Commission releases legal opinion after heated public debate over DDA appointments

The Sault Ste. Marie City Commission on Monday voted unanimously to waive attorney-client privilege and publish a legal opinion about who may legally be seated as the city’s representative on the Downtown Development Authority board.

The action came after weeks of public debate and two packed comment periods in which residents accused the mayor of taking a seat on the DDA without following the charter or the statutory process. Commissioner Rubenstein moved to release the opinion; the motion carried without dissent.

Why it matters: the legal opinion addresses whether the mayor or the city manager — or their designees — hold the authority to appoint the municipal representative to the DDA. The question bears on recent DDA meetings and personnel actions that residents say affected downtown governance and the DDA director’s position.

Longtime downtown critic Matt Wilks used his public time to challenge the mayor’s conduct. “Mayor Gary violated MCL 125.4204,” Wilks said, citing state statute language on authority and appointment. He argued the city manager must initiate the designation and that the mayor’s unilateral action created an appearance of bias and possible conflicts of interest.

Nancy Rose, who reviewed past agendas and minutes, told commissioners she had tracked multiple instances in 2022–2025 where the DDA board recommended appointments that were later affirmed by the commission. “I called bull on that, Mr. Mayor,” Rose said, arguing that the recent sequence of events diverged from long-standing local practice.

Mayor Gary framed the decision to release the opinion as a move toward transparency. After the vote he said the written legal analysis would be posted on the city website and distributed to DDA members. “What I care about the most is moving our downtown forward,” he said, adding that he welcomed honest conversations with downtown business owners and stakeholders.

City staff described the legal opinion as prepared by McGraw Morris PC (lead attorney Kevin Kilby) and emphasized that the city — not the commission — holds privilege over attorney communications; releasing the opinion required a commission vote.

What happens next: the written opinion will be posted on the city website and provided to DDA board members. The release is intended to clarify statutory requirements and local charter language; it does not itself change appointments retroactively. Any changes to DDA membership or further legal steps would follow from that clarification or from separate formal motions.

Provenance: Commission discussion and the motion to release the legal opinion occurred during communications and public comment (topic began in the meeting packet and discussion at the communications agenda item).