GRATIOT COUNTY — A request for comment that Gratiot County Whistleblower sent to the county's Animal Control director after the Sept. 15 Board of Commissioners meeting was answered by the county administrator, who wrote that he is the board's official spokesperson and that he will not respond to questions posed by anonymous persons.
This publication is a participant in the exchange described here, not an outside observer of it. For that reason the report relies on the emails themselves, quoted exactly as written, and separates what those emails establish from what they do not. It reaches no conclusion about why any person acted as they did.
The Original Request
Commissioners discussed Animal Control at length during the Sept. 15 meeting, including a request to reclassify Animal Control officers' pay. To understand the department's perspective on those topics, the publication emailed Animal Control Director Jaime Haase on Sept. 17, 2026, under the subject line “Questions Regarding the September 15 Meeting.” The full text follows, unedited, including a misspelling of the director's first name in the greeting.
Hello Jamie
I am reaching out on behalf of the Gratiot County Whistleblower page.
The purpose of this page is to help provide the public with clear, documented information about local government, public meetings, county departments, policies, spending, and other matters that affect Gratiot County residents. Our goal is not to spread rumors or attack individuals, but to ask questions, review available information, and give departments or officials an opportunity to provide their perspective when questions or concerns arise.
We are currently looking into some of the topics discussed during the September 15 meeting and would like to better understand Animal Control’s perspective on a few of those issues.
Would someone from Animal Control be willing to answer a few questions via email or contact us on Messenger when you have time?
For privacy reasons, the person operating this page will remain anonymous, but these questions are being asked in good faith, and any responses provided will help us accurately represent Animal Control’s position.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Best regards,
Gratiot County Whistleblower
The email asked whether someone would answer questions. It did not ask for any public document or record.
Animal Control Seeks Guidance
Later that morning, Haase forwarded the email to Gratiot County Administrator Timothy J. Dolehanty. Her forwarding message, which appears in the email thread reviewed by this publication, reads:
Please advise on how I should respond. I have also forwarded this to Tom and asked for his opinion as well. I would like to work with both of you to ensure it is a proper response.
The message does not further identify “Tom,” and this report does not attempt to. The documented fact is that the director sought guidance before responding.
County Administrator Responds
Dolehanty then replied directly to Gratiot County Whistleblower. The body of his email reads:
Hello.
Thank you for your inquiry into topics discussed at the September 15 meeting of the Board of Commissioners.
As the official spokesperson for the Gratiot County Board of Commissioners, you may direct inquiries and requests for public documents to my attention. Please note that the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requires that all public document requests must include the requesting person's complete name, address, and contact information. Addresses must be written in compliance with United States Postal Service addressing standards and contact information must include a valid telephone number or electronic mail address (MCL 15.233). Likewise, I will not respond to questions posed from anonymous persons.
My contact information is provided below. I look forward to hearing from you regarding topics discussed at the September 15 Board of Commissioners meeting.
Respectfully,
Timothy J. Dolehanty
Gratiot County Administrator
FOIA Coordinator
The reply did two things. It identified Dolehanty as the official spokesperson for the Board of Commissioners and as the county's FOIA coordinator. And it stated that he will not respond to questions from anonymous persons.
Request for Comment vs. Public-Records Request
The two are different things. A request for comment asks a person or an office to answer questions. A public-records request asks a government body to produce documents, and Michigan's Freedom of Information Act sets out how such requests are made.
The Sept. 17 email was the first kind. It asked whether someone at Animal Control would answer questions and requested no documents. The administrator's reply addressed both inquiries and requests for public documents, and it cited FOIA's identification requirements for the latter.
This report draws no legal conclusion from that. It notes only that the original email did not seek records.
What the Emails Establish
- The publication asked Animal Control for its perspective on topics from the Sept. 15 meeting.
- The Animal Control director forwarded the request to the county administrator and asked how she should respond.
- The county administrator replied to the publication himself.
- He identified himself as the board's official spokesperson and as FOIA coordinator.
- He wrote that he will not respond to questions posed by anonymous persons.
- The original email did not request public documents.
What Is Still Unknown
The current record does not establish any of the following. Each is an open question, not a finding.
- Whether Animal Control employees are allowed to respond directly to media questions.
- Whether county departments are required to send media inquiries through the county administrator.
- Whether Haase simply chose to seek guidance in this instance.
- Whether the county has a written media-relations policy.
- Whether there is an internal directive that is not publicly posted.
- Why FOIA requirements were included in a response to an email that did not request records.
Nothing in the emails shows that anyone was prevented from speaking, that any law or policy was violated, or what any person's reasons were. Seeking guidance before answering a press inquiry, and routing such inquiries through a designated spokesperson, are both common practices in government.
Awaiting County Response
Gratiot County Whistleblower has sent Dolehanty a follow-up asking him to clarify one point: whether Animal Control employees are permitted to respond directly to questions from this publication, or whether all questions concerning county departments must instead be directed through his office.
As of publication, the county had not responded to that follow-up. This report will be updated when it does, and the county's answer will be reported in full. Any county official named here is welcome to respond, and any response will be added.
Readers can check back on this page for updates. Every change to this report will be listed below with its date.