Garden City council adopts 7.581 mills after debate over fire-fee settlement and budget gaps

Garden City’s mayor and council voted on July 20 to adopt a 7.581 ad valorem millage rate for fiscal year 2026 after a lengthy public hearing and council discussion about budget shortfalls and a recent change in how the city must collect fire-protection charges.

Council members and city officials told the public the change follows recent court decisions that have questioned the separate “fire fee” model and required municipalities to treat that revenue as part of ad valorem tax collections. “A court did not tell us to pay the fee. We settled the case based on the fact that we anticipated that a court may agree that the tax is invalid,” the mayor said in explaining why a settlement reduced a potential $5.2 million claim to about $1.4 million.

Several residents urged the council to use surplus funds or cut spending rather than raise the millage. Amy Blackchman, a resident who reviewed the online budget materials, asked the council to publish a reconciliation showing total recurring revenues by source for 2025 compared with 2026, “including property taxes, fire fees, sales taxes, franchise fees, business taxes, licensing, permits, charges for service and transfers.” City staff replied that the budget documents are online but did not produce a single reconciled line-by-line comparison at the meeting.

Council members debated alternatives and the effect on the city’s fund balance and bond rating. One council member noted that appropriating more of the city’s fund balance could harm the city’s bond rating and increase future borrowing costs; another said seniors and low-income residents would be adversely affected by a large increase. After discussion, the council moved and carried the resolution to set the millage at 7.581 mills. The roll-call vote was 4 in favor (Hall, Lacer, Mars, Mayor Campbell) and 2 opposed (Bruner, Figuel).

The resolution adopts the ad valorem millage rate for the fiscal year; the council’s staff presentation and debate noted that adopting the higher rate would reduce the city’s appropriation of fund balance to an estimated roughly $700,000, while lower millage choices would have required larger appropriations. The council did not adopt any offsets such as targeted exemptions at the meeting. The resolution takes immediate effect for the fiscal year budget process, and the city will post the adopted rate in its budget documents as required by state law.