Coldwater council hears pitch for state 'Rx Kids' cash-transfer program but motion to join fails

City Council of Coldwater on Feb. 9 debated whether the city should act as the local "community champion" for Michigan’s Rx Kids cash‑transfer pilot, but the council did not adopt a motion to participate.

Staff summarized the program and told the council the model provides a cash payment starting at about 16 weeks of pregnancy and monthly payments of $500 for the first six months after birth (about $3,000 per participant). Staff said the city’s initial one‑year commitment would be roughly $110,000 and that the state would match that with about $900,000. Staff also reported 223 births in the city over the last year and that 61% of those births involved people on Medicaid.

Proponents, including Kim Hemker of the Bridal County Coalition Against Domestic and ****** Violence, urged the council to consider the program as an immediate, trauma‑informed form of support. Hemker told the council, "We strongly encourage the city of Coldwater to serve as the inaugural community champion for this initiative," and said the unrestricted funds help survivors address urgent needs.

Supporters cited research and local data presented by staff, saying participating communities have shown better maternal health outcomes and reductions in evictions after the program. Council members asked practical questions about funding sources, the program’s administration (payments would be administered by GiveDirectly, not the city), whether partner nonprofits or the county would serve as champion, and what would happen to unspent funds. Staff said GiveDirectly handles application review, residency and pregnancy verification, and that the city’s role would be primarily liaison and outreach.

Council members also reported mixed town‑hall and county reactions: one council member said the county had been "cold" in response and others warned of likely "hit and miss" public opinion. A motion was made to commit to a three‑year participation (the minimum program term), but it failed for lack of support; the council therefore took no action before moving on.

The staff presenter noted the program is time‑sensitive and that the current state application window was set to expire on the 14th (staff said it is unknown whether another window will open). Council members indicated interest in the concept but cited concerns about committing general fund dollars without broader local or county participation.

Next steps: no formal commitment was approved at the meeting; the council did not authorize city funding or a community‑champion role during this session.