Macomb County Prosecutor Peter Lucido touted his legal victory over County Executive Mark Hackel on Monday when the state Supreme Court backed his ability to hire outside legal counsel for civil matters.

The Michigan Supreme Court upheld the state Court of Appeals to allow the county Board of Commissioners to allocate $42,500 to Lucido to hire law firms or individual attorneys for some ongoing legal services instead of using county lawyers.

In a statement released Tuesday, Lucido also referenced the county board winning a separate ruling the same day that reversed the appeals court and will force Hackel’s administration to provide the county board with real-time, “read only” electronic access to county financial data.

“The Court has again sent Mr. Hackel a clear message that he cannot rule like a king, and his abuse of power must end,” Lucido said in a statement Tuesday. “These are historic decisions that protect Macomb County taxpayers and the integrity of justice in our county.”

Lucido, a Republican, and Democrat Hackel have butted heads over budgeting and staffing issues since Lucido took office in 2021.

This is the second time Lucido has prevailed at the state high court in a legal dispute with the executive. In 2022, Lucido won a ruling over his hiring of four employees via the board during the annual budget process instead of going through Executive Office. Hackel refused to fill the posts until the ruling.

In the recent case, Lucido gained the board’s approval, including an override of Hackel’s veto, in November 2023 to hire from among several law firms for the 2024 budget. But Hackel refused to sign the contracts, prompting Lucido to sue. The Prosecutor’s Office will still use county lawyers to represent his office in some matters.

Lucido, who has also had disputes with county Corporation Counsel John Schapka, said access to outside counsel is essential to ensure prosecutorial independence.

The Court of Appeals last year directed Hackel to give the money to Lucido and told the parties to “work together to facilitate the appropriate contracts.”

In his statement, Lucido also said he believes Hackel has spent “over a million taxpayer dollars on high-priced lawyers to fight against financial transparency.”

“It makes sense to ask, ‘What is Mr. Hackel trying to hide?’” he said.

Deputy County Executive Andrew McKinnon said he could not immediately provide data on how much the Executive Office has spent on legal fees for the cases.

McKinnon called the rulings in both cases clarifications on how the department will operate.

“Now with the clarification we have received, it is the board’s responsibility whether or not they want to give Pete the $42,000 or the couple of hundred thousand that he originally asked for,” McKinnon said in regard to the Lucido ruling. “That is their determination in the budget process moving forward.”

Board Chair Joe Sabatini of Macomb Township applauded both rulings as providing clarity for county officials.

“A lot of questions that have been underlying for a number of years have now been answered,” Sabatini said in an interview.

Regarding the real-time access to financial data, Sabatini said in a statement, “The Supreme Court recognized the Board’s valid ordinance requirement that the Board be provided accurate and timely financial information.”

“It will help us drastically,” he added in the interview. “We literally will be able to go right into the system and gather information immediately. It will allow us to do things we have not been able to do in the past.”

It will improve the board’s ability to monitor spending in a more timely manner and gain immediate access to past data instead of requesting it from the county Finance Department, he added. It also will help the board during the annual budget process each fall for the following year, he explained.

“We want useful information provided to the board that can be discussed in an open forum,” he said.

Sabatini and McKinnon said the two sides will work together to implement the process on how county board will access the date.

“The Board looks forward to working together with the County Executive for the common goal of accountable and efficient government for the citizens of Macomb County,” Sabatini said in the statement.

The battle between Hackel and the board dates back to 2017, when the Republican-majority commission adopted an ordinance that required Hackel to provide the commission’s director of legislative affairs with real-time, read-only access to the county’s integrated financial software program. Hackel refused to do so, kicking off litigation between the county leaders in 2018.

Hackel initially prevailed on the issue in a January 2022 opinion by Macomb Circuit Judge James Maceroni that was later upheld by the appeals court.

Hackel’s attorney argued in court earlier this year the executive was operating within the authority afforded to his position and that a decision blocking him from doing so would undermine the authority of county executives across the state.

But the Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion written by Justice Elizabeth Welch, found Macomb County’s charter and ordinances gave the board legal authority to view real-time, read-only financial information.

The plain language of the ordinance, Welch wrote, “requires the county executive to provide the commission or its agent with access to real-time, read-only access to the financial software program used by the county.”

Michigan Supreme Court Justice Noah Hood, who was appointed in April, did not participate in Monday’s orders.

The decision reversed an earlier ruling by the Michigan Court of Appeals and sent the case back to Macomb County Circuit Court for proceedings consistent with the order.