had assumed that this matter would be scheduled for August 23rd.” 

The legal representative for the petitioners, Robert Dube, in his closing statements expressed hope that the Judge’s earlier ruling would be changed. 

“We have addressed in our briefs, this is an election law dispute, that there is standing to determine how are appropriations validly passed in the city charter because that will affect all referendums going forward,” Dube said. 

“We respectfully request the court to issue an order different from its earlier order on the [temporary restraining order] TRO and in favor of the petitioners,” he added. 

Advocates of the project argue that it would bring more than 2,000 jobs to the region, and would offer competitive hourly wages. 

“There were a lot of other states fighting for this Marshall site, we landed it,” Governor Gretchen Whitmer said previously. “It was a bipartisan effort. It is going to be a great opportunity for everyone.”

Others have expressed concerns regarding security risk of Ford’s relationship with Chinese Battery Company, Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Ltd (CATL), and the jobs that would be filled .  The House Ways and Means Committee and Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, led by Chairmen Jason Smith (R-Missouri) and Mike Gallagher (R-Wisconsin) sent a joint letter to Ford asking for details about the deal between the car manufacturer and China. 

“Ford has argued that the deal will create thousands of American jobs, further Ford’s “commitments to sustainability and human rights,” and lead to American battery technology advancements. But newly discovered information raises serious questions about each claim. Specifically, information regarding the proposed partnership agreement between Ford and CATL suggests that a significant portion of these well-paying jobs will be given to citizens of the People’s Republic of China (PRC)—not Americans,” the two wrote in a letter to Ford. 

Eventually, Judge Marietti chose to grant the defense the right to submit a response brief and expressed that he was looking forward to receiving the replies from the respondents. 

“I understand that you wish to submit those in writing, so you have until August 20th to submit those, and I will give you a written opinion thereafter,” he said.