Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Breaking Bread Village topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mayor's veto of $9,162.50 allocation to Breaking Bread Village sustained after council debate
Summary
Public commenters and commissioners debated a $9,162.50 allocation for Breaking Bread Village on June 15. The mayor vetoed the allocation and the commission declined to override the veto; commissioners cited legal and transparency concerns while supporters said private funding would cover the program.
The Bay City Commission sustained Mayor Gerard’s veto of a $9,162.50 allocation to Breaking Bread Village after public comment and internal debate at its June 15 meeting.
Resident Denise Davidson urged commissioners not to override the veto, saying taxpayer priorities should focus on infrastructure and public safety rather than funding the Breaking Bread Villages series. "I urge you to not override the mayor's veto," Davidson told the commission during public input. Other residents said transparency about funding and how the program was presented to the public was lacking.
Commissioners split on the program’s merits but coalesced around legal and procedural concerns. Commissioner Runberg, who said he ultimately would vote to support the veto, cited the confidential city attorney opinion and said the question of whether a contract existed for the work made it inappropriate to use taxpayer funds without clearer transparency. "I will be voting to support the veto," Runberg said during the discussion, citing contract and transparency concerns.
Mayor Gerard and Commissioner Tenney defended the value of Breaking Bread Village programs as community‑building work and said outside funding sources had been sought. The mayor said the Community Foundation and other partners had funded initial sessions and indicated additional funding would cover the remaining sessions; several commissioners later confirmed that funding alternatives had been identified.
The clerk conducted a roll call on whether the commission would pass the vetoed resolution notwithstanding the veto; the roll call returned nine 'no' votes, sustaining the mayoral veto. Commissioners said the program would continue on a non‑taxpayer funding path while the procedural questions that motivated the veto are resolved.
Outcome: the mayoral veto was sustained; the commission did not appropriate the $9,162.50 from city funds. Several commissioners asked staff to document funding sources clearly in future proposals and to avoid presenting programs to the public that would require taxpayer funding absent prior commission approval.
