City Commission Meeting - May 18, 2026

The meeting of the Lapeer City Commission on May 18, 2026, was dominated by a contentious debate regarding a bill from the law firm Bodman PLC and the scheduling of City Manager Mike Womack's performance evaluation. Commissioner Joshua C. Atwood and Commissioner Stefan Brady raised concerns regarding the transparency of legal billing and the legitimacy of the evaluation timeline, leading to heated exchanges regarding parliamentary procedure and attorney-client privilege.

While much of the meeting involved procedural disputes, the commission also addressed significant local issues, including budget adoption, the city fee schedule, and a costly emergency repair for the pickleball courts at Cranom Park. The meeting concluded with unresolved tension regarding the legality of the current evaluation process and potential contract violations.

• City Manager Performance Evaluation: Debates over the timeline, contract compliance, and the validity of adding the review to the agenda.
• sBodman PLC Invoices: Disputes over whether specific legal bills should be separated from the general bill listing and issues of confidentiality.
• Park Infrastructure: An emergency budget transfer to address soil issues for the new pickleball courts.
• Budget and Fees: Adoption of the 2026-2027 fiscal year budget and the city fee schedule.

• Jeramy Hing: Mayor
• Joshua C. Atwood: Commissioner
• Stefan Brady: Commissioner
• Linda Glisman: Commissioner
• Melissa Petrie: Commissioner / Mayor Pro-Tem
• Lynne McCarthy: Commissioner
• Mike Womack: City Manager
• Chris Turn: Representative from "Prank for a Cause"
• West Weber Jr.: City resident
• Tona Osco: Resident
• Kella Carter: Resident
• Hannah: Staff member (Clerk/Finance)

• Agenda Amendment: Commissioner Atwood requested the addition of items G4 (pickleball courts) and G5 (city manager evaluation postponement) to the agenda 6:06.
• Approval of Minutes: The commission approved the minutes from the May 4, 2026, meeting 11:58.
• The Bodman PLC Dispute: Commissioner Brady attempted to "demand" the separation of a specific invoice from the general bill listing for individual discussion 28:31. This led to a debate over whether the bill was already paid and whether the commission was violating privilege by discussing it 40:35.
• Pickleball Court Emergency: It was revealed that the ground under the new tennis courts at Cranom Park was unstable due to waterlogged soil 1:38:55. The commission discussed an undercut and stone aggregate solution costing up to $89,610 1:40:22.
• Budget Adoption: The commission officially adopted the budget for the 2026-2027 fiscal year 1:27:09.

• May 18, 2026: Date of the meeting 4:42.
• June 1, 2026: The proposed date for the City Manager's performance review 7:16.
• July 1, 2026: Effective date for the new city fee schedule 1:28:12.
• Contractual Deadline: The City Manager's contract specifies a review "on or about May 8th" 2:06:56.

• Budgetary Needs: The transfer of $80,000 from the disc golf budget to the pickleball project was proposed to address soil stability issues discovered during demolition 1:41:04.
• Contractual Compliance: A significant portion of the debate focused on ensuring the City Manager's evaluation follows the 30-day review period stipulated in his contract 2:12:37.
• Transparency vs. Privilege: Commissioner Brady argued that the refusal to discuss the Bodman bill was an attempt to hide information from the public, while Mayor Hing and Commissioner McCarthy argued they were protecting attorney-client privilege 46:43, 53:08.

• Approval of Agenda: Motion by Commissioner Glisman, second by Commissioner Petrie to approve the agenda with additions G4 and G5 6:28. Passed unanimously 11:36.
• Approval of Minutes: Motion by Commissioner Glisman, second by Commissioner Petrie to approve May 4, 2026, minutes 11:58. Passed unanimously 12:42.
• Approval of Consent Agenda: Motion by Commissioner Atwood, second by Commissioner Petrie to approve the consent agenda 25:13. Passed unanimously 25:13.
• Approval of Bill Listing ($734,236.30): Motion by Commissioner Glisman, second by Commissioner Petrie to approve the bill listing 25:56. After a failed attempt to remove the Bodman invoice 41:18, the motion was put to a vote [125:46].
  • Roll Call:
    • Commissioner Brady: No
    • Commissioner Glisman: Yes
    • Commissioner McCarthy: Yes
    • Commissioner Petrie: Yes
    • Result: Motion carries [125:46].
• Adoption of 2026-2027 Budget: Motion by Commissioner Brady, second by Commissioner Petrie to adopt the budget and appropriations 1:27:09.
  • Roll Call:
    • Commissioner Glisman: Yes
    • Commissioner McCarthy: Yes
    • Commissioner Petrie: Yes
    • Commissioner Atwood: Yes
    • Commissioner Brady: Yes
    • Result: Motion carries 1:27:50.
• Adoption of City Fee Schedule: Motion by Commissioner Glisman, second by Commissioner McCarthy to adopt the fee schedule effective July 1, 2026 1:28:32. Passed unanimously 1:34:35.
• Approval of Component Unit Budgets: Motion by Commissioner McCarthy, second by Commissioner Atwood to adopt various authority budgets 1:35:42. Passed unanimously 1:37:27.
• Approval of Special Assessments: Motion by Commissioner McCarthy, second by Commissioner Atwood to approve 2017 assessments 1:38:10. Passed unanimously 1:38:32.
• Pickleball Court Project/Budget Transfer: Motion by Commissioner Glisman, second by Commissioner McCarthy to approve the $89,610 expenditure and transfer $80,000 from disc golf funds 1:42:49.
  • Roll Call:
    • Commissioner Atwood: Yes
    • Commissioner Brady: Yes
    • Commissioner Glisman: Yes
    • Commissioner McCarthy: Yes
    • Commissioner Petrie: Yes
    • Result: Motion carries 2:04:27.
• Postponement of City Manager Review: Motion by Commissioner Atwood to postpone the review to June 1, 2026 2:06:13.
  • Roll Call:
    • Commissioner Atwood: Yes
    • Commissioner Brady: No
    • Commissioner Glisman: Yes
    • Commissioner McCarthy: Yes
    • Commissioner Petrie: Yes
    • Result: Motion carries 2:06:13.

• Legal Review: The commission to consult with the city attorney regarding the validity of the "demand for division" of the question 29:54.
• Budgetary Work: Staff to continue working with engineers to attempt to reduce the $89,610 cost for the pickleball project 1:40:22.
• Evaluation Completion: The City Manager to review the provided documentation within the 30-day contractual window 2:12:37.

Overall Sentiment

The single viewer comment is highly critical and satirical, expressing frustration with local political dynamics and suggesting hyperbolic or absurd solutions to municipal decisions.

Recurring Themes

• Criticism of interpersonal dynamics between Commissioner Brady and Mayor Hing.
• Satirical suggestions regarding the reallocation of municipal funds.

Notable Comments

"Commissioner Brady has once again shown his dislike of the Mayor by only offering up a plaque. We should be taking that money and putting it with private donations to take down the courthouse and construct the new Hing Ballroom." — @RANDYLAWRENCE-p3h, 1 likes

Overall Sentiment

The audience sentiment is overwhelmingly critical, hostile, and disappointed. Much of the chat focuses on perceived unprofessionalism, disrespect, and lack of transparency from Mayor Hing, with viewers expressing frustration over the conduct of the board and the handling of city business.

Chat Timeline

[13:56 – 42:37] The conversation begins with procedural observations regarding public comment, quickly shifting to criticism of the Mayor's interpersonal conduct and attitude toward other board members.

[42:37 – 72:17] The chat becomes highly accusatory as viewers debate confidentiality and leadership. Discussions center on the Mayor's behavior and a suggestion to FOIA his handwritten notes.

[72:17 – 98:57] Tensions rise as viewers react to specific voting procedures and interpersonal dynamics between commissioners. The chat criticizes the lack of accurate information during votes and labels the Mayor's behavior as "embarrassing" and "disrespectful."

[98:57 – 152:46] The final segment involves reactions to specific committee discussions, including the hiring of outside lawyers and contract details. Viewers express strong disapproval of the Mayor's leadership, contrasting his style with other commissioners.

Notable Messages

42:37 "why's the mayor have to be a jerk to other board members?" — @mundanethings8515

1:12:17 "also - we can FOIA the mayors hand written notes from the meeting tonight - those notes belong to the public." — @mundanethings8515

1:30:06 "This is embarrassing. How can one vote on something without appropriate and accurate information?" — @KO_TransparencyMatters

1:36:58 "Mayor is disrespectful. When a commissioner is speaking, you listen. Interrupting, making rude comments, and getting out of your seat to talk to someone when another member is talking is very rude!" — @KO_TransparencyMatters

[133:33] "Hing is driving out one of the best things for the city of Lapeer." — @mundanethings8515

Community Sentiment on Key Moments

• Leadership Conduct: A significant portion of the chat is dedicated to criticizing Mayor Hing's tone, accusing him of being a "know it all" and acting disrespectfully toward other commissioners.
• Information Accuracy & Transparency: Viewers expressed frustration regarding the quality of information available for votes and suggested using FOIA requests to access meeting notes.
• Board Dynamics: The chat frequently contrasted the behavior of the Mayor against other officials, offering support to members like Womack, Brady, and Atwood.