Jackson City Council passes water and sewage rate hike
LANSING, Mich. (WLNS) — The Jackson City Council approved a hike in the city's water and sewage rates for the next two fiscal years at a meeting Tuesday night.
On average, Jackson residents will see a $5 increase to water and a $6 increase to sewage each month, for a total of $33 per quarter, according to a memo to City Manager Jonathan Greene from Mike Osborn, the city's Director of Public Works. This would come out to $132 a year on average, though the exact amount on your bill would come down to your water usage.
These rates were Option #1 of three rate hikes presented to the City Council. Option #1 was the steepest hike of the three, raising the average homeowner's bill by $33 a quarter in comparison to Option #2, raising it by $27, and Option #3 by $21.
Osborn's memo says the rate increases would help the city invest and improve its aging water systems, including treatment facilities and collection and distribution infrastructure, and ensure the city complies with the Lead and Copper Rule.
The Council also discussed the possibility of switching from quarterly billing to monthly billing, with Ward 3 Councilmember Angelita Gunn and Ward 4 Councilmember Conner Wood saying they spoke with constituents who brought that to their attention as a possibility. Wood said one of his constituents told him monthly billing would make the rate increases 'more tolerable.'
Greene says the city has been inching toward monthly billing for the past five years. He says the city has been buying and installing meter parts that allow for remote reading to make the switch, but the process is ongoing.
When Gunn asked if there was a specific reason the rate hikes were over 2 years, Greene said that the City has 'gotten into the habit' of two-year rates, as they assist with planning long-term projects.
Jackson Mayor Daniel Mahoney brought up the possibility of creating a flexible long-term plan, alternating between rate increases and decreases per year, depending on the funding needs of the city, which would avoid large rate hikes.
Ward 6 Councilmember Will Forgrave said that one of the things that made him more comfortable in supporting the rate increases was that, even with the proposed rate increases, the city would still be far below the state average.
In the end, Option #1 of the three increases was approved by the city 4-3 by the council.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
‘Major shift': State House passes K-12 school budget
LANSING, Mich. (WLNS) — The Michigan House of Representatives approved the GOP's $21.9 million for K-12 schools in the state Wednesday. The plan proposes $10,025 in foundation funding per student, and an additional estimated $1,975 in separate funds per student if school districts adhere to certain requirements. These requirements include having one school resource officer and one mental health support staff member on staff and submitting an annual report detailing the use of the funds. Lawmakers behind the proposal say this would be an increase of $2,392 per student. 'This budget represents a major shift in how we approach education in Michigan,' said State Rep. Ann Bollin, chair of the House Appropriations Committee (R-Brighton Township). 'We're building a stronger model by putting trust where it belongs — in the hands of local school boards, parents, and educators who know their communities best. Every district is different, and the people closest to the students should be the ones making the decisions.' Lawmakers say the plan would also ban funding for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives and prevent biological males from competing in female sports divisions, as well as stop schools from using 'curriculums that promote race or gender stereotyping.' Representatives behind the appropriations say these funds would be used to help schools reduce class sizes, improve reading scores, and better school infrastructure, and that the plan gives schools flexibility to spend the money as they please. 'We're done with top-down mandates that ignore the real challenges our schools face,' Bollin said. 'This plan meets schools where they are and gives them the flexibility they need to lift kids up and help them succeed.' However, those opposed to the appropriations say the budget cuts important programs for students, such as school breakfast and lunch, which could have negative impacts on families. 'House Republicans' education budget could raise costs for working families by nearly $900 a year, force students to go hungry, and take money away from teachers trying to help students learn — while doing absolutely nothing to improve reading, math, or science scores,' said Curtis Hertel, chair of the Michigan Democratic Party. Michigan State Superintendent Michael F. Rice says the appropriations 'fall short' in supporting the schools, calling it a 'duct-taped budget' and saying the lack of specified appropriations would be detrimental toward certain efforts to improve the state's school system. 'While I support increasing per-pupil funding and reducing to a significant degree the number of categorical grants to give school districts more flexibility in how to spend state dollars, this budget unnecessarily puts at risk statewide education priorities,' said Rice. 'The budget lumps funds into large block grants that would diminish the statewide efforts to support, protect, and help educate children and at the same time address the state's shortage of certified and highly trained teachers.' The plan advanced with support from Republicans and opposition from Democrats. It now heads to the Democrat-controlled Senate, which previously passed its . The two chambers need to agree on a budget by July 1. 6 News will keep you updated with the latest. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
Expert weighs in on military deployment to Los Angeles protests
LANSING, Mich. (WLNS) – As protests continue against the Trump administration's immigration crackdown, Michigan experts and officials are speaking their minds. Protests started in Los Angeles on Friday, and since then, President Trump has ordered thousands of National Guard members and Marines to deploy in the area. 6 News spoke with a local Homeland Security and National Guard expert about his thoughts on the situation. Retired Brigadier General and Cooley Law Professor Emeritus Michael McDaniel told 6 News he's surprised at how small the protests are compared to the heavy military response. McDaniel says the current LA protests and riots are 'nowhere near' the that occurred after the Rodney King verdict. In that instance, the governor did request President George H.W. Bush to send troops, and Bush invoked the Insurrection Act. This is the most recent time the Insurrection Act has been used by a U.S. president. McDaniel rose through the ranks of the Michigan National Guard for nearly three decades and taught Domestic Operations Law and Constitutional Law at Cooley Law School. He explains that the president does have the ability to use military force domestically through the Insurrection Act—however, he says President Trump has not invoked the act, and neither the California governor nor the state legislature has requested the deployment of troops—which McDaniel says is required before the federal government intervenes. '[President Trump] is, in essence, using military forces for the sole purpose of protecting a federal building,' said McDaniel. 'The military has to be apolitical, neutral. They cannot be engaged in that.' McDaniel says the ability to engage and deter criminal activity is first and foremost with the states, and the federal government should stay out of it. '[The military] cannot do law enforcement,' said McDaniel. 'And if they do, they are acting unlawfully. Maybe the president has immunity under the Supreme Court ruling, but the military leaders do not…and they would be following, I believe, an unlawful order which is contrary to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.' McDaniel says he believes President Trump is acting unconstitutionally in this situation. Furthermore, McDaniel does not believe there's any need for federal troops to be involved. 'It suggests that the president, the current president, sees the military as an instrument that he can use to quash political speech,' said McDaniel. McDaniel also says that although the current issues are in California, the implications are far-reaching and can affect anyone. 'Protests are covered under the First Amendment,' said McDaniel. 'If…the White House decides to use military force to stifle First Amendment debate, political debate, political speech—which goes to the core of our Constitution and our system of government—none of us are safe from an authoritarian state. I'm stating that awfully strongly, but I believe it strongly, that you have to allow types of protests. You cannot have the federal government step in.' Representative Josh Schriver (R-Oxford) was scheduled to hold a press conference Wednesday, urging local governments to cooperate with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and put a stop to 'lawless violence'. 6 News planned to attend that conference, but it was rescheduled to Thursday. 6 News will keep you updated as we learn more. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Los Angeles Times
14 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Cypress withholds records from TimesOC related to city manager allegations
In the aftermath of 'unlawful acts of misconduct' allegations made against Cypress City Manager Peter Grant, the city is refusing to turn over related records to TimesOC. Since former Public Works Director Doug Dancs first made the accusation while calling for Grant's firing during the April 28 Cypress City Council meeting, concerned residents and council members have pushed for more transparency. On May 15, TimesOC filed a public records request seeking documents detailing allegations of misconduct or harassment involving Grant and Dancs. The request also asked for invoices from the Los Angeles-based Liebert, Cassidy, Whitmore firm, as an attorney with the firm signed off on Dancs' $183,000 separation agreement. The city's payment register also shows nearly $105,000 in fees paid to the firm for legal services dating back to May 2024. It remains unclear if the payments were related to any human resources issue involving Dancs and Grant. Either way, Cypress cited attorney-client privilege first and foremost in withholding all responsive records — including invoices — from disclosure. 'Any invoices or related records maintained by the city regarding [the firm's] advice regarding any workplace investigations are exempt from disclosure,' City Clerk Alisha Farnell wrote in an emailed response to TimesOC's public records request. 'These invoices contain descriptions of confidential legal services and matters, and their disclosure would reveal privileged attorney-client communications and legal strategy.' David Loy, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, said that Cypress' exemptions raised questions on both sides. He pointed to a case in Petaluma were an appellate court eventually ruled that an investigative report into a woman firefighter's claims of sexual harassment and discrimination by an outside firm was privileged. 'On the right facts, privilege can potentially apply to outside counsel doing investigation, depending on the situation,' Loy said. 'It's very fact-sensitive.' With regard to withheld invoices, Loy turned to a California Supreme Court ruling in a case involving the ACLU's efforts to obtain invoices from Los Angeles County related to payments made to private law firms in lawsuits against its sheriff's department. 'The court ruled that invoices are not always privileged, but drew a distinction between open cases and closed cases,' Loy said. 'When a matter is active and ongoing, the court held that the invoice, as a whole, is subject to privilege — even the total amount spent. Once a case is closed, the invoices are no longer completely privileged.' Farnell claimed that the firm is providing 'ongoing advice' to Cypress. The city, she said, would be disclosing the total amount of legal billing by the firm since May 2024 in connection with any workplace investigations. TimesOC already tallied that figure through Cypress' payment register. 'With respect to invoices, the issue is not whether the law firm is on a permanent retainer, the issue is whether that particular case or matter is done,' Loy said. All parties signed Dancs' separation agreement by October. His last day of employment with Cypress was Dec. 31. The city paid him out in January. To whatever degree privilege is legally applicable to documents related to Dancs' allegations, Cypress City Council, as the client, would have the authority to waive it. In a recent high-profile case, Anaheim waived attorney-client privilege in 2023, which cleared the way for the release of a redacted anti-corruption report to its city council and the public. Cypress Mayor David Burke called a special meeting on May 19 to direct City Atty. Fred Galante to turn over any such documents to the council. The question of waiving attorney-client privilege did not appear on the agenda. With Councilmember Leo Medrano absent because he was attending a Democratic club meeting at a Cerritos IHOP instead, the council deadlocked 2-2 on the question. During the June 9 Cypress City Council meeting, a former council member, Frances Marquez, advocated for the item to be brought back for discussion at a future meeting. 'You need to hand that investigation over to the mayor,' she told Galante. 'Everybody in this community is still watching.' But for the second straight council meeting since the special meeting deadlock, no council member took any action to revive the discussion. Instead, a review of Grant's job appeared on the agenda. Galante reported during the meeting that the City Council discussed the city manager's performance evaluation and provided direction in closed session. 'No further reportable action was taken,' he said.
