After the initial discussion on the agenda, the February 25, 2025, Board of Commissioners meeting moved steadily along until the second action item—a resolution regarding the Campbell Plant in Port Sheldon Township. Discussions lengthened with each subsequent item. Motives, ideologies, and premeditation were brought increasingly into question.

In support of the delayed closing of the Consumers Energy plant, Commissioner Allison Miedema read aloud the Resolution to Delay the Closing of the Consumers Energy J.H. Campbell Plant.

Prior to the vote, some commissioners shared the thoughts behind their viewpoint.

• Commissioner Jordan Jorristsma asked if there are any definitive steps the Board could look into taking to actually intervene substantively or would this resolution be enough.

• Agreeing with one public commenter that Consumers Energy’s plan is unrealistic, Commissioner Joe Moss said he’d go further and say it’s ideological. He added that they’re pushing a climate crisis green energy agenda in their war on affordable fossil fuels. “They’re completely out of line with the Trump Administration,” Moss said, “and the direction that the country is going. So, I definitely support the resolution and absolutely believe that this closure should be delayed at a minimum.”

• Commissioner Jacob Bonnema added that it’s in the best interest of the constituents that the grid has stable power.

• Commissioner Josh Brugger clarified that he had different reasons for supporting the resolution. “Number one that’s most important is I do believe in climate change.” Brugger continued, “I do believe that coal has a negative impact on our environment, and I am thrilled with the closure of coal plants. I do believe we need a diverse source of energy excluding coal. I’ve had the opportunity to vote to close one coal plant as a city commission councilman in the City of Grand Haven…” Brugger added his concern is that shutting down the plant before there are more green resources could cause rolling blackouts or brownouts.

Those voting yes were Commissioners Josh Brugger, Jacob Bonnema, Kendra Wenzel, Allison Miedema, Joe Moss, Jordan Jorritsma, Phil Kuyers, Jim Barry, and John Teeples.

Commissioner Doug Zylstra was the only no vote.

Commissioner Sylvia Rhodea was absent due to illness.

Chair Teeples read a letter outlining the opinion of the County litigation attorneys Plunkett Cooney on the agreement between Chester Township and the County regarding Crockery Lake. In summary, the attorneys found the agreement to be invalid as a matter of law and not enforceable.

In response to the letter, there was a motion to authorize a legal action asking the court to rule on the validity of the agreement.

• Moss responded that while the attorneys’ letter tries to say that the Board exceeded its authority by entering the agreement, that was not how he saw it. “MCL 124.2 on intergovernmental contracts and 124.504 for joint public powers,” Moss said, “explicitly authorize counties to enter into these types of agreements for jointly managing property. So, it’s my understanding the agreement falls well within the County’s General Public Service authority… but maybe there could be more discussion between the attorneys.”

• Jorritsma interjected that the fact that Moss and the attorneys disagree, there is ambiguity and is why the court should rule.

• Miedema found it interesting that later in the agenda would be an action item to resolve or terminate the contract with Kallman Legal Group who drafted the contract with Chester. As such, Kallman Legal Group was not present and therefore not given the opportunity to speak on this matter before the Board.

• “I believe,” Teeples said, “that the prior Board was acting in good faith of the community. I believe it. I think you made a mistake.”

• Moss disagreed with some of the statements Teeples made saying the County Board’s decision was multifaceted—it was looking at using Monsanto funding, which was specifically related to water quality and other issues, looking at park property, looking at County property, and taking into consideration the public that uses the park. In his view there was mutual consideration.

• Zylstra reminded the Board of the need to be careful in its use of the court of law, wondering whether a declaratory ruling would require a six-month process that would cost $20,000 or a one-month process that would cost $2,000. He suggested having a deliberation with Chester Township to reduce the amount in the agreement.

• Teeples responded that the contract is no longer a subject of negotiation if it is invalid.

• “I’ve always thought this agreement was very favorable to the County and to Chester and to our citizens,” Moss said. “I was led to believe over the last month and a half that today would be a discussion on this issue. Instead of a discussion as was promised, although we are having discussion, it actually became an action item to try to reverse the prior Board’s decision… I could have brought a dueling opinion because I know attorneys who think that this is absolutely fine…”

The motion to authorize legal action for the court ruling passed. The yes votes were Kuyers, Barry, Zylstra, Brugger, Bonnema, Jorritsma, and Teeples. The no votes were Moss, Miedema, and Wenzel.

Those voting yes were Kuyers, Barry, Zylstra, Brugger, Bonnema, Jorritsma, and Teeples.

Those voting no were Moss, Miedema, and Wenzel.

Next on the agenda was the motion to approve the Agreement For Termination for legal services with The Kallman Legal Group (KLG) effective February 21, 2025.

• Moss acknowledged that the votes were most likely tallied, but that he didn’t think the Board should move forward. “Kallman Legal is one of, if not the best constitutional, pro-citizen, pro-individual rights, pro-freedom law firm in the state… I understand that there are individuals who have sort of had it out for them from the very beginning, seeing them as sort of a political appointment. They were hired based on merit… They defended lawsuit after lawsuit from the Left, as we continually were attacked over last two years… I appreciate the amount of hours that they donated towards the County to help… I think it should be clarified that they are not leaving because they want to. They’re leaving, or they are being terminated or resigning, because they’re being forced out…”

• Since KLG already had been paid in December for the current year, Zylstra was concerned whether money would be left on the table with their departure.

• According to Teeples, once the February invoice is paid, the County will be left to absorb $50,000 to $75,000 for terminating KLG’s services early. There was also a transition period where Kallman Legal Group would still be available while new counsel is brought on.

Those voting yes were Brugger, Kuyers, Barry, Jorritsma, Bonnema, and Teeples.

Those voting no were Zylstra, Moss, Miedema, and Wenzel.

Bonnema moved to retain Ronald Bultje as lead counsel. Until a permanent Corporation Counsel can be hired, Dickinson Wright and its attorneys, agents and contractors would serve as interim Ottawa County Corporation Counsel, performing corporate legal services to Ottawa and its departments, funding units, departments and boards and commissioners.

Teeples invited Bultje to the podium to answer questions from the commissioners.

• Since Bultje currently represents townships in Ottawa County, Miedema asked whose responsibility would it be to seek different legal counsel were there a conflict. Would it be the local municipality’s or the County’s? Bultje explained that in an adversarial situation, both sides would need to seek independent counsel. Since the County is often working with local municipalities on a regular basis, the response raised concerns.

• Jorritsma, however, saw it as an advantage to have a corporate counsel that also works with their municipalities.

• Because Moss had no idea beforehand that they would be looking at new counsel, he wasn’t able to meet ahead with Bultje. Instead, he reached out to people in the legal community and heard varying opinions, “some glowing, some very negative.” Moss asked if Bultje needed to refer work to outside firms, would it be to his daughter’s firm. Bultje assured Moss he would not use his daughter’s firm who works with and is a shareholder with Sarah Howard, the person who has sued the County repeatedly.

• Wenzel pressed Teeples on which commissioners were in on the decision to reach out to Bultje.

• After a time of back and forth with Wenzel, Teeples indicated that he had included Barry, Jorritsma, Zylstra, Bonnema, Kuyers, and Brugger, in the decision. He did not speak with Moss, Miedema, Rhodea, or Wenzel about hiring Ronald Bultje, although he did indicate to at least Moss that he was looking at replacing Kallman Legal Group.

Those voting yes were Zylstra, Brugger, Jorritsma, Kuyers, Barry, Bonnema, and Teeples.

Those voting no were Miedema, Moss, and Wenzel.

February 25, 2025, Ottawa County Board of Commissioners Meeting.

Ottawa County Board of Commissioners
Regular Session
February 25, 2025

Ottawa County Administration Building
12220 Fillmore Street
West Olive, MI 49460