Ferndale City Council Special Meeting – Appointment to Council Vacancy

Date: May 26, 2026
Time: Meeting called to order at 6:09 PM; adjourned at 7:15 PM
Location: City Hall, 300 E 9 Mile, Ferndale, MI 48220

The City Council convened a special meeting to conduct interviews and appoint a candidate to fill a vacancy on the council. The meeting began with the Pledge of Allegiance, roll call (all four council members present: Kelly, Mikulski, Sabatini, Leaks May), and approval of the agenda. Following a public comment period, the council interviewed three candidates for the vacant seat and voted unanimously to appoint Nina LaSalle.

Public Comments & Testimony

• One member of the public (unidentified, but referred to as a litigant) addressed the council from 6:10 PM to 6:13 PM. The speaker expressed anger over past council actions, referencing pending litigation against the city and individual council members for alleged violations of constitutional rights. The speaker warned any new appointee that they would be included in the lawsuit if they voted for an upcoming rule change restricting profanity and personal attacks, calling it unconstitutional. The speaker also criticized the city’s spending and policies.

Interview and Appointment Process

• The city manager outlined the process: each candidate would answer the same eight questions prepared by council members, in alphabetical order, with a time limit of approximately 15 minutes per candidate. After all interviews, council would discuss and vote.

Candidate Interviews

1. Chris Hall

• Position on Community Center: Advocated for keeping the Kulik Center and seeking grants, public-private partnerships, and in-kind contributions for funding.
• Lived Experience: Background in negotiating contracts with major banks (U.S. Bank, Wells Fargo); emphasized transparency and communication skills.
• Fairness: Believed in assessing current market conditions, tax burdens, and balancing resources.
• Communication Style: Emphasized listening and clarifying questions; distinguished between “church and state.”
• Handling Divisive Issues: Stressed listening to residents and bridging gaps on issues like Jewish community concerns, police brutality, and racial injustice.
• Balancing Views: Acknowledged that not everyone can be pleased; focused on transparency and meeting in the middle.
• Environmental Sustainability: Prioritized preserving trees and infrastructure; mentioned solar energy and wildflowers.
• When No Resolution Possible: Advocated for continued trust-building and respectful communication even when agreement is impossible.
• Additional question from council: Asked about ideal housing affordability solutions; council members responded that affordable vs. market-rate housing is complex and they are exploring all options. Also asked about e-bike ordinance; candidate suggested studying why riders use sidewalks before regulating.

2. Nina LaSalle

• Position on Community Center: Supported a community center, favored rehabbing Kulik Center over new construction; suggested CDBG grants, MEDC funding, and partnerships.
• Lived Experience: Background in government finance and grant management.
• Fairness: Relied on historical data, cautious spending, and extensive community outreach.
• Communication Style: Likes asking questions, collaborative, leads from the middle.
• Handling Divisive Issues: Would talk to both sides, explore why an issue is divisive, and seek common ground.
• Balancing Views: Would put personal opinion aside, weigh the majority’s view, and consult departments and businesses before deciding.
• Environmental Sustainability: Advocated community engagement, home energy efficiency incentives, native gardening classes, and treating sustainability as a community project.
• When No Resolution Possible: Would have a frank conversation about why resolution is not possible, with transparency and respect.
• Additional question from council: Asked about modes of community outreach; responded she would be physically present at festivals, schools, and other community spaces (she is not on social media).
• Candidate’s question to council: Asked about the pending lawsuit; council declined to discuss active litigation. Also asked how council members handle being in the public eye; members shared advice about authenticity and not taking criticism personally.

3. Jim McLucky

• Position on Community Center: Advocated for maintaining the Kulik Center, citing historic character; open to bonds or millage but conscious of resident financial concerns.
• Lived Experience: Background in software, technology, customer support; sees himself as a resource for helping people.
• Fairness: Would sit down with all stakeholders to gather perspectives before decisions.
• Communication Style: Described himself as “spicy” but respectful; committed to being authentic and caring, though acknowledged needing to be more respectful.
• Handling Divisive Issues: Bases decisions on facts and data, referenced the Headlee override debate, and argued it was the most responsible choice.
• Balancing Views: Sees himself as a vessel for residents, businesses, and visitors; uses stakeholder feedback to separate signal from noise.
• Environmental Sustainability: Prioritized trees (citing a 3-to-1 return on investment), water and sewer infrastructure, and sidewalks.
• When No Resolution Possible: Would anchor himself to what can be done, demonstrate effort, and let constituents down as gently as possible.
• Candidate’s question to council: Asked what gap he could fill; council members said they need additional voices, diverse perspectives, and particularly financial savvy (a gap left by a former council member).

Discussion and Vote

• Council members thanked all applicants and highlighted each candidate’s strengths.
• Council Member Mikulski praised Nina LaSalle’s knowledge of potential funding sources and transparency.
• Council Member Sabatini appreciated Nina’s willingness to learn from council and departments and her community presence.
• Council Member Leaks May acknowledged the difficulty of the process and thanked all three finalists. He noted each candidate’s thoughtful answers and particularly liked Nina’s finance background and affordable housing perspectives.
• Council Member Kelly emphasized that her vote was based on skill set, noting the need for strong financial expertise with upcoming projects (police, fire, Kulik). She supported Nina LaSalle.
• Mayor Pro Tem (?) and others also expressed support for Nina, citing her financial background and desire to learn from others.
• Motion: Council Member Mikulski moved to appoint Nina LaSalle to fill the vacancy effective at the second-to-last item of the regular council meeting (to allow swearing-in). The motion was seconded and passed by a roll call vote: 4–0 (all four members voted yes).

Key Outcomes

• Nina LaSalle was appointed to the Ferndale City Council, with term expiring December 31, 2027.
• The oath of office was scheduled to be administered at the end of the regular council meeting that evening.
• Council members encouraged all candidates and applicants to remain engaged in the community.