The Lansing USD 469 Board of Education voted to approve Resolution 2026-02 to deny a request for a Residential Housing Incentive District (RHID) for the proposed Monroe Manor subdivision, following a series of public comments both for and against the incentive.

The board’s vote came after more than a dozen members of the public addressed the board during the hearing. John Redden, who spoke first during the developer-focused public comments, read figures he said were from Circle H Holdings’ materials and argued the RHID was unnecessary because the developer would build the subdivision without the $3,000,000 RHID payment. Redden said Circle H purchased the land for $745,000 and described the developer’s internal feasibility estimate of $11,700,000 in development costs for 194 lots. He calculated, as presented in his remarks, $60,000 development cost per lot and an estimated $15,000 profit per developed lot, concluding the RHID would represent an additional payment to the developer rather than a needed subsidy.

City of Lansing representative Tony McNeal urged the board to approve the RHID, saying the city’s housing study showed a need for housing at this price point and that the term and projected tax revenue would benefit local governments. “This is an infill project,” McNeal said, and he told the board the new homeowners—not current taxpayers—would pay the increased tax burden for the new houses.

Other public speakers urged rejection. Trina Guilford presented internet-sourced consumer complaints about the proposed builder, Higgs Brothers LLC, citing negative Better Business Bureau reviews and reported buyer complaints in other states. Sarah George and another resident criticized using local tax dollars for a developer subsidy while residents face higher school taxes and possible bond requests, calling the RHID a “corporate kickback” that would divert funds from schools.

Board discussion that followed ranged from concerns about long-term neighborhood character and infrastructure to questions about whether the development needed the RHID to proceed. Several board members said they were influenced by constituents’ objections to what they described as a taxpayer-funded incentive. A motion to approve Resolution 2026-02, to deny the RHID, was made and seconded.

When the board recorded its roll call vote, board members voted as follows: Coffey — yes; (board member listed as “Mister M” in the transcript) — yes; Wood — yes; Workman — yes; Bollin — no; Boingart — no; Yoakam (or Yocombe/Yoakam in the transcript) — no. The motion to adopt Resolution 2026-02 to deny the RHID carried on a 4–3 vote.

The denial means the district will not formally support or participate in the developer’s requested RHID. Board members who opposed the incentive said they were concerned about forgoing future tax revenue and objected to using taxpayer funding for developer profit; supporters who voted no on the resolution cited a need for lower-price housing in the city and said the subdivision could create homes at price points they say the market otherwise would not deliver.

Public commenters and several trustees also raised secondary concerns about lot size, housing quality and local builder history, and whether the developer’s profit projections and consultant analysis had been independently validated. Some residents said the project would set a negative planning precedent for the county and the city.

The developer and city representatives had previously presented materials to local planning bodies; presenters during public comment referenced studies, engineering reports and a traffic study submitted to the planning commission. The board did not adopt any conditions or alternative actions at the meeting beyond the denial resolution.

The board’s decision is a local action; any future developer requests or new incentive proposals would return to the board or to the relevant taxing jurisdictions if refiled.

Ending: The board’s vote closes the current RHID request for Monroe Manor; city and developer representatives and residents signaled they could pursue other paths, but no further board action on this project was recorded at the meeting.