County Ethics Board dismisses complaints against officials
The Macomb County Ethics Board has dismissed nine complaints made against various county officials mostly over use of government resources for campaign purposes and lack of disclosures.
Board members last week voted unanimously in eight of the nine votes at its meeting to dismiss the complaints on the basis of “lack of subject matter jurisdiction” without further discussion at its April 15 meeting in Mount Clemens. One dismissal was passed 4-1, and one was dismissed due to lack of “personal jurisdiction.”
Dismissed complaints include one filed last year against county Republican Prosecutor Peter Lucido by attorney and Democratic activist Mark Brewer, two against County Executive Mark Hackel, one each against four members of Hackel’s staff and one each against county Sheriff’s Anthony Wickersham and former county Board of Commissioners chair Don Brown.
Brewer said this week he was not informed of the decision and did not respond to a further request for comment.
While board members didn’t comment at the meeting and one contacted by phone declined to respond, the board’s attorney, John Schapka, said he hopes the dismissals put an end to people using the board to file politically motivated complaints.
“The Ethics Board was never intended to be used as a tool for politically motivated in-fighting, politically motivated intrigue or politically motivated axe grinding,” Schapka said.
Several of the complaints centered on claims officials used county resources for personal or political purposes by posting photos on campaign web or social media sites that included county property.
In most or all of the instances, there is no evidence that the official is the one who posted the photo or photos, Schapka noted. And even if it could be proven, the county property’s inclusion in the photo was incidental.
Schapka, who also is the county’s lead attorney, provided memos to the board on each of the complaints, which were presumably discussed during a nearly hour-long closed session at the April 18 meeting. The memos are protected from disclosure by attorney-client privilege.
Christopher Stump, who alleged ethical violations by Hackel, Wickersham and Brown due to the photos’ use, declined to comment. Stump works for attorney Todd Perkins, who has represented Lucido in legal matters.
The complaint against Lucido was not addressed until recently. It was put on hold due to Lucido filing a lawsuit against Schapka and the Ethics Board last year. The board has been removed, and most of the case against Schapka has been dismissed.
Complaints filed by Warren resident Paul Kardasz against Hackel and his associates alleged that three employees and a contractor failed to disclose they had also worked for Hackel’s campaign, and that Andrew McKinnon, one of Hackel’s five deputy executives, should not have talked to a newspaper reporter on behalf of Hackel.
Schapka said the county’s disclosure requirements do not include revealing the matters alleged by Kardarsz.
In regard to McKinnon’s media comments, the deputy executive is protected by the First Amendment, according to Schapka.
In an email response to the rulings, Kardarsz criticized the board and Schapka for not only the decisions but also the process, noting the lack of discussion by board members other than the standard remark over jurisdiction. According to Kardasz, that reveals a control over the board by Schapka, who serves at the will of Hackel.
“This opaque and irregular process, devoid of transparency or substantive justification, exemplifies the board’s bias and Schapka’s influence in shielding Hackel’s administration, further eroding public trust in ethical governance,” Kardarsz said. “Schapka’s dual capacity as Hackel’s appointee and board advisor, raises grave concerns regarding bias, particularly in light of his dismissal of my evidence as politically motivated without addressing the substantive transparency issues I presented.”
Kardarsz alleged his complaints were excluded from the board’s agenda that is posted online and added them at the meeting, “thereby denying me due notice and opportunity for public comment.”
Kardasz also expressed concern he had not heard from county officials after he wrote a letter to the Board of Commissioners citing weaknesses in the Ethics Ordinance.
“Their refusal to discuss the ordinance’s deficiencies, my evidence of disclosure violations, or documented conflicts of interest reveals a collective preference for public relations tactics over substantive dialogue to address the crisis in ethical oversight,” Kardasz said. “This silence places an undue burden on citizens like myself to expose and challenge their inaction, further eroding public trust in Macomb County’s governance.”
In that letter, Kardasz agreed with Schapka’s concern that ethics complaints can be motivated by politics instead of ethics.
The ordinance’s vagueness encourages complaints that can “be rooted in political interests, particularly during election cycles,” Kardasz wrote. “Their intent may not be to prevent the misuse of public resources but to inflict political harm or generate headlines.”
Kardasz called for a “temporary halt on ethics board actions, and a requirement for ethics board members to file personal disclosure statements … to ensure fairness and accountability.”
He has said Ethics Board Chair Steve Krajnik and board member Bryan Padgett should have disclosed they contributed to the election campaign of Christina Hines, Lucido’s Democratic opponent in last fall’s election when they were considering the complaint against Lucido.
Schapka has said the Ethics Ordinance likely will be the subject of revisions in the coming months that will go to county commissioners for approval.
Ethics Board members are nominated by the county executive, subject to approval by the county commissioners.
This article originally appeared on The Detroit News: County Ethics Board dismisses complaints against officials
