Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Land Use Taxation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lansing board votes to take no action on Grunemeyer RHID, deferring decision to county

5681208 · August 26, 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

The Lansing School Board voted 5–2 to take no action on the Grunemeyer RHID, effectively allowing county review to determine the outcome within the 30-day statutory window.

The Lansing School Board voted 5–2 on a motion to take no action on the Grunemeyer RHID, effectively leaving the matter for the county to decide within the 30-day review window.

Board member Jeff moved that the board "take no action on it" and "let the county decide," a motion that drew a second and brief discussion before the roll call vote. Jeff said the RHID "doesn't affect the Lansing School District" enough to warrant the board spending extended time on it and that the county is the more appropriate body to consider the request.

The motion passed on a roll-call vote: Board member Mister Bolland — yes; Board member Mister Boomgard — yes; Board member Amy Covey — no; Board member Mister M — yes; Board member Miss Wood — yes; Board member Missus Workman — no; Board member Mister Yoakam — yes (tally: 5–2). By the board’s practice and the timeline discussed by staff, allowing the board to take no action means the county will act within the 30-day statutory review period.

Staff member Danielle noted the timing constraints, saying the RHID "would fall in our 30 day window" and that the board’s next regular meeting would be outside that window. During discussion several board members expressed concern about spending district time on a matter they said primarily affects county tax administration.

Board members also debated whether a special meeting with public comment should be scheduled before the county acts; some members said scheduling a separate public-comment meeting would have required three votes before the agenda was posted and that option was not approved. A board member argued for greater public input, but the motion to take no action remained on the floor and carried.

The board moved on to the next agenda item after the vote.