Drawing fire for you
Earlier this month, a resident reached out to me expressing concern that a council member’s home had appeared to be vacant for some time, raising a question of her eligibility for the position. I don’t know the particulars of that council member’s situation (though I knew it was plausible that she was spending a considerable amount of time away from her house given what I did know), so I reached out to our city manager, Justin Breyer, to get clarification as to whether the council member still met the eligibility requirements. His response did not provide a definitive answer and actually began by alerting me to how I would go about bringing the matter to Council’s attention. I then reached out to the council member, but did not receive a reply. A few days later, I reached out to Mayor Keough, and also did not receive a definitive answer. I then asked to discuss the matter at our most recent council meeting (9/26; see beginning page 87 here https://cms9files1.revize.com/cityofdextermi/City_Council/2022/Packets/2022-09-26-CC-P.pdf).
At the beginning of the meeting, two members of the public addressed Council about this topic:
Joe Semifero, currently running for a spot on Council, stated that these were false allegations and that it, “calls into question the person that deems that a reliable source.” You can watch his statement here: https://youtu.be/0VZXTS_DGbI?t=1959.
Ray Tell, a former council member, also indicated that he took issue with the fact that the question came from an unnamed “reliable” source. You can watch his statement here: https://youtu.be/0VZXTS_DGbI?t=2303.
When it came time to discuss the topic, I began with the following statement (https://youtu.be/0VZXTS_DGbI?t=8513):
I understand emotions are high. The question of what it takes to be eligible for council is an important question; one of consequence. And we are elected to have difficult conversations. And although it might be uncomfortable, I have no problem taking flak at a council meeting for raising a resident concern. That’s part of the job. I am here to be their voice.
In my council member report, I mentioned how one way we can prevent and deter crime is to get to know your neighbors. I also referenced the neighborhood watch program which pretty much literally asks you to watch or otherwise surveil your neighborhood.
In my letter, I stated: “Together, you can help monitor the area in and around your home and their businesses. You will learn, if you haven’t already, what types of behaviors and activities are typical so that you can better recognize those that are suspicious.”
Although it was suggested otherwise, I want to be clear that you can “keep an eye” on what’s going on in your neighborhood—often without even trying—and happening to know the comings and goings of your neighbors makes you observant and nothing else. For example, more people are working home than ever before. Perhaps the floor plan of your house affords you a good view of your street. Mine certainly does. I know the comings and goings of my neighbors not because I’m trying, but because I’m in and around my house much of the time.
With respect to this agenda item, a question was raised by a resident, I couldn’t answer it, so I reached out to Justin. His response did not provide a definitive answer and actually began by alerting me to how I would go about bringing the matter to Council’s attention. I then reached out to Donna, but did not get a reply. A few days later, I reached out to the mayor, and also did not receive a definitive answer.
It was less than two years ago that Julie Knight resigned her position because she was going to be spending a significant amount of time out of town. So, when this question came to me, I immediately thought of that.
Clarification on the issue of whether and to what extent being out of town affects one’s eligibility for council is relevant to all of us at this table and to is relevant to any future council member. Although a specific council member is the motivating example, I don’t want this conversation to be about this person or her specific circumstances unless or until it becomes clear, following the consultation of our legal counsel, that we need to do so.
When a resident reaches out to the city to complain about a neighbor’s long grass or unshoveled sidewalk, the complainants name is only shared if legal proceedings become part of the resolution. In my view, this is a similar situation. If we end up pursuing some specific action regarding Donna’s eligibility, the complainants name would become public.
But, again, my hope is that we can begin by getting some clarity on this issue from our legal counsel: Is maintaining a principal residence exemption sufficient for maintaining eligibility for council? Could I maintain my PRE, travel extensively, but return for public meetings, and still be eligible for council? I honestly don’t know. And that’s what I’m hoping to get clarity on tonight. I see that Scott Munzel is here tonight, so my preference is to begin by hearing from him.
Unfortunately, the conversation immediately devolved into a series of character attacks based on nothing but emotions. Both Council Members Arab and Hubbard questioned the timing of my request. Why hadn’t I spoken up sooner? Was this just some ploy to gain traction in advance of the upcoming election? To be clear, my term ends in two years. You will not see my name on the ballot this November (or sooner if you’re voting absentee). I spoke up as soon as the resident concern became known to me. It’s as simple as that.
I heard repeatedly that my advancement of this “false allegation” from an “unnamed source” called into question my character and my motivations. Council Member Arab went on to say: “This is not the first time this line of questioning and these line of accusations has come to this council and this city. And it’s very, very unfortunate, but also very telling, that we are seeing these sort of things only from one council member and only from one person that has brought it to this city. […] It’s very telling of your character.” (https://youtu.be/0VZXTS_DGbI?t=9274) Ironically, Council Member Arab went on to say that I raised this question to “smear somebody’s character” (https://youtu.be/0VZXTS_DGbI?t=9384).
What is perhaps most disappointing about the meeting is that our city attorney was asked to be, and was in fact, in attendance for this agenda item. And although at least three council members indicated they wanted to hear what the attorney had to say, he was never formally invited to the podium to speak. Mayor Keough, in his role as chairperson, has the authority to invite audience members to participate during the meeting. And yet he never did invite our attorney up; rather, he said he didn’t want to see the issue go any further (https://youtu.be/0VZXTS_DGbI?t=9602). I reiterated that I would like to see the topic of council member eligibility, in general, back on the agenda so that we could get the clarity we need (https://youtu.be/0VZXTS_DGbI?t=9924). Mayor Keough then told me perhaps I would consider reaching out to the Michigan Municipal League (MML)—even as our own city attorney was sitting in the audience, paid to be there (https://youtu.be/0VZXTS_DGbI?t=10001). The conversation then concluded.
I made the following statement during council comments at the close of the meeting (https://youtu.be/0VZXTS_DGbI?t=10910):
My role on council is to advocate for residents. When they reach out with concerns, I do my best to address them and the get the answers they need. I know my motivations. My family and friends can attest to my character. Will I get it right every time? No. In hindsight, I would have revised this to be an agenda item about council eligibility in general. Although it’s not hard to imagine that my motivations for doing so even then would have been challenged.
It is clear some on council and in the community still harbor ill will towards me. That’s your and their prerogative. At the same time, there are many more in the community whose trust I have earned.
I want to close by reciting a passage by Theodore Roosevelt that has motivated me in times past and comes to mind tonight:
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”
Why am I sharing this with you? Because I want you to see for yourself to what lengths I go to serve you. I take my role on council very seriously. I take the concerns you bring to me very seriously. I will keep showing up for you in the best way I know how. And I will never throw you under the bus to save face.
Although I haven’t yet been able to reach Ray Tell (who was not at the meeting on my behalf; I have never met or spoken with him), I do want to close by saying I appreciate the comments he made at the end of the meeting (https://youtu.be/0VZXTS_DGbI?t=11496):
“First, I want to acknowledge Ms. Griffin for her tenacity. That’s something I admire in a person. You feel there was something that needed to be said, you dug at it. It’s the same thing I would’ve done. […] You are very by the book, which is something I’m not used to, but that’s the way you are and that can be a real help to this council because somebody needs to see the book. […] You got grit; no shit.”
Sincerely,
Jamie