This article originally appeared in Crain’s Detroit Business June 25, 2025.

Sheetz, a Pennsylvania-based company that sells gasoline and made-to-order food, wants to expand its footprint in Michigan. The chain, which offers a wide selection of decent meals at a low cost, has plans to add dozens of new stations in metro Detroit.

It shouldn’t be news that a company with several hundred stores wants to expand. But Sheetz is in the news because some businesses, citizens and public officials in various cities want to use government power to prevent the retailer from opening.

Some complaints come from people who object to the gas stations’ 24/7 operations. Others say the stores would be too noisy or too close to residential areas. Some protests are more legitimate than others, and most can be mitigated with a few changes to the company’s plan for the site in question.

But some objections are just examples of good old-fashioned anti-competitive behavior. Owners of other gas stations are worried about what Sheetz might mean for them and other fuel sellers, and they support regulations to stop Sheetz from opening. One business owner declared simply, “I don’t want them competing with me.” Another complained that Sheetz could "cannibalize" his business.

Unfortunately, it has become the norm in Michigan, and across the country, for a small number of people to object to almost anything being built. Houses. Apartments. Factories. Stores. Even schools.

Of course, public officials should do due diligence before a business comes in. But this should be focused on public health and safety — making sure the area has enough drainage, electricity, road access, etc. Complaints based on aesthetics or non-safety related regulations, like minimum parking or setback limits, are usually unnecessary. And in the case of Sheetz, they are being blocked from building in places that already featured gas stations or similar stores in the past.

What’s new now is the amount of pushback from other businesses. It is inappropriate, and illegitimate, for incumbent businesses to use their power to block out future competitors. These companies themselves would never have gotten off the ground in the first place if lawmakers used government power to stop them before they started.

Local officials — and the business community — should reject these efforts. Building and zoning regulations should be about rational planning and protecting the public. Protecting some businesses from others is not a legitimate reason for zoning laws.

Michigan needs to be a competitive state — not a guild state. In the former, consumers benefit when businesses compete for their business. In the latter, existing favored businesses use the government to pull up the ladder behind them, stopping new companies from starting, growing and thriving.

Permission to reprint this blog post in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author (or authors) and the Mackinac Center for Public Policy are properly cited.