It’s an epic clash of the titans: the Livingston County Board of Commissioners and the county’s courts are at war.
In a lawsuit filed with the Michigan Court of Appeals on March 11, 2024, the Livingston County Courts — Circuit, District and Probate — are claiming that the Livingston County Board of Commissioners is trying to starve them of the constitutionally required funding they need to operate as the county sits pretty atop a general fund balance $30 million high. (CLICK HERE to see the county’s budget as filed with the courts’ lawsuit.)
Why would the county board want to squeeze the courts?
The one area in red, red Livingston County where Democrats have had consistent, long-lasting, high-impact success is in the court system, and it’s because of gubernatorial appointments. Half of Livingston County’s judges were appointed by Democratic governors, and if you think that fact doesn’t stick in the craw of some of our elected Republicans, well, you haven’t been paying close enough attention.
With the recent retirement of Chief Judge Mike Hatty (appointed by Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm), Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer appointed Howell attorney Susan Longsworth, a well-known Democrat. Whitmer also appointed Circuit Judge Matt McGivney and District Judge Daniel Bain.
District Judge Shauna Murphy was appointed by Republican Gov. Rick Snyder, while Circuit Judge Suzanne Geddis, a known Republican, and Probate Court Judge Miriam Cavanaugh, whose political party is unknown, were elected to their seats.
To think the politics behind the judicial appointments isn’t playing into the squeeze the commissioners are putting on the court system is to ignore who they are.
The leaders of the all-male, all-Republican, Livingston County Board of Commissioners are hyper-partisan. These are not Republican commissioners who serve to practice fiscal conservation and keep the county running smoothly; these are Republicans who have branded Livingston a “constitutional” county, and who have among their ranks several who love playing political hardball.
Commissioner Wes Nakagiri — once the board’s chair and probably its most radical member — is guided by his personal political proclivities. When he was chairperson, we watched as he stripped abortion coverage from the health care plans of the county’s non-union employees. We saw him replace a conservative representative to the Huron Clinton Metroparks board with someone way, way farther right because the Metroparks provide diversity, equity and inclusion training for its employees. We’ve even seen him attempt to deny a woman a seat on a county board because she once voted in a Democratic primary.
Nakagiri has also made it clear that he thinks Livingston County’s court system is overstaffed and underworked.
While the Livingston County court system is a separate — and supposedly co-equal — branch of government, it is dependent on the Livingston County Board of Commissioners for its funding. And the county board is making it clear that it wants the court system to shrink.
A little background: The post-pandemic period and low unemployment rates have made hiring way more challenging than in the past, and many U.S. employers have been raising wages to bring more workers on board. (Just think of $17 an hour to flip burgers.) Livingston County is no exception.
So, in March 2022, the Livingston County Board of Commissioners hired MGT Consulting to conduct a wage study of its non-union employees, including those at the courts. The study was to ensure that the county’s wage structure was “competitive with current economic and market conditions,” and helpful to “recruit and retain a talented workforce.”
MGT Consulting completed its study in October 2022, and recommended wage increases and position re-classifications for Livingston County’s non-union employees. The recommendations were adopted unanimously by the Livingston County Board of Commissioners at its Oct. 24, 2022, meeting, and became effective for all non-union employees, including those in the courts, on Jan. 1, 2023.
The Courts had been negotiating with the Michigan Association of Public Employees (MAPE), to which its union employees belong, because its collective bargaining agreement was expiring on Dec. 31, 2022.
A tentative agreement was reached on a two-year contract to run from Jan. 1, 2023, to Dec. 31, 2025. A provision of that contract required that the court system’s union employees get the same wage increases as its non-union workers, and that the courts and the union conduct a wage study before Aug. 1, 2023. (CLICK HERE for the bargaining agreement as filed with the courts’ lawsuit.)
So the courts hired MGT Consulting — the same company the county used; it completed its study on Sept. 22, 2023, and just as it had with the county’s non-union study, MGT Consulting recommended re-classifications and wage increases for the courts’ union employees consistent with what the county had adopted.
The cost to do the study was $22,800; it was expected that cost would be covered by the county, but the county board refused to pay, so the courts had to find money to cover the expense in its existing budget.
Other cuts to the courts’ proposed budget were made by the commissioners.
On Sept. 29, 2023, the courts received notice that a discussion of the approval and implementation of its union wage study was removed from the agenda of the county board’s personnel committee by its chair, Commissioner Frank Sample, and that the county refused to consider the matter further.
On Oct. 16, 2023, the court system learned that a total of $163,220 was cut from its proposed budget, cuts to which it said it did not object “in the spirit of cooperation given that County administration’s proposed budget for the Courts included funding for the implementation of the Courts’ Union Wage Study.” (The cost to implement that union wage study is approximately $213,000 for 2024, assuming 100% staffing of all existing court positions for the entire year.)
Court administrators and then-Chief Judge Michael Hatty attended the commission’s Finance and Asset Management Committee meeting on Oct. 30, 2023, which was to include a discussion on implementing the Courts’ union wage study. Judge Hatty spoke during Call to the Public, but after that, the board refused to take action.
On top of that, current Board Chair Jay Drick — who ran unsuccessfully multiple times for a judgeship, and who was once the court’s magistrate — made a motion to whack $200,000 more from the courts’ budget.
Drick’s motion was seconded by Frank Sample, and it passed with Drick, Sample and commissioners Nick Fiani, Wes Nakagiri, Roger Deaton and Jay Gross voting for it. David Domas and Martin Smith voted against it, and Doug Helzerman was absent.
The courts claim that the “decision to strike an additional $200,000 from the Court’s 2024 budget had never been discussed, and there was little discussion at the Oct. 30, 2023 (meeting) about the rationale or reasons for such a cut.”
The Courts claimed that since its proposed budget had already been cut by $163,220, the additional $200,000 cut resulting from Drick’s motion, coupled with the county’s refusal to pay for the union wage study, “threatened the serviceability of the Courts for fiscal year 2024.”
Then-Chief Judge Hatty authorized the lawsuit against the county on behalf of the Circuit and District courts; Chief Judge Miriam Cavanaugh of the Probate Court did the same.
The budget the county adopted included $368,000 in total cuts to the court system, and did not fund the $213,000 to implement the Courts’ union wage study, making for a shortfall of nearly $600,000. And while some may argue that it’s comparing apples and oranges, there were no cuts made to the budget of the Livingston County Sheriff’s Office, and all its employees — union and non-union — received the same 3% raises.
On January 19, 2024, MAPE sent a letter to the courts and the county threatening to sue for repudiation of the collective bargaining agreement, unfair labor practices, violation of the Public Employment Relations Act, and violation of the Equal Protection Clauses of the Michigan and U.S. constitutions.
A March 5, 2024, facilitated mediation session between the county and the courts failed.
CLICK HERE to read the courts’ lawsuit.
CLICK HERE to read the county’s response to the courts’ lawsuit.
Story edited to clarify that it was at the commission’s Finance and Asset Management Committee meeting on Oct. 30, 2023, that Commissioner Jay Drick moved to strike another $200,000 from the Livingston County court system’s budget.
