Mayor Pro Tem Vote, Davenport House Matter Show Division Remains on the Saline City Council

Image

Not all wounds have healed on Saline City Council, dogged by division since the city manager hiring process last year.

Fresh evidence of the wounds was seen at Monday's meeting with Mayor Brian Marl nominating Councillor Nicole Rice for Mayor Pro Tem and Councillor Jenn Harmount as Presiding Officer.

The Mayor Pro Tem runs the meetings in the absence of the Mayor. The Presiding Officer swings the gavel when both are absent.

Monday's kerfuffle started innocently enough, with Councillor Janet Dillon making a motion to acknowledge rather than approve Marl's request. Dillon's issue was with the Presiding Officer position. 

"Have we ever received the legal opinion as to whether we have the authority to create that position, and that position would have authority?" Dillon asked.

Marl said he believes the council has that authority, but said it was a question for legal counsel.

The Presiding Officer position was established by the City Council in 2019.

Dillon said the position was created because the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem were traveling to Germany and Council wanted someone to run the meetings.

"We continued on with that practice, but I don't recall that we ever actually received clarification that we had the ability to do that," Dillon said.

She noted that the City Charter calls for a Mayor Pro Tem, but it does not call for any Presiding Officer.

She asked the City Council to pause the position so city lawyers can study the matter.

City Manager Dan Swallow said Council has the authority to appoint an individual to run the meeting if the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem are absent.

Marl said the position streamlines the process in situations when the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem are absent. He indicated he would vote for a motion to appoint Rice and Harmount to the positions.

Then Councillor Dillon made a statement, nominating Councillor Dean Girbach for the Mayor Pro Tem position. 

"Having served on City Council for over 10 years, including the past three years as Mayor Pro Tem, I have a clear understanding of the responsibilities this role entails. The position requires reliability, accountability, sound judgment, and trust. Mr. Girbach has consistently demonstrated these qualities. I would like to put his name forward for the 2026 Mayor Pro Tem," Dillon said.

In The Saline Post's history of covering City Council, no council member has ever put forth recommendations counter to the Mayor's.

Council passed the motion to acknowledge the motion.

Then it voted on Mayor Marl's request - voting 5-2 in favor of Rice and Harmount for the positions.

Dillon and Girbach voted against the motion. After the meeting, Girbach was asked about his vote.

"It was about what's happened over the last year during the hiring of the city manager," Girbach said.

Councillor Rice joined Marl, along with former Councillors Jack Ceo and Chuck Lesch, in freezing out Acting City Manager Elle Cole as one of the final four candidates during the search for a city manager. All four later voted against her for the position.

Rice simply thanked Council for supporting her for Mayor Pro Tem.

"This is my third year, second term. I'm really looking forward to continuing my service and I appreciate the confidence of my colleagues in designating me Mayor Pro Tem," Rice said during the Reports and Other Announcements section of the meeting.

At recent meetings, Rice has sternly advised council members to promote the Rec Center and efforts to increase memberships.

During the Work Session on the Davenport House purchase, council was showing signs of being split on the issue. Mayor Marl and Councillor Girbach both seemed to be supportive of the purchase. Councillors Tramaine Halsch, Harmount and Rice all seemed to indicate opposition.

During the discussion, Dillon and Girbach criticized Rec Center spending.

"You're looking at between $23,000 and $29,000 a month (to finance the purchase of The Davenport House). That's a very reasonable amount to adjust our budgets. We are looking at this with restraints, and yet we don't follow the same procedure with the Rec Center," Dillon said. "We are constantly using the general fund to subsidize the Rec Center."

Girbach compared the spending to finance the Davenport House to the Rec Center spending.

"We're spending seven hundred thousand dollars a year and probably more that's going right out the door because of the mismanagement of the Rec Center for the last five years," Girbach said, suggesting that five years of Rec Center deficits could fund the purchase of the Davenport House.

Rice criticized comments made by Dillon and Girbach.

"We just continue to bring up the recreation center in every conversation as if it's a negative asset. It's positive asset to our city, and we're finding money," Rice said. "It's a positive asset to our city."

One financing plan involves outright purchasing the Davenport House with cash ($3 million), and then, later in the year, bonding to replenish the general fund. For a few months, at least, the fund balance would drop to 8.6 percent.  

"We're not concerned about dipping down to 8.6 percent, then why aren't we investing that  money into our Rec Center?" Rice said. "It's not the right time to take on another big project. I'm not comfortable with spending this amount of money and having to fight every year in the budget cycle when we've essentially given up on doing that for the recreation center."

More News from Saline
5
I'm interested
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Replies

Disagree with Dillon's assessment of Girbach and relieved that Council voted otherwise regarding appointments. In our view, Girbach has been nothing but divisive, an originator of non-fact based and non-productive innuendo and allegation on more than one topic and strongly wedded to personal opinion and agenda rather than the good of the city. He is a negative force within the community and Council. It is time for him to go.

Relative to Davenport House, we love that landmark. That said, the city has numerous other priorities. As much as we would love a solution that maintains that structure, we believe that solution needs to involve outside funding sources. Perhaps grants, personal donations, etc. can be sought but for Saline to take on that expense feels irresponsible, particularly with no plans for income generation (do we really need a venue that will compete with long-standing Wellers and potentially put that historic building in jeopardy?).

Finally, the allegation that the rec center has been mismanaged is just another example of unfounded, divisive, and inappropriate statements. We are long-standing members and quite familiar with the asset it represents, the many benefits, the absolute commitment, creativity, and ingenuity of those running operations, and the significant void that would exist were it no longer there. We are also familiar with the denial of routine maintenance driven by some members of Council, including Girbach, over at least the last 10 years, denials driven by Girbach's personal feelings which ultimately led to catastrophic failures much more costly and disruptive than routine maintenance. If Dillon and Girbach believe there has been mismanagement, they need to look in the mirror and consider Girbach's continued maligning of the facility and resultant actions as a starting point, not those who are there every day coming up with creative solutions and programming while proactively seeking support from Council even in the face of one or two exceptionally hostile members (thank you to those members past and present who have been supportive and solution oriented in this space).

I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Denial of maintenance is a bit of a canard.
Girbach and Dillon and many other were under the understanding that the most recent "study" of the feasibility of the Rec Center was exactly that. Instead, they were given a report that was nothing but a "if you build it, they will come" request for money.
That entire process was tainted.
If I served on council, I'd be pretty disgusted with that and I'd probably want to dump the Rec Center too, just out of spite.
That said, I would not say the Rec Center is mismanaged.
I would say that it's fair to say that the city, on its own, can not afford the Rec Center. That's obvious. 
Filling the whole of last year's deficit is 1.2 mills or something. 
Tax everyone in the city 1 mill for nothing more than maintaining current service? Not even improving? Who is that fair to? And then charge memberships on top?
So there are 4 options to maintain it.
1) Privatize it or at least sign a significant private partner.
2) Another township or 2 get involved? Feels a bit pie in the sky. But Mayor Marl suggested there's something brewing with Pittsfield Township.
3) Saline Area Schools and raising the CARES millage. In a way, this the best option since the CARES millage once had a bigger role in funding Rec Center operations, but they reduced the millage as a deal with voters to pass the Sinking Fund Millage.
4) School/Community-based Rec Authority. Not just the Rec Center, but a real, true community Recreation budget, millage financed in the school district. See how it's done in the Rochester area.
And 5) I guess, Washtenaw Rec. But the county Rec Department has been watching this Rec Center flail in the water for 15 years and doing nothing to help.

I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Disagree with your assessments. That said, if you believe the process was flawed well . . . . perhaps, again, you should be looking at Girbach as he was involved in the process (don't know what, if any other Council members were). 

I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

And you (and Girbach) really need to stop beating the same dead arguments such as "if you build it they will come". There was nothing in the current proposal presentation that we saw that talked about building anything, it was a way forward strategy development project. And while we are talking about "if you build it they will come", let's again talk about the hundreds of thousands being thrown at the Senior Center which no members we have spoken with thought was needed in the least (and as we are seeing a fair amount of what is going on is not even for the benefit of seniors) and which serves only a segment of the population. Then the millions at the library and middle school. ALL of these structures are important to the residents, none serve everyone and together they are part of what makes Saline a desirable community. They are all assets to the community with Council seeming willing to throw literally millions at some for very much "nice to have" items while others are maligned for actually having needs as well. 

I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

This is like letting your children manage the family budget. Its like children choosing to buy toys and candy with the money meant for the house payment. Jack and the beanstalk fable was meant for this.

1
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive