Commissioners Move Forward with LifeWays Bond Request
The board will pursue legal counsel related to the issuance of a $15 million building bond.
Hillsdale County—In a 3-2 vote, the Hillsdale County Board of Commissioners moved forward with a resolution to back LifeWays’ request for a building bond.
Following an hour of public comment in opposition, Republicans Kevin Collins, District 2, Mark Wiley, District 3, and Brent Leininger, District 5 voted to send the resolution to legal counsel to prepare the county’s backing of the building bond, which exceeds $15 million.
Collins introduced the resolution, and Wiley motioned to support it.
During board discussion, Leininger told the board that “this is not authorizing any bond for LifeWays.”
He also noted that he has some “legal questions,” saying that he wanted to do “due diligence.”
Commissioners Doug Ingles of District 1 and Brad Benzing of District 4 opposed the measure.
Benzing, in contrast to those in support, wanted the county to seek its own legal counsel—rather than LifeWays paying—to advise the board further.
He also noted that there is no “guaranteed stream of income” by which the county would pay for the building if LifeWays were to default.
Ingles argued that a “yes” vote today is de facto support for the bond moving forward.
“The intent of engaging a bond counsel quite frankly is to pursue the issue of a bond for Hillsdale County on behalf of LifeWays.”
He also told the board that he received “over 75 emails,” all in opposition to issuing the bond, suggesting that “the message was very clear.”
In contrast, those in support of the bond were “LifeWays board members and employees.”
According to the District 1 Commissioner, whatever legal counsel says, Hillsdale County would be responsible in the case of a default.
“You can have an attorney interpret that however you want,” he said, “Hillsdale County would be on the hook.”
In response, Wiley remarked that some of the email opposition he received was “copy and paste.”
“People were not really putting their heart and soul into it,” he added.
Moving forward, the board will hear from legal counsel, paid for by LifeWays, regarding the details of the bond.
Jacob Bruns
Related Stories:
LifeWays to Solicit County Backing for Building Bond Next Week
LifeWays Likely to Solicit County Board Again for a Bond at Tuesday's Meeting
LifeWays to Solicit $15.5 Million Bond from Hillsdale County Commissioners
Thank you so much for families that sent emails to Commissioners and showed up at today’s BOC meeting. The vote to engage bond counsel passed3-2 (Ingles, Benzing opposed). The bond issuance will come to BOC after bond counsel reports. I do not know the time frame, but will post when it is determined.
Following is a summary of my comments: The intent of engaging bond counsel is to pursue issuing a bond for Hillsdale County on behalf of Lifeways. I have received over 75 emails. All oppose issuing a bond for Lifeways. Not one in support.
2 important messages from the emails are
1) Vote no on supporting a bond for Lifeways
2) Regarding our meeting time. An item of this importance should be discussed at a time when more people can attend with input. This can better happen at a late afternoon or early evening meeting.
Notice that many who spoke today have left. Please do remember their words and message.
Regarding:
Section 330.1205 (tel:330.1205) (6) A county that has created a community mental health authority is not liable for any intentional, negligent, or grossly negligent act or omission, for any financial affairs, or for any obligation of a community mental health authority, its board, employees, representatives, or agents. This subsection applies only to county government.
MCL 330.1205 section 6 has been mentioned.
This holds if Lifeways receives a loan. If Lifeways defaults Hillsdale County is not liable.
This does not hold if Hillsdale County issues the bond. If Federal funding is lost and Lifeways defaults on bond payments. Hillsdale County is on the hook.
The questions to counsel are not needed if we do not move toward a bond.
The message I received and believe—NO MEANS NO
In response to Wiley's comment : How many ways can citizens say NO?