Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Opinion City Manager topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City attorney finds no legal violation in city manager severance addendum; council rejects motion for independent review
Summary
Clawson's city attorney told the council the contract addendum for the city manager was legally developed and properly noticed; a motion to hire outside counsel for a supplemental legal review failed on a roll-call vote.
Clawson —s city attorney summarized his written opinion Tuesday, concluding that a recent severance addendum to the city manager—s contract was processed in compliance with open-meetings and notice requirements and that he found no legal violations.
The attorney told the council he reviewed how the amendment was drafted and implemented and that "as I deal with the legality...the agenda was proper, votes were proper...no violations." He warned that his role is to represent the city—s interests and that councilors seeking broader comparative opinions on ethics or alleged improprieties might need to pursue other remedies outside the city attorney—s office.
Council Member Tinland moved for an independent supplemental legal review to assess the severance provisions and any liabilities, specifically asking for an analysis applying Michigan Public Act 317. Supporters of the motion said an outside review would address community concerns about timing and potential financial exposure. The city attorney and other council members argued the council itself could not be the genesis of a review that would put the city in opposition to its own attorney—s opinion and that such action could be impractical and costly.
On roll call the motion failed: only one councilor voted in favor and the remaining members voted no; the measure did not pass.
What was in dispute: Members of the public and some councilors raised concerns about the contract—s severance language and whether councilors or staff had unduly limited options. The city attorney countered that his review focused on legality, not ethics, and said residents seeking further action should pursue administrative or legal channels outside the city's retained counsel.
Next steps: No independent review will be retained by the council. Councilors who supported additional review said residents retain the right to pursue complaints or legal action on their own behalf.
