UPDATED VERSION -- Macomb County judge essentially rewrites Warren’s term limits law

A Macomb County judge today ruled that two Warren City Council members can run for re-election though they’ve already served the maximum 12 years allowed under the city’s voter-approved term limits law.
Macomb County Circuit Judge Diane Druzinski said the idea that the seven-member council actually consists of two separate offices – and members can serve three, 4-year terms in each – is “an arguably sound position.” She decided that veteran Councilmen Cecil St. Pierre and Keith Sadowski can run for another 4-year term in the upcoming elections.



Druzinski

Relying on a legal opinion delivered under odd circumstances by City Attorney David Griem, the judge accepted the contention that the council members who serve in districts are running for a separate office from those who run on an at-large basis citywide.

Druzinski dismissed the argument by the plaintiff, council candidate Lanette Olejniczak, that the council is a unicameral body and the two categories of councilman never meet or vote separately on any matters.

The bottom line, Olejniczak said, is that the Warren voters approved the 1999 term limits charter amendment with the understanding that it restricted time in city office to 12 years, not 24 years.

Olejniczak

“Apparently 78 percent of the (voters) in Warren don’t matter anymore,” Olejniczak said outside the courtroom, according to The Macomb Daily. “It’s a very sad day. It’s very unfortunate the judge decided this way.”

The arguments against keeping St. Pierre and Sadowski on the ballot outlined in Olejniczak’s lawsuit included:

* The Warren City Charter makes no mention of a “bicameral legislature” or “separate and distinct” offices of city council, in contrast to Griem’s opinion.

Griem

* If the court ruled that the city council is comprised of separate and distinct offices, it would permit a person to serve three 4-year terms in each of the five council districts, as well as three 4-year terms as an at-large council member, essentially allowing the possibility that a person could hold the office of city council for 18 consecutive terms, or 72 years.

* The charter requires a quorum be present at council meetings but it allows a quorum without any at-large council members present to grant approval to agenda items.

St. Pierre

In addition, after the city switched from nine at-large council members to the current seven-member configuration, the charter stated that the nominating process continues as in the past, with no distinct protocol for filing as an at-large or district candidate.

What’s more, the charter requires that on city election ballots “the order of offices on any primary or election ballot shall be mayor, council, and municipal judges” – again with no references to separate, distinct council offices.

Sadowski

The suit had called for a temporary restraining order to give city officials time to decide whether St. Pierre and Sadowski are ineligible to hold office. Olejniczak claimed that she would suffer irreparable harm if the two incumbents were placed on the ballot because it would unfairly diminish her chances of winning election.

Druzinski ruled that a court decision to keep any candidates out of the election would unfairly restrict the electorate’s choices in the August primary and November general election. “Granting of a preliminary injunction would be highly detrimental to the public,” the judge said, according to news reports.

Olejniczak’s attorney is Richard Sulaka II, who also filed as a council candidate, as well as for mayor. He had until the end of the business day (today) to decide which office he would pursue. The son of former city clerk Richard Sulaka, the attorney said the judge’s ruling, by backing up Griem’s opinion, benefits longtime incumbents.

“I can’t speculate on whether it’s a scheme, but clearly it benefits the people in office,” Sulaka told The Macomb Daily.
Sulaka has said he will appeal the ruling.