Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Parks Events Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council debates Christmas decorations: $25,000 base budget, rentals favored but costs for added displays vary widely

2239231 · February 5, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Terrell council discussed holiday‑season decorations for 2025, with staff presenting options, sample rental and purchase costs, and a preference among several council members for rental packages to reduce staff time and storage needs. Council asked staff to return with menuized packages for budget consideration.

Terrell City Council on Feb. 4 discussed options for 2025 Christmas decorations and events, including the tradeoffs between renting turnkey displays and purchasing permanent items.

Assistant Director/ Downtown Project Manager Raelyn presented background and options, telling council the city budgets $25,000 annually for holiday decorations and listing possible add‑ons and sample costs: an ornamental rental “photo bench” for about $10,000 (30–45 day rental), a large entrance display for about $12,000 (rental), a Candy Cane Lane rental at roughly $16,000, and contractor tree‑wrapping priced at about $800–$1,000 per tree. Raelyn also said bases can be added to the existing downtown tree to increase its height incrementally over time.

Why it matters: Council members stressed the civic value of creating family‑friendly holiday attractions downtown and in parks, but they also expressed “sticker shock” at some vendor price points and questioned funding sources for recurring operational costs.

Council discussion and options

Several council members said they preferred rental, turnkey options because vendors handle setup, maintenance and takedown. Others asked staff to explore lower‑cost vendors, community or nonprofit partnerships, and whether funds from the Paddock (Type B) board could be used; staff explained Paddock’s enabling election language restricts some expenditures to capital projects and that many cities use Type B sales tax for operational holiday expenses when permitted by their charter or voter authorization.

Council members also suggested spreading decorations into parks (Ben Gill Park, Breezy Hill Park, Arley White Park) to reach families who may not travel downtown. Staff proposed returning with package options — a base package at the existing $25,000 budget and one or more add‑on packages — so council can choose a configuration during budget deliberations.

Ending

Council provided direction to staff to obtain multiple quotes, research how peer cities fund decorations, and present discrete package options (base and expanded) for a future council meeting and the budget process.