Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Streetlight Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Garden City council fails to pause streetlight assessment for one year
Summary
After extended debate and public comment, the Garden City City Council voted to keep the annual streetlight assessment in the FY2025-26 budget; a motion to remove the assessment for one year failed following a roll call.
Garden City City Council on June 2 considered and rejected a motion to remove the city’s streetlight special assessment for one year, an action supporters said would relieve residents of roughly $30 per year but that opponents said would create a roughly $350,000 budget shortfall.
The debate centered on whether residents had been misled about what the assessment paid for and on how quickly planned LED replacements and state grants would reduce operating costs. Council member Kara Fotis moved to remove the streetlight assessment for one year and to reevaluate in 2026; Council member Hughes supported the motion. After a roll-call vote—Council member Kara Fotis and Council member Hughes voting yes; Council member King, Council member Witt, Mayor Pro Tem Dold and Mayor Jacobs voting no—the motion failed and the assessment remained in the FY2025-26 budget.
City Manager Gibbons told the council the LED conversion will not deliver the 50–70% electricity savings some residents expected; he said the city’s estimate is closer to 10 percent and gave an example figure of about $65,000 in annual savings from LEDs. Gibbons also said awarded state grant work will roll out in phases, with an initial grant starting in 2026 and another phase from SEMCOG expected in 2028.
Council members who supported removing the assessment said many residents believed the annual fee paid for bulb replacement and conversion to LED. "We were supposed to talk about the last meeting, and I think we all got sidetracked with the water," Council member Kara Fotis said, urging clarity about whether last year’s removal had been temporary. Council member Hughes said he and neighbors assumed the assessment was removed permanently and pressed for relief for residents who had expected LED replacements.
Council members opposing the one-year removal emphasized the fiscal impact on the general fund. Council member King described the assessment as providing revenue the city uses to offset DTE bills and said removing it outright would force either cuts to services or increased use of fund balance. King and others noted the assessment currently yields about $350,000 and that the per-household charge has fallen from about $37.30 in 2011 to $30.89.
Public commenters gave mixed views. Anthony Tackett of Fairfield Street said the roughly $30 annual cost was minimal and urged the council to keep the assessment in place. Other residents urged more accountability about how past assessment and other city funds were spent.
City staff told the council that if the council elected to remove the revenue, staff would return with appropriation adjustments at the next meeting to rebalance the budget or identify offsets. The council did not adopt that change on June 2.
The council moved on to other agenda items after the vote; staff indicated they will present budget adjustment options if future action is requested by council members.
