Resolution Before Scio Township Board Raises Questions About Workplace Conduct and Authority

The Scio Township Board has a resolution before it that states in part that township supervisor Jillian Kerry’s behavior violates a respectful, calm working environment for the staff of the Township. No action was taken at the last board meeting on January 13 when this resolution was presented, but the board might revisit the topic at its next board meeting on January 27.

The item was placed on the Jan. 13 meeting agenda by township treasurer Ryan Yaple. Kerry was unable to attend the Jan. 13 meeting.

No findings of wrongdoing have been made, and the resolution represents allegations and proposed action, not a disciplinary determination.

Public Comment Reflects Divided Community

A number of residents spoke at the meeting during public comment expressing their concerns about the discussion around the supervisor with some wondering if the supervisor is being unjustly attacked and offering their support of Kerry. Others expressed questions about the transparency and dysfunction inside township hall and suggested looking to an outside facilitator to help with the state of things on the board and in the offices.

The dispute highlights broader tensions within Scio Township governance, with residents expressing concern both about workplace conduct and about transparency, authority, and fairness among elected officials.

The Proposed Resolution

“WHEREAS, the Scio Township board has the duty and obligation to provide a respectful, calm working environment for the staff of the Township; and,

WHEREAS, the township currently has assigned Supervisor Kerry an office located in Township Hall; and,

WHEREAS, the Township does not have the legal obligation to provide office space to the Township officials; and,

WHEREAS, Supervisor Kerry’s duties can be carried out with assigned equipment that does not require Supervisor Kerry’s physical presence in Township Hall; and,

WHEREAS, Since taking office on November 20th 2024 Supervisor Kerry’s behavior has created a disorderly and disruptive environment in Township Hall on multiple days; and,

WHEREAS, Supervisor Kerry shouted and screamed at the Township Staff privately, in front of other staff and officials, on multiple occasions over the last year; and,

WHEREAS, Supervisor Kerry has repeated this behavior previously during the calendar year 2025 toward staff members individually and in various group settings; including staff meetings, board meetings and one on one conversations; and,

WHEREAS, Supervisor Kerry’s offensive behavior towards staff members is unacceptable and can potentially contribute to a hostile work environment; and,

WHEREAS, Supervisor Kerry has already been counseled by her fellow Township officials.

“NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees finds that Supervisor Kerry’s behavior violates a respectful, calm working environment for the staff of the Township.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees mandates that Supervisor Kerry’s access to Scio Township Hall be limited to its public spaces unless specifically requested by another Township official or Township Attorney.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Supervisor Kerry’s continued disorderly behavior is not acceptable and that the Board of Trustees asks that it ceases immediately.

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that any future action shall be made by resolution of the Board of Trustees.”

The resolution does not remove Kerry from office or strip her of statutory authority as township supervisor, but would limit her access to non-public areas of Township Hall unless specifically requested by another township official or the township attorney.

Background Cited by Treasurer

Yaple’s statements can be found in the meeting packet for Jan. 13, 2026.

“During my 14 months in Township Hall, I have witnessed Supervisor Kerry being disorderly and disruptive towards Township staff. This disorderly and disruptive behavior has occurred in front of members of the public, township staff and township board members. It is completely unacceptable. I have spoken to Supervisor Kerry on multiple occasions about her behavior in private. Nothing has improved. I must speak out and condemn this behavior as it creates harm towards the township.”

“I have shared my concerns privately multiple times with Supervisor Kerry. I know others have as well. I ask that we take this action to protect the work that we do on behalf of our residents.”

During board discussion, concerns were cited as they relate to the supervisor and treatment of others. Township clerk Jessica Flintoft said she has heard concerns from staff members and others working with the township.

Supervisor Disputes Allegations

Although Kerry could not make the meeting due to sickness, in a written response submitted to the board, she disputed the allegations point by point, arguing that the resolution is unsupported, unlawful, and personally motivated.

“The agenda item and accompanying resolution you prepared are, at best, unacceptable and unprofessional. At worst, they are misogynistic and potentially, unlawful. It shows your naivety of the law and the lack of understanding of Democracy.

“This is not the first instance in which you have attempted to interfere with my statutory duties. The agenda item quoted below supports this claim. Under Michigan law, the Supervisor serves as the moderator of Board meetings. You attempted to remove aspects of that role and reassign them to others. That attempt failed.”

“Facilitator of Agenda Items Prepared by: Ryan Yaple 10-29-2025 Individual members of the Board of Trustees, Office Coordinator or Attorney facilitate any self-submitted item under the sections new business, unfinished business or reports. Self-facilitation assists with efficiency of the meeting as the member is most familiar with the submitted agenda item. Additionally, it provides a more democratic experience for the board and public to hear from members most familiar with the topic. The remainder of the agenda is facilitated by the Office Coordinator. The board can designate an alternate facilitator by a majority vote of the board at any time.”

Your agenda item, itself, contains numerous assertions and allegations that are presented without supporting facts or evidence, including but not limited to the following:

1. You are not my supervisor or employer. You are a fellow elected official. You have no authority to discipline, correct, or supervise my conduct.

2. I find it offensive and misogynistic that you, as a male colleague, claim to have had “multiple discussions” with me about my “behavior” and suggest that “nothing has improved.” It is not your role—statutorily or otherwise—to correct my behavior or that of any other elected official.

3. You have published an agenda item containing your personal opinions, unsupported conclusions, and allegations of misconduct without evidence. This constitutes a direct attack on my character and may rise to the level of libel.

4. You allege that I have been “disorderly and disruptive” without defining those terms or explaining the conduct you claim meets that standard. These labels are subjective. For example, would a trustee bringing cookies for staff constitute “disorder” or “disruption”?

5. You assert that this alleged conduct occurred in front of the public, staff, and board members. Again, this is opinion presented as fact, without evidence or documentation.

6. You claim to have spoken with me “on multiple occasions” about my behavior. Please provide the dates, times, and notes of these alleged discussions. No such conversations occurred.

7. You further state that you raised your concerns with me “privately multiple times.” Are these separate from the “multiple occasions” referenced above? If so, please provide dates, times, and documentation. Once again, these conversations did not occur. The only private conversation I recall with you took place over a year ago, when you invited me to dinner in Carlisle. During that conversation, you discussed your gambling winnings and details of the terms you place on a dinner date that you had in Detroit. My “behavior” was never mentioned.

8. You suggest that others have spoken with me privately about my behavior. How would you know the content of private conversations between me and others? If such information is being shared with you, it raises serious concerns about breaches of confidentiality and trust.

9. You state “to take action to protect the work…” – your statement insinuates that I do not take my role as Supervisor seriously, the residents and voters who I serve and that I only walk around Township Hall yelling and screaming all the time and everyone is so disrupted that no work is being accomplished. Your statement is a gross mischaracterization and untrue.

And, you have frequently interfered with my roles and disrupted my work, without having conversations with me. In other words, you do not respect me and my work, nor do you stay in your lane. I’ve included two examples off the top of my head:

-As LASA Chair, I create the agendas for the LASA Board meetings. One time you went ahead, without discussing with me, published the agenda and sent it to the LASA Board. I had to unpublish it.

-The Road Advisory Committee oversees and we work closely with WCRC. WCRC published the updated funding. You went ahead and emailed it to the Board and RAC, without communicating with me, the Chair of RAC. It should have been RAC providing the information to the Board.

– You have inserted yourself into the Park Road project. While any Board member may attend meetings, each of us typically participates through committees aligned with our stated interests. Notably, you had not previously expressed interest in this project but have recently attended the Park Road meetings despite not serving on either the Roads or Parks Committees.

10. I find it notable that you characterize my conduct as “disruptive and disorderly,” yet you have never raised similar concerns when Trustee Brant engages in unprofessional conduct or publicly attacks me or others during Board meetings. Further, as a member of the Personnel Committee, you are aware that staff have raised complaints regarding Trustee Brant’s conduct toward them. Standards of conduct must be applied consistently; selective enforcement undermines credibility and results in impermissible double standards.

Your agenda item is misleading, unsupported, and inappropriate. It misstates facts, exceeds your authority, and appears designed to damage my reputation rather than address any legitimate governance concern.”

Authority to Impose Restrictions Questioned

Kerry argues the board lacks authority to impose such restrictions, a point that has not been tested or ruled on.

The board took no action on the resolution at its Jan. 13 meeting. Board members indicated the matter could return for further discussion at the next regular meeting on Jan. 27. Meeting materials, including the proposed resolution and Kerry’s complete written response, are available through the township’s meeting records found online at https://www.sciotownshipmi.gov/ 

Photo 1: The Scio Township Board at its Jan. 13, 2025, meeting. Photo: Scio Twp Board video screenshot.

Photo 2: Public comments included support for Supervisor Kerry and criticized the board for its ongoing infighting. Photo: Scio Twp Board video screenshot.