Meeting descends into legal confusion over timing of Hambley termination hearing

OTTAWA COUNTY — An impending hearing to fire Ottawa County Health Officer Adeline Hambley has been delayed by at least several days after an unusual meeting of the board of commissioners that included confusion over the group's own bylaws, state statute and a "short recess" that lasted over 90 minutes.

Commissioner Doug Zylstra, the board's lone Democrat, asked at the beginning of the board's regularly scheduled meeting Tuesday, Oct. 10, for a separate vote on scheduling a termination hearing for Hambley.

Board Chair Joe Moss filed notice Sept. 27 that a removal hearing was planned for Oct. 19 over allegations of "incompetence, misconduct and neglect of duty." Moss' allegations revolve largely around health department budget negotiations, which culminated in $4 million in board-orchestrated cuts and half a dozen layoffs for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1.

Zylstra, citing Michigan law, said a board of commissioners can only call a special meeting by a request of at least one-third of the board, in this case four commissioners of the 11-member board. Zylstra said the Oct. 19 meeting was requested only by Moss.

More: As budget approval loomed, Hambley received notice of disciplinary hearing

More: Ottawa County asks state to approve Kelly as interim health director

County corporate counsel Jack Jordan said Moss was following board rules, called bylaws, but Zylstra said the statute is included in those bylaws. Jordan said he was not "familiar" with the statute Zylstra was referencing. Moss called for a “short recess,” without providing a specific reason.

The recess lasted 94 minutes.

After the meeting resumed, Jordan said he appreciated Zylstra’s “input and diligence” — and indicated there were potential legal concerns with how the meeting was scheduled.

“We took a recess, and I think I’m supposed to say something very eloquent about what I discovered, but I can’t do that,” Jordan said. “I’m not conceding anything, but with the short notice and the amount of time, we don’t have enough time to do a proper, real proper legal research on it."

Jordan indicated a decision had been made during the recess, though it was unclear what conversations took place because they didn't happen in public view.

“What we're doing, we’re going to accept your motion," Jordan said. "I think Commissioner Moss is going to do that, and amend the meeting date in the notice, in compliance with MCL 46.10. We’re going to follow that to the letter.”

District 10 Commissioner Roger Bergman said he believed there was a quorum of commissioners meeting outside the board room during the recess, which Moss said was “incorrect." He said he spoke to legal counsel and the county clerk during the break.

District 7 Commissioner Rebekah Curran and District 11 Commissioner Alison Miedema both said they were not part of a quorum during the recess.

Commissioners voted 10-0 in favor of adding the item to Tuesday’s agenda. District 1 Commissioner Gretchen Cosby was absent.

At least one resident who attended Tuesday's meeting has filed a complaint with the Michigan Attorney General's Office alleging potential Open Meetings Act violations during the recess.

Rebecca Patrick, of Holland Township, filed the complaint shortly before 3 p.m. Oct. 10, saying she felt Jordan's comments indicated private discussions and decisions to which the full board and public were not privy.

"Mr. Jordan’s statement raises many questions," she wrote in her email to the AG's Office. "How did he know Commissioner Zylstra’s motion was going to be 'accepted'? What did that mean? Who would 'accept' it? Commissioner Moss? And if Commissioner Moss 'accepted' it, what did that mean?

"How did he know that the motion would pass, and that therefore it would be necessary to amend the special meeting date and notice? And most of all, what went on behind the scenes, with a quorum of commissioners all in one area, out of view of the public, in the middle of discussion and a vote on a motion?"

The AG's Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Sentinel has filed a Freedom of Information Act request for all Open Meetings Act violation allegations against the board since early January.

Later in the meeting, Moss turned to Vice Chair Sylvia Rhodea for a motion “based on counsel’s recommendation.” Rhodea moved to request a special meeting at 8 a.m. Monday, Oct. 23. District 9 Commissioner Roger Belknap supported the motion.

Curran asked why the date needed to be changed. Jordan explained that, in order to be in full compliance with the statute, the meeting needed to be properly noticed to the public at least 10 days ahead of time.

The vote to schedule the special meeting passed 7-3. Moss, Rhodea, Belknap, Miedema, Curran, Lucy Ebel and Kyle Terpstra voted “yes,” while Zylstra, Jacob Bonnema and Bergman voted “no.”

Zylstra said he doesn't agree with the charges against Hambley.

They include:

• Hambley demonstrated incompetence, misconduct and neglect of duty by making false public representations about budgetary scenarios.

• Hambley demonstrated incompetence, misconduct and neglect of duty by falsely claiming that she was not included in the budget process.

• Hambley demonstrated incompetence, misconduct and neglect of duty by failing to cooperate in the budget process.

• Hambley demonstrated incompetence, misconduct and neglect of duty by making false claims that encouraged and caused confusion, anxiety, fear and panic in the community.

Zylstra said staff have the right to communicate with the board and the public on matters affecting their department and “shouldn’t face retribution for that.”

The charges are the culmination of several tense exchanges between Hambley, County Administrator John Gibbs and Moss after Moss announced in August his intention to cut the department's budget by nearly 60 percent.

Hambley said her attempts to negotiate with Gibbs were rebuffed, so she turned to the department's social media accounts to publish information on the staff, programs and services under threat. Days later, Hambley and her staff were locked out of those accounts, and Gibbs and Moss co-signed a "press release" they posted to the pages, calling Hambley "insubordinate" and "unprofessional."

Hambley refuted the characterizations in a series of press conferences and media releases, saying she's only advocating for the health and welfare of the public.

"As the appointed health officer, it's a matter of law that I’m an administrative officer of the health department. I take actions and determinations necessary and appropriate to carry out the local health department’s function, delegated under the law to protect public health and prevent disease," she said.

"So, there’s not a chain of command breached when I am communicating information to the public that is important to public health."

After the meeting Oct. 10, Hambley's attorney, Sarah Riley-Howard, released a cache of communications and emails between Hambley and other health department staff and administration and commissioners.

Howard said there is definitive proof in those emails that refutes claims made during public meetings by Moss, Rhodea, Cosby and Gibbs that Hambley didn't respond to requests for information.

Howard said the charges Moss has leveled against Hambley are "consistent with the commission’s vote — led by Moss — in its first meeting Jan. 3 attempting to demote Hambley to 'interim' health officer without a hearing, even a sham hearing, to comply with state law."

Hambley sued commissioners in February, claiming the board's Ottawa Impact majority attempted to unlawfully demote her and repeatedly interfered with her state-authorized health duties.

On April 18, a circuit court judge in Muskegon granted Hambley a preliminary injunction that allowed her to remain in her role until a trial could take place later this year. The Michigan Court of Appeals denied commissioners the right to appeal the lower court’s ruling, but later granted a narrow window to appeal certain aspects — mainly whether the judge made legal errors in reaching her decision.

Subscribe: Receive unlimited digital access to your local news coverage

Howard said the circuit court judge directed Hambley not be removed while her case was pending, but after the Michigan Court of Appeals said the county could hold a hearing in the limited circumstances authorized by state statute, Moss attempted to "justify his goal all along" in removing her.

Howard released more than 550 pages of communications — some that date back to December 2022 — that show Hambley repeatedly extending offers to meet with various commissioners to discuss topics of concerns they raised.

Howard noted several times where Gibbs and commissioners did not respond to Hambley's offers.

The COA hearing is scheduled for 10 a.m. Wednesday, Oct. 11, in Grand Rapids.

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

This article originally appeared on The Holland Sentinel: Meeting descends into legal confusion over timing of Hambley termination hearing