Limited Time Offer. Become a Founder Member Now!

Public commenters urge esports events and raise allegations about court and guardian-ad-litem conduct

October 24, 2025 | Kent County, Michigan


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Public commenters urge esports events and raise allegations about court and guardian-ad-litem conduct
Two speakers addressed the Kent County Board of Commissioners during the general public-comment period.

Dee (identifying as chair of the Stockton Community Hub and a resident) described upcoming events and community initiatives, including plans to host college and high‑school esports competitions at DeVos Place and to discuss equity‑based housing and a revolving loan fund with philanthropic partners. Dee said they will appear on local television to promote the events and streaming activities.

Brandy Ritzma (identifying herself as a Kentwood resident) made allegations concerning her experience with the family‑court system and with a court-appointed guardian ad litem. Ritzma alleged that a guardian ad litem named Stacy Van Dyken “violated her fiduciary duties” and that she was isolated from her children, charged fees she cannot afford and denied access to audio/video and body‑camera records related to hearings. Ritzma cited statutory references when describing her claims, including phrases she read aloud as “MCL 7 12 a dot 17 c,” “MCL 7 12 a dot 18 f section 4,” “MCR 8.119,” and “42 USC subsection 407 a.” She said she had not spoken to her children in about a year and asserted that court clerks accepted private Venmo payments for transcripts.

What the record shows: these are public comments and the statements are allegations made by speakers. The board did not take formal action on the items raised during the public-comment period at this meeting, and the transcript does not include responses from the guardian ad litem or court staff. The transcript does show that Ritzma asked the county to provide audio/video copies and that she raised claims about due-process and fee handling in court proceedings.

Ending: No board action on these specific public-comment items is recorded in the transcript; both speakers finished the public-comment period and the meeting proceeded to other agenda items.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Michigan articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI