Time to cough it up taxpayers

By Charles Sercombe
Hamtramck taxpayers are now being tapped to pay for Mayor Adam Alharbi’s private legal bill.
That bill, estimated at about $200,000, is for legal fees Alharbi ran up to prevent 37 uncounted ballots from last November’s mayoral and city council election from being included in the final vote tally.
Alharbi insists this is not his personal bill, but instead is the city’s legal responsibility.
The mayor won November’s election by 11 votes.
His opponent, former city councilmember Muhith Mahmood, has been fighting to get the ballots counted. He sued the Wayne County Board of Canvassers and the City of Hamtramck over how the city handled those ballots.
The city argued that, although the city clerk’s office mishandled the ballots in question, the city did not do serious harm. The uncounted ballots in question were found the day after the election, and then immediately turned over to the county.
Mahmood argued that the ballots should be counted because every voter has a right for their voice to be heard, while Alharbi argued that the ballots could have been tainted by anyone in the clerk’s office, and that the ballots had lost their “chain of custody.”
Alharbi was not yet the mayor at the time of Mahmood’s lawsuit filing. Instead, Alharbi intervened in the matter on his own, and with his own attorney, according to court records.
The county’s Board of Canvassers split, in a 2-2 vote, on whether to include the ballots in the election count.
That tie vote triggered the ballots to be legally excluded from the count.
After winding its way through the Wayne County Circuit Court to the State Appeals Court, the appeals court ruled that the ballots must be counted.
Alharbi was unsuccessful in getting the Michigan Supreme Court to consider the matter, which meant the appeals court decision that the ballots must be counted still holds.
The city has not been a part of Alharbi’s legal dispute, nor Mahmood’s.
About three weeks ago, a resolution to pay Mayor Alharbi’s legal expenses was initially OK’d by only two councilmembers who voted for it. The other voting councilmember was Mohammed Hassan, who opposed the resolution.
The vote was initially ruled as passing, but on review by the city attorney, the vote was ruled invalid because there were not enough councilmembers participating in the vote to qualify as a quorum.
Flash forward to Tuesday’s council meeting, and the resolution to pay Alharbi’s fees was placed on the agenda. That resolution was then passed by councilmembers Nayeem Choudhury, Abu Musa and Muhtasin Sadman.
Councilmembers Mohammed Hassan and Yousuf Saed abstained, without giving reasons, and Councilmember Mohammed Alsomiri voted against the resolution.
Alsomiri insisted on knowing how much money, exactly, the city would have to pay. Alharbi told the council that an invoice will be submitted later.
As for the expense, Alharbi said the city has an $8 million budget surplus, a statement which is contrary to a financial report presented to the council several weeks ago.
That report said the city is in deficit spending, having burned through its budget surplus.
“We’re acting like this is going to be a cost to the city,” Alharbi told the council. He continued to justify the cost, saying: “I’m just being real right now.”
The Review reached out to Acting City Manager Syed Amir Hassan, who is also the city’s Financial Director, regarding the city’s financial picture and also who placed the resolution to pay for the legal fees on the council agenda, but he did not return a call.
The Review also reached out to Alharbi as to whether he placed the resolution on the agenda, but he also did not reply. According to the city charter, the mayor and city manager together set the council agenda.
Unlike other proposed resolutions, the exact wording was not included, nor was there an explanation of the financial impact to the city’s budget, or how this cost would be paid.
Mayor Alharbi justified his stance that the city was responsible for paying the legal bill by insisting that Mahmood made the lawsuit against the city and also “against the sitting mayor.”
At the time of Mahmood’s lawsuit, Alharbi was not yet officially the mayor.
Alharbi hired an attorney without the prior approval of the city to contest the counting of the uncounted ballots.
Still, Alharbi told the council that the “city should have covered” his legal expenses “from the beginning – for its mayor and the city itself.”
Alharbi did not request that the city pay for his legal fees until recently.
The whole issue raises yet another question: whether the city will be responsible for Mahmood’s legal fees then, as well. Alharbi insists that, since Mahmood is not the mayor, he does not qualify for the city’s legal services.
The issue of Alharbi’s legal fees comes at a time when the controversial ballots are finally expected to be counted within the next week or two.
There is a chance that Alharbi could find himself out of the job as mayor — after having already served in office for nine months.
Posted Aug. 28, 2026