Greetings. The ministry of New Buffalo township is the non-municipal government of the people, by the people, and for the people who are willing to motion the public good by being good stewards of the land and of community life. We are the original, still-existing form of Michigan state society – the Republic form. View the sidebar Page AMERICA'S PUBLIC TRUST TIMELINE for verification of this fact. Note: If you are seeking the municipal Township of New Buffalo, you’ve come to the wrong site, but we hope you can visit here before you go.
FORMAT of this Blog: Each originating post includes the difference between the way the municipal Township of New Buffalo functions and the way our non-municipal New Buffalo township functions. Some posts include links to operational documents related to the topic.
As the Hosts, we, Cheryl Marie and Michael Patrick, can be contacted at email@example.com
Private communications are welcome.
We are growing the organic form of governance, which means we associate side-by-side under public law, the law of conscience, common to everyone. You are welcome to plant your seeds of thought within the posts you’ll find, or, you may send us a thought-seedling and we may provide the space for you to plant it for everyone's sharing of its increase.
Tuesday, July 10, 2018
Township Board members had no official authority to "reaffirm for compliance" the Special Land Use Permit for Carts on 12, so correction is necessary
Wednesday, June 20, 2018
This shows the 4-page Court ORDER, which includes the fact that it resulted from a plea agreement:
Friday, February 2, 2018
Judge disqualifies himself, and then issues ORDER --- Part Five, Segment Two of the Two; educational series concerning Law Suit against Twp of New Buffalo
Tuesday, January 23, 2018
Judge disqualifies himself, and then issues ORDER – Part Five, Segment One of the Two; educational series concerning Law Suit against Twp of New Buffalo
Sunday, January 7, 2018
The Township’s hired attorney is currently trying to claim that the Township officers do not understand our Law Suit (pleading ignorance in other words), and therefore it is frivolous and should be summarily dismissed. The Defendant-attorney’s attorney is trying to claim his client had immunity for his actions even if the Judge finds that tort exists. These are typical first-motions made by such Defendants. We have brought the Natural Law (public law, which secures peoples’ God-given rights – like the right to know the cause of a claim) to bear in this case, not merely statutory law (i.e., private law / ordinances). That’s why the Judge has proclaimed our case is the most unusual he has ever experienced. The circuit court is a court of general jurisdiction, and is where the Natural Law can be invoked when it is the law that controls the obligations and rights of the party invoking it. Public officers are subject to Natural Law even though they concern themselves most of the time with private law. The difference is, under private law, also called Public Policy, people consent (knowingly or not) to monetize their societal rights.
Saturday, December 30, 2017
Monday, December 11, 2017
Saturday, November 25, 2017
The case number in the Berrien County Circuit Court is 17-000229-CZ
Tuesday, July 18, 2017
Their vote, approving the SLU permit, indicated they answered “NO” to each point on the Checklist. Their approval of the permit cannot be valid, because the procedure and the SLU conditions required by law have not been met. We now intend to seek a court-issued writ commanding these officers to perform their ministerial duty.
Their refusal to enforce a key SLU ordinance provision, specific to this “open air business”, also means that they are choosing to put the public’s safety at risk (and ours especially). That provision prohibits this type of business from using the driveway of the parcel of property at the street address 19415 US 12, because it is too close to the intersection of US 12 and the entrance to Grand Beach Village.
Another effect of their vote is that they have sanctioned the Township becoming a literal junk yard. Read more about that in sections 4 c and e, plus 4 f two, three and four, of our Notice document. According to Twp Zoning Administrator Estelle Brinkman (the Board irresponsibly concurring to-date), anyone can use derelict semi-trailers as storage structures or accessory buildings. Anyone can also put about anything anywhere on their property because Brinkman personally determines that anything is “reusable” and therefore is not JUNK. We believe that the better way to categorize such items is that they are treasure to the owner and possibly junk to the observer, and so the applicable ordinances should be enforced as they are now written.
How would you like to live next to a fence made from literal shipping pallets? Brinkman and Board members have allowed this business to install such ‘fence’. While the regular fence ordinance lacks a prohibition about such non-fence material (which ordinance could be easily amended), the SLU ordinance specifically requires a fence that is compatible with the adjacent use of land and that will not change the essential character of the vicinity. The mixed-use character of the vicinity---well what used to be the character---is “rural resort community”.
We claim the Township's officers have breached the trust they have been given, and have also breached the contract with the State established per their oaths of office by refusing to perform their mandatory duty to enforce their ordinances that maintain property values.
Michael Patrick and Cheryl Marie (who live next door to this business)
Friday, July 14, 2017
This law enforcement matter affects not only residents (and possibly tax funds), but also affects the safety of the public traveling near the intersection of US 12 and the entrance into Grand Beach Village. The Twp has the capability to record its Board meetings, but its officers choose instead to keep the public in the dark. Not even the Minutes of the Board’s meetings reveal the truth about this matter we are now presenting (as no public commentary is included in their Minutes). That is why we have been video-taping the Board’s zoning-related proceedings.
We believe that Authority is derived from the Truth.
Below our email is the Zoning Enforcement officer’s final report. Our email contains the remedy that Twp officers might chose to consider. We will post their reply if we receive one.
Note: we welcome comments or questions from the public on all of our posts, but we do not invite input that is merely derogatory or else cryptic in nature.
Our email to the Twp follows ---
Supervisor Heit, and each and all of you Board members:
We have just been provided with a copy of Zoning Enforcement Officer Buller's final report concerning Carts on 12 compliance with your SLU and regular ordinances. A copy is attached.
We find outrageous---unconscionable---the depth of the Zoning Dept officers' gross negligence, and your official failure or inability to supervise them Michelle, and you Board members' refusal to uphold the intent and specific goals of your Master Plan by causing and then condoning a literal junk yard in your C1 zoning district, and your refusal to enforce or even recognize detailed regular ordinance and SLU ordinance requirements, and your reckless disregard for the traveling-public's safety near the intersection, as well as the resulting harm that all of these matters has been and continues to be caused to our peace and land rights.
You have all individually, and collectively, knowingly and willfully, and having had prior notice of what to do to correct your position and/or shortcomings, chosen to violate your laws and your law-enforcement procedures.
What is your fact-based justification for refusing to recognize, or to simply ignore, the clear language and intent of your published ordinances and your mandated procedures? Your refusal to provide your justification will be another violation of your oath of office.
If you stand on the claim that you have in-fact total discretion to see nothing and/or do nothing, or act from only your personal edicts, you could be wrong. You could be required to prove your claim, or to prove that your claim of having discretion is reasonable in light of specific resulting harm.
Furthermore, an official's refusal to perform official duties is cause for removal from the office by the Governor, if not by the residents.
Our position is that you should immediately re-think your position, and then start mitigating the harm you have been and are causing us, by beginning to enforce your ordinances as they are written. Our position on these matters is fully-documented.
Michael Patrick and Cheryl Marie
END of the email.
Ordinance Enforcement Officer Dennis Buller's report can be read at this link ---
Thursday, January 26, 2017
What Michigan’s 180th birthday announcement by top state officials has to do with our recent email to Berrien County Commissioner Ezra Scott
Monday, January 2, 2017
2017, the pivotal year – we can choose to reap benefit from sowing self-sustaining Civility (Civic Health) at the grass-roots level, or else, choose to try surviving all the devastating consequences of institutionally-sown Civic Decay that are now upon us
Friday, December 9, 2016
Report: New Buffalo Twp Planning Commission hearing of a Special Land Use for golf cart business “Carts on 12”
The video is in two parts. The first is the Public Hearing portion of the Commissioners’ meeting. The second part is the portion when Commissioners discussed what they heard and viewed, which resulted in the action they chose to take. The outcome was their unanimous tabling of their role. They chose to seek from the Township Zoning Dept. yet another review of the statements of fact correlated with specific Twp ordinance provisions contained in this document [for our readers' downloading]. One Commission member deemed it to be a "concrete distillation of the issues" that apply to this unique situation, and the other members concurred. The document was provided to the Commissioners by the hosts of this website, who are affected neighbors. The two Site Plans displayed below were utilized during the Public Hearing, and were added to this document provided to Commissioners.
The Township’s new Supervisor, Michelle Heit, was in the audience during this hearing. She was formerly a Twp Board Trustee who was appointed as liaison to the Planning Commission, so she had to step down from the Commission when elected as Supervisor. The Commissioners' next scheduled meeting is January 10, 2017.
Saturday, November 12, 2016
What is now possible for each of us, as singular people and as a People (i.e., what the people and Council of the City of New Buffalo could do)
Wednesday, November 9, 2016
Sunday, November 6, 2016
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
Friday, September 23, 2016
I note within the below-linked HP news report of Sept. 16 that the renovated jail Intake Area will be “providing 75 beds for inmates, as well as larger holding cells for up to 12 inmates”. Assuming this report accurately presents the word “bed”, I have the following questions, plus input. My input has also recently been communicated via email to Carl Macpherson, for his benefit and use. I think the Public will deem the word "bed" as the commonly-understood definition, thereby believing that the new facility is financially, socially and morally worth the money being committed to it. If that is not what the County means, then clarification to the Public must be immediately provided or else the word "bed" can be deemed as intentional misrepresentation.
1. What is the County’s definition of the word “bed”? Please send it to me via return-email.
An associated question is, what is your own (individual) definition of “bed” in relation to the Intake Area?
For instance, is “bed” a commercial / corporate legal term for a designated spatial area, as occupied real estate marketed in the financial market-place? If so, how much spatial area is designated for each inmate, particularly within the 12-person cells, presuming each inmate is allotted a fully-prone-body occupancy area?
Or, is “bed” meant per the ordinary definition: “a piece of furniture for sleep or rest, typically a framework with a mattress and coverings”?
2. If my first proffered definition is the correct one, then will a mattress and covering (consisting of at least a blanket as a covering) be provided to each inmate?
If my other proffered definition is the correct one, then will the required “framework, and mattress and coverings” be provided to each inmate? I’m assuming the ‘framework’ will not merely consist of the cell floor, but please specify what type of framework will be provided.
3. My Input, if no mattress and blanket will be provided for the "beds": I offer that most people, when they are asked to think and reason, would determine that their body-heat is their unique and exclusive Creator-granted ‘property’, and that, being essential and unalienable property, they have a right to not be deprived of it without due process of law. NOTE: I cannot imagine a circumstance when the taking of someone’s body-heat as punishment for a crime would justly compensate the Public for some infraction of its societal rules.
I further offer that even people with ‘challenged’ reasoning-ability would definitely determine that one who is NOT convicted of a crime, or NOT even arraigned (and who may NOT be the correct body to begin with) could not be lawfully subjected to the intentionally-caused loss of such property.
The County’s required-focus (and cost) of providing adequate indigent defense services will be compromised if qualified inmates are deprived of such unalienable property prior to meeting with their court-ordered legal counsel. It is a given that no one can physiologically know another's bodily needs as to such property. The attorney’s properly-offered services will likely be disadvantaged from the get-go due to his client having suffered from lost ordinary body-heat, resulting in less mental or physical capacity to interact with the attorney for obtaining the benefit that is due. Otherwise, this property matter should be a required initial inquiry made by the attorney.
Please respond to this email within five  days, since media will require timely issuance of correcting articles if the County's word "bed" is not the commonly-held public definition.
New Buffalo township (the body-politic)