Jackson City Council rejects Pearl Street special assessments after heated public hearing

Jackson City Council voted down two proposed special-assessment resolutions for Pearl Street on Jan. 14, 2025, after a lengthy public hearing and council debate that included several local business owners and a detailed funding breakdown from city staff. The failed votes leave the city with a $7.5 million water/transmission and street project that staff said would have relied in part on about $601,000 in assessments.

The council opened a board-of-review public hearing on the assessments and heard multiple business owners from Pearl Street. Larry Filipczak, who identified himself as the owner of 615 Pearl Street, said the assessment “has come in just about double” what he expected and that it would be “definitely impossible for me to pass this kind of a cost on to my tenant.” Darren Buecher, owner of 600 East Pearl, told council the assessments on commercial properties ranged widely and urged the council to “look at the assessments, should have honest discussions with the businesses involved” and reconsider the amounts.

City Manager Jonathan Green described the scope and funding for the multi-street water-transmission and reconstruction project and gave a line-item breakdown: “The total project is a $7,500,000 project,” he said, listing roughly $2,000,000 in water funds, $2,100,000 in sewer funds, a $1,700,000 EPA grant, $850,000 in street funds and an estimated $601,000 in street assessments. He told the council that if the assessments did not pass, “we will have to spread those that amount across the water funds, sewer funds, and street funds,” which staff said would result in deferring or cancelling an unspecified future project.

Council members expressed divided positions. Council member Forgrave argued for pursuing long-term solutions such as a millage and said, “I didn't get elected not to fix the roads,” emphasizing support for water infrastructure while acknowledging the burden on property owners. Council member Davis and others raised concern about the financial effect on noncommercial property holders and nonprofits; one council member pointed out a residential SEV cap of $15,000 applied under the city’s special-assessment policy and that commercial properties were not capped.

After discussion the motion to confirm Special Assessment No. 3444 for street reconstruction on Pearl Street from Cooper to Waterloo failed. The council later opened and closed a separate hearing for Special Assessment No. 3450 (the related half of the project) and that resolution also failed on the subsequent vote (final tally recorded by the clerk as 1–6 against).

City staff repeatedly said the assessments were calculated under the city's special-assessment policy, which factors roughly a dozen elements including linear frontage and the state equalized value (SEV) cap for lower-valued residential properties. Staff explained the SEV cap is intended to prevent an assessment from exceeding 25% of a residential property's SEV. A staff member noted there is no comparable cap for commercial properties under current policy, which contributed to the large disparities raised by business owners.

The city's presentation also noted grant and fund matches. Green told council the EPA grant portion for the transmission main requires a match funded from the water fund and that assessments do not affect the grant match. Several council members asked staff to return with options to fund local streets that might reduce reliance on property assessments, including a menu of alternatives such as a millage and revisions to the assessment policy.

With both assessments defeated, the city manager said staff will reallocate the assessment share across water, sewer and street funds and that some future projects will need to be postponed: “It just means we'll have to do just something will come off the table, but I couldn't tell you what it is now.” He also said staff had contingency plans and would present funding-options in the coming weeks.

Votes at a glance on these items: the council recorded the motion on Special Assessment No. 3444 as failed; the resolution tied to Special Assessment No. 3450 failed 1–6. Council members and several business owners asked staff to return with alternatives to the present special-assessment approach.

The council’s discussion combined technical fund details, appeals from local business owners about assessment fairness, and broader policy debate about long-term street funding solutions. Council members asked staff for follow-up options and clearer communications about how assessments were calculated and why amounts varied so widely for commercial properties.

Details and next steps: staff said they will present multiple funding options for local and major street reconstruction, including models for a potential millage or amended assessment policy. No new funding decision was made at the meeting; the failed votes mean the Pearl Street project funding will be reshuffled across the city’s capital funds if the project proceeds.

Ending: Council members emphasized the urgency of fixing aging water infrastructure even as they wrestled with how to balance that need against the immediate financial burden on property owners. The city manager and staff committed to return with options for council review.