City Commission Meeting - May 18, 2026

The meeting primarily focused on resolving the timing of the City Manager's performance review following disputes over contract terms and recent changes to evaluation procedures. City Manager Mike Womack expressed concerns regarding contract violations and the potential impact of confidential legal documents (referred to as "Bodman stuff") on his review process 0:23. This led to a procedural struggle between the Commission and the City Manager regarding the 30-day review window stipulated in his contract.

The discussion involved significant friction between Mayor Jeramy Hing and Commissioner Joshua C. Atwood. The debate touched on administrative procedures, the role of the City Attorney, and the legitimacy of various motions. After several failed attempts to set a date and multiple points of order, the commission successfully moved to schedule a special meeting on July 20, 2026, at 4:00 p.m. to conduct the evaluation.

• City Manager Performance Review: Discussions regarding the legality, timing, and contract compliance of Mr. Womack's evaluation.
• Contractual Obligations: Debates over the 30-day review period and the validity of updated job descriptions.
• Procedial Disputes: Frequent use of Robert's Rules of Order, points of order, and debates over the "calling of the question."
• Legal Counsel Influence: Concerns regarding the role of Bodman PLC and the impact of legal opinions on commission decisions.
• Budgetary and Infrastructure Matters: Discussion of the city budget, fee schedules, and the repair of tennis/pickleball courts in Cranon Park.

• Jeramy Hing: Mayor, presiding over the meeting and managing procedural disputes 4:58.
• Mike Womack: City Manager, who expressed concerns regarding contract violations and the fairness of his evaluation 0:23.
• Joshua C. Atwood: Commissioner, who raised points regarding the legality of the evaluation and the integrity of the process 1:49.
• Melissa Petrie: Commissioner/Mayor Pro-Tem, who participated in the debate over scheduling and procedural rules 2:30.
• Linda Glisman: Commissioner, involved in discussions regarding the budget and evaluation timing 6:04.
• Stefan Brady: Commissioner, who engaged in a heated debate with the Mayor regarding transparency and legal counsel 1:49.
• Lynne McCarthy: Commissioner, who proposed and amended motions to finalize the evaluation date 10:45.
• Ramona (Clerk): The City Clerk, who provided procedural guidance and recorded motions 5:39.
• Mr. Francis: City Attorney, who provided legal context and rulings on points of order 8:13.

• Postponement of Evaluation: The commission debated moving the evaluation to June 1st versus adhering to a 30-day window following the receipt of reviews 5:39.
• Motion to Schedule Special Meeting: A motion was passed to schedule the evaluation for July 20, 2026, at 4:00 p.m., to ensure compliance with the 30-day contract window 57:21.
• Budget and Fee Adoption: The commission approved the city budget, the 2026-2027 budget for component units, and the new city fee schedule 3:29:19, 3:37:07, 3:36:45.
• Infrastructure Decision: A motion was passed to approve an expense not to exceed $89,610 to fix the substrate/ground issues at the park tennis/pickleball courts 3:44:59.

• May 18, 2026: The date of the meeting.
• June 1, 2026: An initial proposed date for the performance review 5:39.
• June 18, 2026: A secondary proposed date discussed by the commission 13:26.
• July 20, 2026, at 4:00 p.m.: The finalized date for the special meeting to conduct the City Manager's evaluation 57:21.
• May 8, 2026: The contractually suggested date for the review mentioned by Mr. Womack 2:10:34.

• Contract Compliance: The primary driver for the shifting dates was the legal requirement to allow Mr. Womack 30 days to review his evaluation documents 11:10.
• Procedural Integrity: Commissioner Atwood and Mayor Hing clashed over the legitimacy of certain motions and the "calling of the question" to ensure decisions were legally sound 4:58, 5:18.
• Transparency vs. Confidentiality: The debate was fueled by the tension between the public's right to know and the necessity of protecting personnel/legal privilege 1:14:48, 1:57:52.

• Motion to Postpone to June 1st: This initial motion failed after a dispute over the inclusion of the City Manager's approval 9:42.
• Motion for Special Meeting (July 20, 4:00 p.m.): Passed with a 3-2 vote to resolve the evaluation date while respecting the 30-day contract window 59:17.
• Approval of Budget and Fees: The budget resolution and the new city fee schedule were both successfully adopted 3:29:19, 3:36:45.
• Approval of Court Repairs: The motion to approve the $89,610 expenditure for the park courts passed .

Overall Sentiment

The overall sentiment is highly negative and critical. Viewers expressed intense frustration regarding the conduct of the City Commission, specifically targeting Mayor Hing's leadership style, which many characterized as authoritarian, divisive, and disrespectful toward fellow commissioners.

Recurring Themes

• Leadership Conduct: Allegations that Mayor Hing acts like a "judge" or "tyrant" rather than a facilitator, frequently interrupting or dismissing commissioners.
• Commission Infighting: Observations of deep divisions, with commenters noting how certain commissioners are treated differently based on gender or political alignment.
• Conflict with City Management: Speculation that the Mayor is actively attempting to force City Manager Mike Womack out of his position.
• Procedural Irregularities: Criticism regarding the scheduling of special meetings and the perceived violation of First Amendment rights during public comment.

Notable Comments

"Hing shuts down everyone that doesn’t see it his way. He interrupts. He dismisses each of you... Chaos is an understatement for this joke of a commission." — @KO_TransparencyMatters, 0 likes

"Whats crazy is how much hing lets the women all talk out of turn... yet as soon as Brady talks hes out of order. I wonder if the ladies ever rewatch this to see how they look?" — @shawnschalau4396, 4 likes

"If anyone thinks that Bodman is going to finish whatever work King Hing wants done before the full $10k is billed they are crazy. And after tonight's meeting if anyone believes that King Hing is not gunning for Mr Womack's job they are delusional." — @kellynolan6437, 4 likes

"“This is not a courtroom” then stop acting like the judge! You are making it a courtroom. Lapeer you handed a narcissistic personality the gavel and he took control to another level..." — @KO_TransparencyMatters, 0 likes

Dissent / Disagreement

While the comments are overwhelmingly critical of the Mayor, there is some internal disagreement regarding the commission's dynamics. Some commenters suggest that female commissioners are "mirroring" the Mayor's behavior or "drinking Kool-aid," while others defend the commissioners who attempted to address the Mayor's conduct.

Overall Sentiment

The audience sentiment is overwhelmingly hostile toward Mayor Jeramy Hing and Commissioner Melissa Petrie, while showing significant support for City Manager Mike Womack and Commissioner Stefan Brady. Many viewers expressed frustration with the perceived lack of decorum, accusing the Mayor of being disrespectful, "out of order," and acting with an agenda.

Chat Timeline

[00:55 – 41:28] Early reactions focus on the Mayor's conduct during interactions with City Manager Womack. Viewers criticize Hing for treating Womack condescendingly and note perceived double standards regarding who is allowed to speak out of turn.

[41:28 – 102:49] The conversation shifts toward the legality of the proceedings and the role of the City Clerk. Discussion arises regarding the evaluation process for the City Manager and whether certain officials are overstepping their authority.

[102:49 – 212:21] The chat becomes heated with mentions of potential recalls. Viewers debate the feasibility of removing officials from office while reacting to the Mayor's defense of his own actions.

[212:21 – 275:01] Late-stage commentary focuses on the "embarrassing" nature of the meeting. Viewers condemn the Mayor's interruptions and rude behavior, while some suggest legal action or FOIA requests regarding meeting notes.

Notable Messages

23:02 "@mundanethings8515: this mayor is a joke" — @mundanethings8515

35:08 "@shawnschalau4396: petrie just sits by hing and whispers and talks all night out of order. no wonder he wanted a change in seats, he needs help all night by her. shes so much out of order all the time its a shame" — @shawnschalau4396

1:16:03 "@Tim_Galbraith: King" — @Tim_Galbraith

[193:57] "@mundanethings8515: Kudos to Womack, Brady, and Atwood" — @mundanethings8515

[219:13] "@KO_TransparencyMatters: 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

Community Sentiment on Key Moments

• Mayor vs. Womack: The audience largely sided with Womack, viewing the Mayor's questioning of the highly educated City Manager as patronizing and unnecessary.
• Procedural Conduct: A recurring theme was the perceived sexism and double standards regarding "out of order" remarks, with users noting that female commissioners were permitted to whisper and interrupt while others were reprimanded.
• The Evaluation Process: Significant skepticism was directed at the process of using outside lawyers to draft job performance documents for the City Manager.