Judge: Ottawa health officer will remain in place until trial on broader issues

OTTAWA COUNTY — Ottawa County’s health officer will remain in her position — for now.

Muskegon 14th Circuit Court Judge Jenny L. McNeill granted Adeline Hambley a preliminary injunction Tuesday, April 18, which will allow Hambley to remain in her position until a trial can take place over the myriad claims she made that Ottawa Impact-linked commissioners have repeatedly interfered with her ability to do her job.

Hambley filed her lawsuit Feb. 13 in Ottawa County’s 20th Circuit Court, claiming the commissioners overreached their authority by attempting to limit her state-authorized health duties, including standing in the way of critical contracts the county has with local health providers.

A key dispute was whether Hambley’s appointment is binding to the new board, which is now controlled by Ottawa Impact, an upstart far-right political group borne from clashes over the county’s COVID-19 mitigation mandates in 2020.

More: Judge to consider whether Ottawa County health officer was properly appointed

More: Lawsuit: Health officer says Ottawa Impact commissioners targeted her

Its founders, Joe Moss and Sylvia Rhodea, were unsuccessful in suing the previous board of commissioners and the county's former health officer, Lisa Stefanovsky, who retired in March.

In response, they targeted seats on the board in 2022, recruiting like-minded candidates who agreed “traditional Republicans” weren’t enforcing true conservative policies. They successfully defeated enough incumbents in the August primary to win the majority.

Now, Moss and Rhodea are among the seven individual defendants in the lawsuit — Hambley's attorney, Sarah Riley Howard, later amended the original complaint to include the board at large.

McNeill granted a temporary restraining order just days after OI commissioners made a "correction" to a resolution the former board approved on Dec. 13 appointing Hambley to the role after Stefanovsky announced in August she planned to retire in the spring.

The OI commissioners argue the resolution approving Hambley’s appointment "did not accurately reflect the actual motion and vote that took place at the meeting" because there were wording discrepancies between the written resolution and the verbal motion made by one of the commissioners prior to the unanimous vote to appoint Hambley.

Kallman said the written resolution the previous board approved wasn't in front of commissioners when they voted to appoint Hambley — and further alleged former board chair Matt Fenske and county clerk Justin Roebuck later changed the written resolution in private, which he asserted was a violation of the state’s Open Meetings Act.

McNeill said in her ruling that was a "misinterpretation of the events."

"The board approved the appointment of (Hambley) as Ottawa County Administrative Health Officer at the Dec. 13, 2022, meeting by a unanimous vote," McNeill wrote in her ruling. "The only remaining contingencies at that point in time were confirmation by the MDHHS and passing the county's background check process."

Howard said in her filings that Hambley's position grants her certain powers through the state and that her position is of a “just cause” nature, where the supervising authority — the board of commissioners — would need to provide a reason, or cause, to fire her, and could only do so after a public hearing, where she could be represented by legal counsel.

McNeill agreed, saying if the commissioners want to fire Hambley, they must follow outlined procedures in the law to do so. That aspect of the judge's decision reaffirms previous legal opinions provided to the county by former corporate counsel Doug Van Essen and former state attorney general Mike Cox.

Fenske did not respond to The Sentinel's request for comment. Roebuck refuted the claims Kallman made in court.

“I am awaiting a copy of the transcript from the court proceedings to verify the exact language that was stated in court before I respond further to Mr. Kallman’s claims. However, I categorically deny the allegation that I or any member of my team violated the Open Meetings Act, or acted unethically in any way in the conduct of our normal business while processing this resolution," Roebuck wrote in an emailed statement to The Sentinel.

More: Ottawa Clerk: Kallman accusations of illegal actions 'categorically false'

McNeill said in her ruling there was no case law provided by the defendants to show the December resolution was invalid.

"The motion passed. The board had the resolution in front of them. The court has not been provided any authority for this argument. There is no logical reason for the board to vote twice on this issue," McNeill wrote. "A common sense reading of the motion and resolution are that the Plaintiff was appointed as the Health Director."

She denied both sides' requests for summary judgments in their respective favor — with the exception of the preliminary injunction — because there are disputes over the facts that surround the case.

McNeill denied Kallman's request to sanction Hambley, saying her lawsuit was not frivolous. McNeill also denied Kallman's request for a stay of the proceedings, an action taken by a court to stop a legal proceeding or the actions of a party.

Kallman is expected to appeal the judge's ruling. A trial date has not yet been scheduled.

Subscribe: Get all your breaking news and unlimited access to our local coverage

More: Second lawsuit against Ottawa Impact-led commission targets decisions made Jan. 3

The case was the first in two lawsuits currently pending against the county.

A second lawsuit from a citizen group was filed against the board March 8, alleging the Ottawa Impact majority violated the state's Open Meetings Act at its inaugural meeting by communicating and making decisions behind closed doors beforehand. The lawsuit names the board as an entity and doesn't identify individual commissioners.

The suit seeks to nullify decisions made by the board Jan. 3, arguing Ottawa Impact commissioners were a de facto public body and required to adhere to OMA beginning Nov. 9 — the day after the general election — because, during that time, they knew they'd hold a majority on the board, discussed county business, made decisions affecting the county and gave instructions to county staff, which were followed.

Kallman, again defending the commission, responded to the lawsuit on April 5 asking for the case to be dismissed. Kallman argued that the complaint "fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted" and that a de facto official is not a legally recognizable label nor position under the law.

"Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel thoroughly investigated Defendant’s actions complained of in the above complaint and determined that Defendant committed no violations of the Open Meetings Act," Kallman said in answer to the OMA-based lawsuit.

On Jan. 4, Nessel announced her office was reviewing the actions taken during the meeting to determine if the Open Meetings Act was violated. After a nearly six-week review, she announced Feb. 16 that, although the OI commissioners' conduct was a “blatant violation of the public’s trust and the tenets of government transparency,” it didn't technically violate state law.

Nessel planned to urge state lawmakers to view Ottawa County as a reason to strengthen "sunshine laws," which include OMA and the state's Freedom of Information Act.

"There’s no question that there were things that occurred involving this county commission that were really disturbing,” Nessel told The Sentinel.

In an interview with The Sentinel, Nessel noted Ottawa County residents could still pursue legal action, which could set new precedent for what commissioners can and can't do before taking office.

A hearing on that matter has not been scheduled yet.

— Sarah Leach is executive editor of The Holland Sentinel. Contact her at sarah.leach@hollandsentinel.com. Follow her on Twitter @SentinelLeach.

This article originally appeared on The Holland Sentinel: Judge: Ottawa County health officer will remain in place — for now