Leelanau County administrator Jim Dyer has broken his months long silence, submitting a lengthy written response that denies wrongdoing and asks commissioners to reject the remedy sought by finance director Rio Risbridger in the complaint that landed him on paid leave. Dyer was placed on administrative leave June 9, one day after Risbridger filed a complaint invoking the Michigan Whistleblowers’ Protection Act, alleging financial misconduct, circumvention of board authority and a pattern of intimidation by both Dyer and Human Resources Manager Jen Kain.
Risbridger, who had been on the job 74 days when she filed the complaint, asked the board to remove her from Dyer’s supervision and have her report directly to commissioners, and to move her to a contract-employee arrangement.
The complaint laid out seven categories of concern, including an inability to facilitate county operations, withholding of information, inaccurate statements to commissioners, and “repeated disparagement” of Hartesvelt, former assistant finance director Mike Birkmeier, Chief Clerk Jen Zywicki, and Clerk Michelle Crocker.
“I do not believe these standards would be upheld ... were I not here to insist on them,” Risbridger wrote in her complaint in June.
In his response, obtained by the Leelanau Enterprise through the Freedom of Information Act, Dyer calls the complaint “a collection of allegations and conclusions,” not “a finding,” “an audit report” or “a legal opinion.” He urges the board to separate testable facts from what he describes as Risbridger’s subjective conclusions and her requested remedy.
“The Board should not confuse the discomfort of reform with evidence of misconduct,” Dyer wrote. “It should not treat resistance from the old system as proof that the reformer is the problem.”
Crocker had no comment at this time.
Dyer’s central argument is that the finance problems Risbridger describes — late closes, paper journal entries, manual payroll calculations, reliance on compensating controls — were documented for years before he arrived, in the county’s own audit findings, a Rehmann consulting report, and public reporting on the resignations of prior finance staff.
“When I was appointed, the County was not operating from a position of strength. It was operating from a position of longterm weakness, exacerbated by a resistance to change,” Dyer wrote.
In his nearly 60-page response that is available on leelanaunews. com, Dyer noted numerous occasions when he was told by the clerk’s office, “We’ve never done that before.”
He argues Risbridger’s proposed fix, closer reliance on Clerk Michelle Crocker and deputy Jen Zywicki, would recreate the very structure blamed for those weaknesses.
“Risbridger’s complaint therefore proves the need for change,” Dyer wrote. “But it does not prove that the person trying to change the system is the cause of the system’s weakness.”
Dyer devotes much of the document to rebutting specific incidents, including the temporary reassignment of payroll duties after he fired Hartesvelt in February, a comment telling Risbridger that clerk’s office staff were “not going to (expletive) train” her, which he says was mischaracterized, and his decision to let Zywicki assist with the 2025 year-end close — which he says came at Risbridger’s own request over his initial objections.
Dyer also disputes Risbridger’s account of a severance agreement approved without prior board sign-off, arguing his contract and role as chief personnel officer gave him authority to settle the grievance within his spending limits, and that the payment was withheld until the matter went to the board for ratification.
Much of the response is aimed at the remedy Risbridger requested rather than the specific allegations. Citing his employment contract and the state’s Uniform Budgeting and Accounting Act, Dyer argues that stripping him of supervisory authority over the finance department while leaving him accountable for the county’s budget and financial reporting would be unworkable and would breach his contract.
“If the Board wants to restructure county government, it has lawful ways to consider that objective openly, prospectively, and with legal advice,” Dyer wrote. “It should not do so indirectly, in response to a complaint.”
The response also revisits Dyer’s long-running friction with the Clerk’s office, which he says has interfered with department heads who report to him, predating his hiring. He cites a December meeting Hartesvelt tried to arrange with Zywicki and County Treasurer John Gallagher that Gallagher told him was aimed at securing a fourth commissioner vote to fire Dyer — an account Dyer says factored into terminating Hartesvelt weeks later.
Since Dyer’s leave began, it has been elected officials — not the appointed department heads who report to him — speaking up on his behalf. Sheriff Mike Borkovich, Gallagher and Register of Deeds Jennifer Grant submitted letters supporting his reinstatement at the board’s June 16 meeting. County GOP chairman Jim White has separately called for Dyer’s removal over unrelated concerns.
Commissioners have not disclosed a timeline for concluding their investigation. The board has continued to decline public comment while it remains open. Interim administrator Lauren Cypher continues to serve in Dyer’s absence through at least Aug. 18.
Meanwhile, the Board of Commissioners have scheduled a special meeting for 9:30 a.m. today to consider and possibly act on a written attorney-client privileged communication from the County’s corporate counsel.
