The Michigan Supreme Court issued a decision June 16, 2025, in a long-running dispute between Macomb County Executive Mark A. Hackel and the Macomb County Board of Commissioners over governmental authority and access to county financial systems.
The case, *Hackel v. Macomb County Board of Commissioners* (Mich. 2025), originated in 2018 when Hackel filed suit in Macomb Circuit Court seeking declaratory relief and a writ of mandamus regarding the scope of the Commission's authority. While Hackel's original complaint was dismissed and not appealed, the dispute continued through a counterclaim filed by the Commission.
The Commission's counterclaim sought declaratory relief and mandamus ordering Hackel to grant the Commission's director of legislative affairs real-time, read-only access to the county's financial management software. The Commission argued this access was necessary for fulfilling its budgeting obligations under the county's home rule charter.
The conflict stems from events in 2017 when the Commission requested access to county financial software, which Hackel refused to provide. The dispute escalated when the Commission adopted its general appropriations ordinance for Fiscal Year 2018, designated as Ordinance No. 2017-04. This ordinance included Section 10(H), which required that the Commission's director of legislative affairs be granted access to financial management systems.
The case represents a fundamental dispute over separation of powers at the county level, with the Commission asserting its oversight responsibilities required access to financial data, while the executive branch maintained control over administrative systems. The disagreement highlights tensions between legislative oversight and executive administration in county government structures.
Macomb County operates under a home rule charter that establishes the framework for governmental operations and defines the respective roles of the county executive and the board of commissioners. The Commission's argument centered on its fiduciary duty to oversee county finances and create budgets based on accurate, current financial information.
The legal proceedings moved through multiple stages before reaching the Michigan Supreme Court. The high court heard oral arguments on the application for leave to appeal on April 9, 2025, before issuing its decision approximately two months later.
This case is significant for Michigan counties operating under similar governmental structures, as it clarifies the balance of power between county executives and boards of commissioners regarding access to administrative systems and financial information. The decision provides guidance for other counties that may face similar disputes over information access and governmental oversight responsibilities.
The Michigan Supreme Court's opinion was issued by Chief Justice Megan K. Cavanagh, with the full court including Justices Brian K. Zahra, Richard H. Bernstein, Elizabeth M. Welch, Kyra H. Bolden, Kimberly A. Thomas, and Noah P. Hood participating in the decision.
The seven-year timeline from the initial 2018 filing to the 2025 Supreme Court decision demonstrates the complexity of the legal and constitutional issues involved. The case required careful consideration of county charter provisions, state law governing county operations, and the constitutional principles of separation of powers as they apply to local government structures.
For Macomb County, the resolution of this dispute will clarify the operational relationship between the executive and legislative branches of county government. The decision establishes precedent for how similar conflicts should be resolved and what level of access legislative bodies can demand from executive departments.
The case also highlights broader issues facing county governments across Michigan regarding transparency, accountability, and the balance of power between different branches of local government. As counties continue to modernize their operations and implement new technologies, questions about access to information systems and data become increasingly important for effective governance.
The Supreme Court's decision provides a framework for understanding how constitutional principles of separation of powers apply in the context of modern county government operations, particularly regarding access to electronic systems and real-time financial data that enables effective legislative oversight.
This resolution comes at a time when many local governments are grappling with similar questions about information access, transparency, and the appropriate balance between executive efficiency and legislative oversight in an increasingly digital governmental environment.