Macomb County Prosecutor Peter Lucido has sued county Corporation Counsel John Schapka and the county Ethics Board, and Lucido’s lawyer has filed an ethics complaint against Schapka, both mostly claiming a conflict of interest while asserting an illegal closed session was held.

Lucido and his attorney, Todd Perkins, contend Schapka has a conflict of interest serving as an attorney for Lucido but also as legal counsel for the Ethics Board and for County Executive Mark Hackel, with whom Lucido has had multiple legal disputes over authority over staffing in the Prosecutor’s Office since Lucido took office in 2021.

Lucido filed the lawsuit June 28 in Macomb County Circuit Court, and Perkins filed the ethics complaint two days earlier.

“It’s time to shed some light on the Macomb County Ethics Board practices in a court of law, stop the use of the board for political purposes, and give it power to look into opaque county contracts to prevent a repeat of the Macomb County corruption I’ve been cleaning up after,” Lucido said in a press release in apparent reference to former county prosecutor Eric Smith.

Two ethics complaints were filed against Lucido, a Republican, earlier this year by attorney Mark Brewer, a Democrat, claiming the prosecutor has used county resources for his political purposes.

One complaint survived the initial review and is scheduled for a July 17 hearing to determine whether a violation occurred for which the board could fine Lucido up to $500. That complaint alleges Lucido’s improperly used, and continues to use, a photograph of himself at his desk in the Prosecutor’s Office in the County Administration Building in Mount Clemens on his campaign web site.

The complaint that was dismissed by the board alleged Lucido allowed Paul Manni, a Sterling Heights City Council candidate, to use a photograph of himself in Lucido’s office for his campaign.

Perkins, in his ethics complaint, calls Schapka “biased” against Lucido, pointing out in an Ethics Board complaint Schapka serves at the will of Hackel. Hackel appoints members of the Ethics Board, with county Board of Commissioners’ approval.

“He is an extension of the County Executive, because he was hired by, and reports to, the County Executive,” Perkins said.

Schapka declined to comment on the lawsuit and ethics complaint, but he previously told The Macomb Daily he does not have a conflict of interest. He rarely represents Lucido or Hackel so he cannot have a conflict of interest. After Lucido took office, he has insisted Schapka or his office not represent him.

In his duties Schapka primarily represents the county as a whole but can provide legal advice to Hackel and other officials and entities.

Schapka serves in an advisory role to the five-member Ethics Board, which makes decisions on ethics complaints. Schapka has said he does not recommend how they should vote.

Ethics Board Chair Dorie Vazquez-Nolan said last month Schakpa does not discuss specifics of a case.

“We have utilized Corporation Counsel to answer questions from members strictly related to the interpretation of the Ethics ordinance and state law,” Vazquez-Nolan said.

Perkins conceded he can’t prove Schapka has worked against his client’s interest but insisted the “appearance of impropriety” is enough that Schapka should no longer serve as the Ethics Board’s counsel for the complaint against Lucido.

Lucido’s request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to prevent Schapka from advising the Ethics Board is scheduled for a hearing Tuesday in front of Macomb County Circuit Judge James Maceroni.

Lucido is asking Maceroni to “invalidate all adverse actions taken by the Ethics Board” against him, notably the decision to set a July 17 hearing at which the board would decide whether Lucido violated the Ethics Ordinance by using the office photo on his campaign web site.

He is also asking the judge to determine whether the state Campaign Finance Act supersedes the county Ethics Ordinance so the Ethics Board does not have jurisdiction, and accuses the Ethics Board of violating the Open Meetings Act by illegally meeting in closed session to discuss Lucido’s case.

The lawsuit asserts Schapka shouldn’t be involved with the ethics complaint against Lucido because he “and his corporation counsel staff are able and does in fact represent and offer legal advice and counsel to the Prosecutor’s Office.”

In his ethics complaint, Perkins also accuses Schapka of not advising the board to pursue a complaint against Lucido’s opponent in this year’s election, Christina Hines, for her use of a photo of her standing in front of the county Probation and Election departments that includes the names of those departments and the county seal.

Perkins says that photo is equivalent to the photo for which Lucido still faces a potential ethics violation.

“The hypocrisy and double standard weakens the Ethics Board and distracts the ethics focus away from following the money in county contracts,” Perkins said.

Ethics violations by the board are fairly rare. The body in 2017 found then Republican county clerk Karen Spranger committed a violation when she allowed two non-employees access to the county computer system, for which she was fined $100. In 2016, the board found then Democratic public works commissioner Anthony Marrocco in violation for filming a campaign ad on county property and fined him $125.

Brewer also alleges Lucido violated the state Campaign Finance Act in a complaint to the state Bureau of Elections, accusing him of multiple acts. They include using a county email to send a newsletter to county employees at their county email addresses that includes a heading with a link to his campaign web site, and distributing campaign items — a tote bag with his campaign web site address printed on it — at a county-sponsored senior event last fall and deploying county employees and resources for campaign activities.

The election bureau is investigating.