Residents raise concerns about CAPER spending, road conditions and commissioner conduct at Battle Creek meeting

Several members of the public used the Sept. 16 Battle Creek City Commission public-comment period to raise concerns about federal program spending, local infrastructure and commission conduct.

During the meeting's public-comment period, a public commenter, John Kennethick of 234 South Avenue, addressed the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) for program year 2024 and criticized how HUD-funded Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME funds were allocated in the report. Kennethick said the CAPER shows $321,761 allocated to the code department and $256,883 to city administration for the year and asserted that over approximately 25 years, the city has directed about $23 million to code and administration from these federal funds. He questioned funding for local projects and asked whether organizations such as Habitat for Humanity are receiving CAPER funds for specific addresses, noting two line items referenced as $143,000 for projects at 25 North Woodlawn and 273 West Spalding; he asked whether such work is being funded by federal dollars rather than wholly by the organizations themselves.

"Are we supporting CAPER? Are we supporting Habitat? They don't have to do this anymore on their own?" Kennethick asked, adding that federal dollars he said were spent should be scrutinized.

In a separate public comment on program spending and community services, another commenter, Kathy Antea of Parkers Drive, thanked commissioners for supporting Neighborhood Planning Councils (NPCs) and promoted upcoming community fundraising and housing-discussion ideas. Antea encouraged the commission to consider a housing millage similar to one in Kalamazoo County and said she believes local groups are well organized to use such funding.

Public commenters also raised non-financial concerns. Jeremy Cox of 20 Leach Drive described a severely deteriorated road surface on Leach near Harold that he said impedes emergency-vehicle access and snow-plow service; the mayor and staff acknowledged the report and asked that Cox provide contact information so city staff could follow up.

A third substantive public comment came from Autumn Smith, who raised concerns about a conduct incident during the meeting in which she said Commissioner Simmons "personally attack[ed] citizens by name calling." Smith quoted the city code of ethics, identified as section 212.05 in her remarks, and asked the commission to address the reported conduct with review and training. Smith also raised an electronic voting issue: she said some attendees were unable to log in to record votes and argued that alternative roll-call or verbal methods specified in Robert's Rules of Order were not used when the electronic vote malfunctioned.

"The code explicitly states that commissioners must assure fair and equal treatment of all persons," Smith said. "Personal attacks and name calling directly violate these principles." She urged the commission to investigate and to restore a culture of respect through training and review.

Staff response and next steps: meeting staff acknowledged that an electronic voting display and remote login issue prevented one commissioner from being shown as joined during an early vote (introduction of ordinance 15-2025). Staff told the commission that the missing commissioner had in fact voted affirmatively and that the clerk would record the vote as an affirmative, noting the commission recorded the result as 7-0 for that introduction. For the road complaint, city staff asked Jeremy Cox to leave contact details so staff could follow up. There was no immediate substantive staff reply during the meeting to Kennethick's CAPER questions beyond the public-comment record; the CAPER public hearing earlier in the meeting had been opened and closed with no speakers at that hearing.

What was at issue: the CAPER is the city's annual report to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development describing how federal CDBG and HOME funds were spent in program year 2024. Public commenters asked for greater transparency on allocations to city code/enforcement staff, administration and nonprofit partners, and whether specific project costs cited in the CAPER represent expenditures of federal funds. The meeting record shows staff opened the CAPER public hearing earlier in the agenda and reported no public comments during that hearing; the CAPER-related line items referenced by Kennethick appeared in general public comment rather than in the public-hearing record.

Contact/follow-up: Staff indicated they would follow up with the citizen who reported the road condition; the commission did not take immediate formal action on the ethics complaint during the meeting.