Jackson council opens FY 2025–26 budget public hearing as residents press on DEI, water and streets

Jackson City Council opened a public hearing May 13 on the proposed fiscal year 2025–26 budget and heard more than a dozen public comments focused on the city’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) work, deferred water infrastructure and deteriorating streets.

Speakers at the hearing and during the following citizen comment period raised recurring concerns about the DEI program’s cost and priorities, the scope and pay of DEI staff, and whether DEI spending diverts scarce resources from water- and street-repair needs. Multiple speakers explicitly tied long-term infrastructure shortfalls — including the need to replace lead service lines and failing water mains — to fiscal sustainability and compared Jackson’s situation to other Michigan cities that faced crises when infrastructure was neglected.

The hearing drew comments from longtime attendees and residents. John C. King and Nicholas Thurston both questioned whether DEI expenditures are appropriate at this time and whether grant funding and remediation obligations for contaminated lots will fall to taxpayers. Thurston urged council to prioritize water-main replacement and said he believed DEI programming had taken attention and funds from those efforts. Mara McKay and Gayla (Gala) Ignacio spoke in favor of retaining DEI funding; McKay described community beautification projects and called the proposed DEI position at about $60,000 an appropriate investment, while Ignacio said DEI work helps preserve cultural events.

The budget discussion also drew requests for more aggressive street and pothole repair. Resident Elizabeth First showed council photos (submitted after the meeting) of deep, water-retaining potholes on Cypress and other streets and called neighborhood pavement conditions “dangerously bad.” She asked council to target more budget dollars to street maintenance as part of overall public-safety and quality-of-life priorities.

City staff and council members responded with context about the budget process and priorities. A staff speaker explained that the city applied for and received a federal competitive grant (the Build program, previously “RAISE”) that funds Eastside corridor street work and that professional services contracts are being approved now to keep the project on schedule. The manager noted the proposed budget maintains a high fund balance (described at roughly 30% in public remarks) and reduces the millage rate by 0.7 mills, while funding the city’s core services — police, fire, water and sewer, and roads — that together account for the largest share of spending.

Several commenters asked whether DEI functions must be salaried positions; Thurston and others suggested volunteers or boards could handle some work to save money. Council members and the mayor repeatedly framed budget trade-offs as difficult choices among competing priorities and praised staff for presenting a balanced draft after an extended review process.

The public hearing was opened and then closed during the meeting; council subsequently moved to the consent agenda and later approved the final budget at a subsequent meeting as part of the council’s regular adoption process (noted here only insofar as the public hearing and citizen comments occurred May 13). Ending

The city clerk closed the public hearing before the meeting recessed for a short break. Council members thanked staff for the budget work and urged continued public engagement on infrastructure and neighborhood issues. Several residents said they will follow up with staff and council on specific repair requests and neighborhood initiatives.