Maumee committee backs 4% street‑lighting assessment increase, debates owning poles vs. relying on Toledo Edison

The Maumee Finance & Economic Development Committee voted on July 1 to recommend a 4% increase to the city’s street‑lighting assessment to preserve the city’s ability to levy that assessment and to fund a multi‑year capital plan to replace aging poles.

Staff presented a long‑term capital plan and photometric rationale for replacing many of the city’s poles—especially along commercial corridors such as Dussel, Conant and Ford—so the community can move from isolated, aging Toledo Edison poles to city‑owned poles that staff say are lower, comply with a “dark sky” approach and can be maintained uniformly. The presentation included a phased schedule and cost forecasts running through 2032.

Jennifer, the city finance staff member, described the current street‑lighting fund and operating costs: about $297,500 in operating expenses for the year and roughly $765,000 in assessment revenue that currently supports replacement and maintenance. She told the committee that a 4% assessment increase would raise the average parcel assessment from about $1.20 in 2025 to about $1.25 in 2026—roughly $0.05 extra per parcel annually—and would generate roughly an additional $30,000 in assessment revenue. Staff cautioned that the increase alone would not cover the full capital plan but would help start the program.

Committee members pressed staff on several technical and policy points: the number and heights of poles required to meet state photometric standards (staff said taller poles require fewer units but create over‑illumination; lower poles require more units with overlapping light circles), the difference in installed cost between a basic wooden pole and a city standard pole with direct‑burial base and electrical apparatus (staff estimated roughly $10,000 for a full modern pole versus about $2,500 for a simple wood pole), and operational questions about whether owning poles would shift maintenance liability from Toledo Edison to the city.

Multiple councilmembers urged the city to be proactive because poles have been failing; staff said several poles had fallen since the last meeting. Staff recommended a phased approach—beginning with targeted streets and replacing about 10 residential poles per year—while discussing funding options that include citywide assessments, parcel‑specific construction assessments, or use of the B fund.

The committee also discussed exploring collective conversations with neighboring communities to press Toledo Edison for better responsiveness or to pursue joint purchasing that could lower cost. Staff said the city has an option to buy poles and pay the electric operating cost through a city meter rather than rely on Edison’s owned poles, but that installing city poles requires meter and base installations on a street‑by‑street basis.

A motion to add the 4% increase to the assessment and continue the capital plan discussion was moved and seconded; the committee recorded a roll‑call vote in the affirmative and recommended the measure to council for further readings and final vote.