Trustees debate whether village should cover community-garden prep costs for 12 plots

Trustees spent a substantial portion of board comments debating how the village should handle a community‑garden preparation invoice described in the meeting as "over $3,000." Trustee Trusty Jamerson flagged the line item during consent review and asked whether the village should be paying the full amount given that plot holders pay modest annual fees.

"There's 12 people that get spots every year," Trusty Jamerson said, noting that plot fees are low and that ‘‘it would be close to — I mean it would be a lot more than they're paying now.’’ He suggested placing garden fees on the official fee schedule so the board could consider raising them or otherwise adjusting cost allocation.

Trusty Clayton pushed back on full cost recovery. "The community garden is a community amenity," he said. "We run a lot of programs here that a certain portion of the population takes advantage of. We run a Halloween party. We don't charge admission ... I think this is a situation where it's an extremely popular program that the village is supporting." He said charging gardeners the full cost would be inconsistent with other village amenities.

Trustees discussed possible alternatives, including expanding plot numbers or finding alternative sites (Discover/former King's Kennel area, or the northwest corner of the Federal Life site) but noted constraints such as irrigation and engineering on potential sites. Director Whit was noted as updating the fee schedule; trustees asked staff to place the issue on a future fee-schedule agenda so the board could decide how to allocate costs or revise plot fees.

The board did not vote on the garden invoice or change fees at this meeting; trustees agreed to revisit the issue when the fee schedule is reviewed.