Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Childcare Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Decatur council rejects $124,877 increase to city funding for Love, Learning and Laughter daycare
Summary
After divided debate, the City Council voted 3–4 to reject a resolution that would have increased the city's $400,000 commitment to finish renovations at Love, Learning and Laughter Daycare; supporters said the center is critical for workforce and neighborhood stability while opponents cited prior city investments and the owner's contractual responsibility for overruns.
The Decatur City Council voted 3–4 to reject a resolution asking the city to increase its construction commitment to Love, Learning and Laughter Daycare, which would have raised the city's portion from $400,000 to about $524,877 to cover contractor bids that exceeded earlier estimates.
The request came after owner Cherry Johnson told the council that original project estimates from the architect and earlier bids had been in the $500,000–$550,000 range and that the most recent contractor bids pushed the city portion over the $400,000 threshold. "This project is locally owned. This project, these jobs are local and the revenue will stay local," Johnson said in public comment, urging the council to approve the amendment so the facility could open for working families.
Supporters on the council, including Councilman Cooper, argued the center addresses childcare gaps that affect parents' ability to work. Councilman Cooper said the project "is a worthwhile investment" and emphasized the costs of letting the building deteriorate or paying demolition costs instead. James McFarland, speaking as a resident, urged the council to finish what it had started and suggested a May 1, 2026 target completion date.
Opponents noted the council previously negotiated a $400,000 cap and that the city has already invested roughly $1.5 million in the project. Councilman Cole said the council had "drawn a line in the sand" at $400,000 and expressed concern about repeatedly increasing public subsidies for a privately owned business. The mayor and others similarly pointed to prior commitments and fiscal constraints.
The motion to pass the resolution was moved and seconded from the floor; the formal roll call recorded Councilwoman Cruz (aye), Councilman McDaniel (no), Councilman Horn (aye), Councilman Colt (no), Councilman Cooper (aye), Councilman Gregory (no) and Mayor Morwolf (no), yielding 3 ayes and 4 nays. With the amendment defeated, the separate budget amendment tied to the resolution was not needed.
Why it matters: Council supporters framed the project as workforce and economic development in areas with high poverty and declining school enrollment, while opponents said the city had contractual limits and limited capacity to continue increasing subsidies to a private operator. The defeat leaves the project owner responsible for covering the bid overage unless the council revisits the issue.
Next steps: Council did not immediately approve alternative funding; staff said the budget amendment contingent on passage would not proceed. The council did not set a new vote date on the amendment during the meeting.
