Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

BUCHANAN — The consideration of a citizen complaint against Buchanan Mayor Sean Denison has been sent to the city attorney after action Tuesday night by Buchanan City Commissioners.  

Resident Carla Johnson has submitted a complaint against Denison, stating that the mayor violated the city charter’s provisions relative to the powers and duties of the mayor when he suspended former City Manager Benjamin Eldridge without notice to the public or a vote of the city commission.  

She also alleged that Denison violated the Open Meetings Act as well as the Michigan Bullard-Piawecki Employee Right to Know Act by not giving Eldridge access to the grievances against him. Eldridge was suspended in early November and resigned Nov. 29 at a hearing where a majority of commissioners appeared poised to fire him. 

In comments at the start of the meeting, Johnson said it was time for commissioners to “face the facts” and “accept responsibility” for their actions which she sees as violating the city charter. “Respect the self-governance the city charter decrees for our citizens and you won’t have to worry all the time about salvaging your name,” she said. 

Tuesday, commissioners did not vote on Johnson’s complaint and request for a censure hearing. Instead, commissioners on a 4-1 vote sent the matter to the city attorney to provide a written memo to the commission to consider at their Feb. 12 meeting. 

Neither that vote nor the amount of money the commission is spending on attorney fees sat well with Commissioner Dan Vigansky. Vigansky noted that the most recent bills had the city paying the city attorney $20,000 including over $8,200 for answering Freedom of Information Act requests. 

Vigansky has been the subject of two complaints since last summer, one withdrawn and one voted on by other commissioners. The complaint approved by the rest of the commission alleged that Vigansky had illegally leaked information to Eldridge, harassed city employees and made racial remarks to a resident. Commissioners voted to censure Vigansky in December and then earlier this month asked the governor to remove him from office.  

Vigansky said he didn’t want to pay the attorney and pointed out that the four other commissioners had created the situation that led to Johnson’s complaint. 

“No matter what anyone thinks, you screwed up,” he said. “You suspended indefinitely someone that would have been here 10 to 15 years … You’re paying him $250 an hour to tell you BS.” 

For his part, Denison said the two other complaints were also sent to the city attorney for his review. 

“I’m not afraid of having a hearing, I didn’t do anything wrong,” he said. “I respect the attorney.” 

Besides the complaints, both Vigansky and Denison are the subjects of recall efforts brought by citizens. The recall wording for both was approved in mid-December and recall elections will be held in either May or November depending on when and if needed signatures are gathered. 

After Tuesday’s meeting, Johnson took issue with the commission action to send her complaint to the same attorney who advised Denison he could suspend Eldridge without informing him or getting approval from the rest of the commission. 

She noted that it was Commissioner Patrick Swem who moved to refer her complaint to the city attorney. Swem said he wanted to get a memorandum from the city attorney as to why Denison acted within his powers as mayor and why it did not violate the city charter.  

“In other words, instead of a public hearing where citizens would be allowed to offer evidence to support the Complaint, your (Swem’s) plan is to ask the city attorney to decide the complaint’s merit, he who advised the mayor on his actions, ” she said.  

“This is a blatant case of conflict of interest and perpetuates the lack of transparency and accountability to the public,” she said. “Does the city attorney represent the taxpayers who paid thousands of dollars for his services in 2023, or does he personally represent the mayor and we pay for it?” 

“The People demand an unbiased outside counsel, and the right to testify at a hearing,” she added. “The precedent was set for the response to a citizen complaint with the hearing held against Commissioner Dan Vigansky where he was given the opportunity to face his accusers and the Commission allowed the public full opportunity to offer their own evidence.”