Oakland County board adopts permanent rules after rejecting changes on counsel access and recording

The Oakland County Board of Commissioners on Jan. 13, 2025, adopted a set of permanent rules for the board after rejecting multiple proposed amendments that sought to expand access to corporation counsel opinions and to require video recording for more meetings.

The main motion to adopt the permanent rules was moved by Commissioner Brendan Johnson and seconded by Commissioner Charlie Cavell; the board approved the rules by a vote of 11 yays to 7 nays. Supporters said the rules provide a stable framework for board operations; opponents argued some amendments were needed to increase transparency.

The debate centered on several amendments introduced from the floor. Commissioner Michael Spitz (identified in debate as “Spitz”/“Spiz”) moved an amendment to change items 3b and 3c to allow the minority caucus to seek legal opinions through the minority caucus chair and to require that both majority and minority caucus chairs receive copies of all legal opinions (including an addition regarding outside counsel). That amendment failed on a 7–11 vote. Commissioner Spitz argued the board — not the chair alone — should be considered the client for attorney-client privilege and pushed for broader access to legal opinions, saying in the meeting, “I think attorney client privilege is the proper wording...the client is the board of commissioners, not the chair.”

Commissioner Nelson brought multiple amendments focused on transparency and document custody. One Nelson amendment would have required that corporation counsel opinions issued at the board's request be kept on file in the office of the chief of staff and made available for review by any commissioner while maintaining confidentiality; another would have required that any meeting consisting of a quorum where public business was discussed be video recorded and broadcast consistent with full-board procedures. Each of those amendments failed after roll calls that produced insufficient affirmative votes (vote tallies reported as 7 yays, 11 nays for the listed failed amendments).

Supporters of Nelson's proposals described them as efforts to “increase accountability and transparency” and to reduce "overrepresentation of legislative leadership over weighting committee votes,” while opponents — including the board chair — urged maintaining long-standing practice regarding the handling of confidential corporation counsel opinions. Chair David T. Woodward referenced the board's existing practice and urged commissioners to preserve the established procedures; one commissioner framed the issue as maintaining a two-decade practice.

Commissioners who spoke for the transparency proposals suggested technical controls could limit distribution while allowing broader access. Commissioner Spitz noted there are software tools used by legal firms that could limit access to privileged documents while making them available to authorized commissioners.

After the amendments failed, the board voted on the main resolution adopting the permanent rules. The clerk announced: “Mister chair, you have 11 yays, 7 nays. A sufficient number voting the affirmative. The resolution is adopted.”

The adoption resolves the board's internal rules for the coming session; commissioners who dissented said they wanted stronger access and public-records provisions, while supporters said the adopted rules preserve existing privilege and committee structures. There were no immediate additional policy actions tied to the vote; the board moved next to committee assignments and appointments.

Ending: The adopted rules will govern Board of Commissioners procedures for the next session. Commissioners who advocated for changes indicated they may bring further proposals in future meetings.