Could you please give the invocation tonight?

Alright, well good evening, Madam Mayor, Council, please pray with me.

Father, we give you thanks tonight, even as in November we head towards time of thanks with thanksgiving just around the corner. Lord, we're grateful for your blessings in our lives.

Even as we think of the words of James, that every good and perfect gift comes down from above from you, the Father of lights, in whom there is no variableness nor shadow of change. So we thank you for your good gifts that you pour out on us every day, and particularly in this council chamber.

Lord, we thank you for the gifts of leadership and leaders. Lord, pray for these men and women tonight that in their respective callings and particular departments that they oversee and run on the council that you would help them to live and make decisions with integrity and character.

Lord, that you'd preserve and strengthen them. Lord, help them to make the difficult decisions Well and that they would work together well or we realize we don't always have the same point of view but we can still work together in some amount of unity and we pray that that would be true here in Freeport and Lord we pray that you would bless our city and bless this meeting tonight we pray in Jesus name amen amen now we'll officially call this meeting to order madam clerk please take the role Mayor Miller? Here. Alderpersons, Klemm? Here. Johnson? Here. Simmons? Here. Parker? Here. Stacy? Here. Shadle? Here. Sanders? Here. And Sellers? Here. And if you could please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance led by Alderman Stacy.

Item number one is the approval of the agenda. Is there such a motion? So moved. Second.

A motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? That motion passes. Number two is the approval of the minutes from the special meeting on November 3rd, 2025. Is there a motion? So moved. Second.

We have a motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

No.

Do you say that's 7-1, Madam Clerk?

Yes, I'm fine with that, as Attorney Ziedel.

And then we have public comment, which is on agenda items, Tim Davenport.

Thank you. I think he stepped out. Okay, then we'll move on to consent agenda. The consent agenda is considered to be routine in nature and acted as one motion unless there's a member of the council that would like to have something removed for further discussion. The consent agenda yes Alderman Sanders the whole agenda for tonight I think we should table it for another is this well we're we've moved on from that already somebody gonna ask me a question well somebody asking me a question when I when I'm making my this my case well I think he's pointing out that we've moved on from that piece Police, we're on the consent agenda.

The consent agenda is what you refer to, am I right?

No the consent agenda is all of those individual little pieces of boards and commissions and reports.

The agenda itself, we've already voted and moved on.

Yeah, I'd like to have us table every one of the items on the agenda to further notice.

And if anybody wants to ask me a question, I'd be glad to answer it for them.

I'm going to direct this to Attorney Zito.

I'm not sure how to handle that.

I know you don't.

So you wanted to table every item on the agenda.

I want to table everything on the agenda.

And that would have been appropriate to make when we were on the agenda item of approval of the agenda, but we already passed that point.

How did we get past that point?

You guys voted.

A motion was made to approve the agenda, it was seconded, and then there was a vote on it.

Okay.

Number one, Alderman Sanders.

I see it there now.

I overlooked that.

Thank you.

That won't happen again.

I overlooked that. Thank you. That won't happen again.

And we'll move on to the Consent Agenda. The Consent Agenda is the minutes from the Board and Commission meetings for the Liquor Commission dated July 10th, August 19th, and September 11th.

Smith, the Board of Fire and Police Commission, September 23rd, October 20th, the Firefighters Pension Board, July 30th, the Police Pension Board, August 26th, all 2025.

Also is the October 2025 reports for building permits and Fire Department and then August and September of 2025 for the Finance Department reports and the Cash Investment reports and approval of the finance bills payable in the total of $3,145,135.33 and payroll ending November 1st, 2025 in the total of $845,650.41. Is there a motion to approve?

So moved.

Second.

With a motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle. Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll?

On the consent agenda, Shadle, Sanders, Sellers, Klemm, Johnson, Simmons, and Parker.

The motion passes 8-0.

Item number 5 is the first reading of Ordinance 2025-61.

Could you please read this?

Fiscal Year 2026, Appropriation Ordinance.

Manager Boyer.

Thank you, Your Honor.

Each city fund and department has been presented at the Finance Committee of the Whole during a series of meetings that were held starting in September, attached as a Fiscal Year 2026 in the Appropriation Ordinance format and also detailed budgets.

I just think it was a lot to have to go through so quick and fast and I just feel that we need More Time to view this ordinance and make sure that this is what we want to do.

Alderman Sanders? Yeah, I concur with that observation. There's a lot of things that that has appeared to be something that has not been considered by council.

We have not considered any of these ordinances to see if they're relevant, see if they're valid and to see which direction that these ordinances take in the city.

And we need to be able to absolutely look at the whole agenda list of ordinances and why are they being considered and who's submitting them.

I like to get down to the bottom of who's submitting these ordinances and we have not had a council discussion on every one of these ordinances that are being presented to us, looking for some type of outcome or some type of objection or discussion on the matter. Why are we here talking about all of these ordinances?

We have not even debated or talked about it, even in council.

Council is pretty much not in tune with what is going on in these ordinances.

And that's my opinion right now at the moment.

But I'm almost about to say that's going to be a factual statement simply because I know this council and the fact that we're not moving according to the legislative part of the council that has to understand why it is we're entering into these types of events.

and others.

We have not had these types of events or these types of programs or anything that is not relevant to the taxpayers.

We have not had this concert conversation with each other because I understand that we're all working on behalf of the taxpayers, the community, the citizens, and we're doing and just if we are not coming to conclusions, discussion matters in detail as opposed of just letting ordinances just fly out especially on this agenda that I'm looking at that's the reason why I wanted to sustain this thing at the very beginning but I missed that boat but I'm not gonna miss the opportunity to make Alderman, Shadle, I would just like to mention Alderman Sanders that all of this stuff was was discussed at the special meetings prior to the meetings, none of which you attended.

So I'm not surprised you aren't aware of any of this, but I feel the rest of us are.

Well, that's your opinion.

Because we are here.

You're talking directly, he's talking directly to me.

But you can't interrupt, he has the floor.

Yeah well he just can't make his statement publicly. If he has the floor please allow him to finish speaking. Okay all right okay.

I think the rest of us are here doing our job. We know what's going on. We're taking this serious and if you're not um so be it I guess. Alderman Sellers did you have something? Yes I wanted to to say that we have been looking at this ever since, didn't you say September?

We had no public presentation to ask any questions.

We've had special meetings.

We've looked at it.

We have to move on because these are things that need to be done for 2026.

And we can't just sit back and hold out because, you know, you didn't come to the meetings S. and X to questions because you have all the time since September to now, that's what two months, almost three months.

We have to, we got to keep business moving and rolling.

So I don't have a problem with us moving this to the second reading.

Manager Boyer.

And I'd like to comment Alderman Sanders that between now and second reading, I'll be making my schedule open to discuss any of the budget items.

Alderman Sanders.

We're on that ordinance.

Okay, I know, but what I'm commenting about is the ones that are stating their opinions about what it is that council should be doing.

And the fact that you, since I'm part of council, I get to object to even your comment and insinuation that we should just move on.

If that is the attitude of council just to move on without having a discussion about it, which you're saying that I was not there, you can't tell me that I was not there because if this has something to do with finances, of course, I'm not attending finances when we have ordinances that is rebutting all of the things that we're talking about here in council.

and others.

It is counsel who has to come together and be accountable for all of these ordinances to find out whether they are relevant, whether that where it is something that the community wants to have.

We have not did a complete evaluation of all of these ordinances that I see compiled up and I have been working on this agenda as if though we're trying to push something through the process when we have not had an informal conversation or discussion about it. So if you're talking about financing, if you're talking about finance, that's a whole different story. I'm talking about the ordinances for today. I'm talking about the ordinance that I'm sitting here looking at that we have not had a full discussion on these ordinances and for anyone that wants to tell me I don't mean that these ordinances are valid. I'm just going to say data information is very relevant in the output of what the council is supposed to be doing.

So if someone wants to try to push things forward, well, you go right ahead and have your opinion about that. But I have my own opinion. I feel that it shouldn't be.

and I think we should think about what we're saying and doing when it comes to council matters.

And every one of these ordinances that I'm looking at is council matter.

It's a matter of council.

And when I feel that we have not done the right thing for council to talk about these ordinances and why they are relevant to the city and the people of the city of Freeport, we should just table everything until council get its act together.

and others. And if we don't do that, then we've been in justice to the city to the citizens of this town. And I yield my last minute.

Okay, so just so we're clear, we've moved on from approving the agenda, and we are on a specific ordinance. So if there's any other discussion on that ordinance.

Mayor, can I make a comment?

Well, you've already had your two times, Larry.

Alderman, Stacy, do you have something on this ordinance?

Yes.

Okay, go ahead.

I've been at the meetings and it was a lot to take in.

I mean, some of us are retired, some of us are not.

and all these ordinance are just compiled to fit the benefit of what you all want.

Just like tonight, for example, I asked about the airport terminals buildings being updated.

It's on the paperwork, but it was skipped over.

it was not discussed.

Like a lot of this have been because we don't have time to go over every itemized item.

And I too feel that we are moving very, very fast.

I mean, anybody can say, I, I, I, we gotta move forward.

But do you know what you're even moving forward to?

Do you know what you're even saying yes to?

And I just think it's too much to put before the council tonight and expect all these ordinances just to go through just because.

Just because. We need to have a total understanding of what all, not what was just talked about, and everything that these ordinances pertain to because it pertains to more that was pointed out and discussed.

Alderman Stacy, the second reading isn't for two weeks, so if you want to have one-on-one discussions on them, you're more than welcome to do that.

We know it's a lot.

That's why we start in September.

We'll move on to item number six, which is the first reading of ordinance 2025-62.

Could you please read this?

City of Freeport tax levy.

Manager Boyer.

Thank you, Your Honor.

There, that's better.

Thank you, Your Honor.

We've attached a spreadsheet that calculates the city's corporate levy.

We have received an estimated 2025 equalized assessed value from the county.

The EAV for our tax district has decreased by $105,004 over the last year.

Based on this information, the city's corporate tax levy for 2025 that is paid in 2026 would be $2,976,000, a decrease of $1,400.

A house valued at $100,000 would see no change in the city's portion of their property tax Bill, as long as their assessed value did not change or increase. During the past nine years, the City Council has kept the rate, tax rate for the corporate levy the same or slightly lower than each year, and staff requests to move forward with the ordinance for second reading on the tax levy.

Is there such a motion?

So moved.

Second.

A motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle.

Alderman Shadle discussion on ordinance 62 so this is Alderman Stacey so this is is speaking of an increase on our taxes no this is keeping our levy the same which we've done for the last nine years the same or less so we are not changing it but you said that we're negative this year Yeah, the EAV was down, so that affects us about $1,400, yes.

So where do we make up that $1,400 at?

We can make it up in any number of ways.

So the budget is balanced and it reflects the EAV that we currently have.

So $1,400 and a $27 million budget is not very much.

Item number seven is the first reading of Ordinance 2025-63.

Could you please read this?

Freeport Public Library Tax Levy.

Director Myers?

The City Council adopts a separate levy for library operations each year.

In 2023, the library reduced their levy requests for Medicare liability insurance, unemployment, and Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund in order to spend down prior reserves in these areas.

At the time, we informed Council that these rates would need to increase when the funds were exhausted.

The equalized assessed value for the City of Freeport has decreased by $105,004 over the last year.

Due to this decrease, any additional increment from rising property values is not available.

The other alternative is to increase the tax rate.

As the 2023 levy was decreased previously in order to spend down reserves, the Library would like to increase the rate for 2025 paid in 2026. The library may increase their tax rate but only to an amount under 5% of the previous level. Based on this information, the library's levy request for 2025 to be paid in 2026 is $1,114,500. This increase would generate $52,500 more in property taxes from last year. Property taxes make up 84% of the Library's income. A house valued at $100,000 would see an increase of $6 in the Library portion of their tax bill. Staff requests City Council to move this ordinance forward for second reading on December 1st, 2025.

Thank you. Is there a motion to move it forward?

So moved.

Second.

Motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle. Discussion on Ordinance 63.

And number eight is a motion to, I'll need a motion to abate all real estate tax levies for repayment of general obligation bonds, but Madam Clerk, could you please read into the record all of those ordinances?

Ordinance 2025-64, ordinance to abate the 2025 real estate tax levy for the repayment of the general obligation bonds, series 2013-A, ordinance 2025-65, ordinance to abate the To obey the 2025 Real Estate Tax Levy for the repayment of the Obligation Bonds, Series 2014b.

Ordinance 2025-66 To Obey the 2025 Real Estate Tax Levy from the Repayment of the General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015a.

Ordinance 2025-67 To Obey the 2025 Real Estate Tax Levy for the Repayment of the General Obligation Bonds, Series 2016a.

Ordinance 2025-68 to abate the 2025 Real Estate Tax Levy for the repayment of the General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018.

Ordinance 2025-69 to abate the 2025 Real Estate Tax Levy for the repayment of the General Obligation Bonds, Series 2019a.

Ordinance 2025-70 to abate the 2025 Real Estate Tax Levy for the repayment of the General General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020, Ordnance 2025-71 to abate the 2025 Real Estate Tax Levy for the repayment of the General Obligation Bonds, Series 2021, Ordnance 2025-72 to abate the 2025 Real Estate Tax Levy for the repayment of the General Obligation Bonds, Series 2022.

Thank you.

Manager Boyer?

Thank you, Your Honor.

Hello. As you can note in your memo are the individual bond issues that City Clerk Anderson just recently read and the amount to be abated and the source of revenue that will be used to make the bond payment. We have also included the potential increased cost on property taxes on an average $100,000 on our home if the bonds were not abated. Staff request City Council move forward with this ordinance. A second reading.

Thank you. Is there a motion to move forward?

A second.

We have a motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Johnson.

Discussion on the abatements.

We'll move on to item number nine, which is the first reading of ordinance 2025-73. Could you please read this?

Ordinance authorizing the sale, recycling, donation, and or disposal of certain personal property owned by the city.

Tonight, we have equipment stored at Albertus Airport.

Thank you. Manager Boyer.

Thank you, Your Honor. Albertus is currently in need of disposing of several items of property that are at the airport.

One is a 1992 Fortoros, the other is a 1974 Lodestar fuel truck, also a John Deere loader, and a Wabasso 3.55 gallon sprayer.

There's no financial commitment or effect by the city and staff recommends moving forward with the ordinance for this surplus property for destruction or sale.

Is there such a motion?

So moved.

Second.

A motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers, discussion on this ordinance.

Do you do you need it approved quicker or is it okay just to go till December on that? Yes, that's fine. Move forward to December 1st meeting. December's fine? Okay.

Are we still open for discussion? Yes, Alderman Sanders. A question. Are these items up for auction or sale or are we disposing of it? Yes, in general we use the Wisconsin Surplus Auction Site. It seems to work good for us across the board.

So, when we get to that place where they're being liquidated, we would probably post them on that site.

We'll also do some investigating to see if there's a better site for the other items, the fuel truck in particular.

Okay, could you submit all receipts onto the council where we may be able to discuss the matter of the directions of those funds?

Do you mean the listings?

item number 10 is the first reading of ordinance 2025 74 could you please read this ordinance granting a special use permit to allow restaurants taverns packaged liquor stores and any other establishment selling alcoholic beverages for consumption on or off the premises section 1252.01 be 11 at 320 North Park Boulevard.

Thank you.

Director Heimerdinger.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

The past owners of the Royer Pub held a special use permit allowing the sale of alcohol.

Staff received a special use permit application from Mishka Inc., the new owners of the property who wish to continue the same uses.

Since special use permits are tied to the owner and the property is in the B3 commercial District. This requires a new special use permit. Both the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Planning Commission have recommended approval. The proposed use continues the established operation, aligns with the surrounding commercial properties, does not negatively impact public health, safety of property values, and supports community economic development. The staff recommends the approval of this special use permit, and also we are requesting the suspension of rules. Is there a motion to move this forward? So moved. Second.

A motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle. Discussion on this ordinance. Alderman Parker. Motion to suspend the rules.

Is there a second? Second.

We have a motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Shadle for suspension of the rules. Suspension of the rules is non-debatable and must pass by a two-thirds majority. Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll on the suspension only?

Stacy? No.

Shadle? Aye.

Sanders, Sellers, Klemm, Johnson, Simmons, and Parker.

the motion to suspend.

Parker, aye. The motion to suspend passes 6 to 2. So now before you counsel, it would be the final passage of this ordinance. Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Stacy, aye. Shadle, aye.

Sanders, aye. Sellers, aye.

Klemm, aye. Johnson, aye.

Simmons, aye. Parker, aye.

and the Ordinance is approved, 8-0.

Item number 11 is the first reading of Ordinance 2025-75.

Could you please read this?

Ordinance granting a special use permit to allow a restaurant with outdoor serving areas, including drive-in services, unless otherwise permitted as a sidewalk, cafe, or parklet under Section 1252.01B10 at 320 North Park Boulevard.

Thank you.

Director Heimerdinger.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

The past owners of the Roya Pub held a special use permit for this as well for a restaurant with outdoor seating. Staff received a special use permit application from Mishka Inc, the new owners of the property who wish to continue operating the restaurant with the existing outdoor dining areas.

In the B3 commercial district, special use permits are tied to the owner. This application stems from the ownership change. That's the only big change happening here.

Both the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Planning Commission recommend the approval.

This continues use in aligning with the surrounding commercial properties, does not negatively impact public health, safety, or property values, and supports community economic development.

Staff recommends approval of the special use permit and also the re-request suspension of the rules.

Is there a motion to move this forward?

So moved.

Second.

Motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle. Discussion on this ordinance?

Motion to suspend the rules. Second.

Motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Sellers for suspension of the rules.

Again, suspension of the rules is non-debatable. Madam Clerk, would you please take the role on the suspension only? Stacy?

No. Shadle?

Aye. Sanders?

No. Sellers?

Aye. Klemm?

Aye. Johnson?

Aye. Simmons?

Aye. And Parker?

Aye. The suspension passes 6-2. So then before you is the final passage for this ordinance.

Alderman Stacey. What is 320 Park Boulevard, North Park Boulevard? That's the Royal Pub area.

The what? The Royal Pub.

And so it's under new management? Yes, so they, yes, so the property was was purchased and it has new owners and special use permits can only be they can't be transferred to a different owner they have to be tied to the owner itself.

So that's why this is this is why they have submitted their application.

They're a new owner.

They want to continue running it as it was before and have the same special uses.

Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Stacey.

Aye.

Shadle.

Sellers? Aye. Klemm? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? Aye. And Parker? Aye. And that ordinance is adopted 8 to 0. Item number 12 is the first reading of ordinance 2025-76. Could you please read this?

Ordinance amending the zoning classification or a map amendment at 602 Southwest Avenue from B11 restricted retail business to an R6 general residence district. Thank you. Director Heimerdinger.

Heimerdinger.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Staff received a Zoning Map Amendment request for 602 Southwest Avenue to rezone the property from B11 Restricted Retail Business to R6 General Residence.

The property is currently legal, nonconforming, three-unit residential building.

The owner is seeking rezoning to facilitate its sale.

As lenders typically will not finance nonconforming properties, rezoning would make the property Legal and Conforming, Allowing the New Owners to Obtain Financing and Insurance, Both the Zoning Board of Appeals and Planning Commission Recommended the Approval, There is Zoning Alliance with the Surrounding Residential Uses and Supports Community Housing Needs, Staff Recommends the Approval and Suspension of the Rules.

Is there a motion to move this forward?

So moved.

Second.

A motion made by Alderman Seller, seconded by Alderman Shadle, Discussion on the Ordinance.

Alderman Shadle? If I could quick, does this R6, I'm familiar with the building and it formerly had some, an insurance agency in the lower level, does this R6 allow for that to continue or is it strictly residential?

it would be so in order for that in order for the residential that commercial business to continue in the downstairs unit they just get a special variant so they would make theirs legal non-conforming or it just flip-flops the two so it would have to change if they would want to put a business back in yes it would just yeah and the next line item not to get ahead of myself but I I think it's relevant to the discussion.

It is the reason why they want to do this is if there was a fire, if there was, you know, in order to obtain insurance properly, most insurance providers wanna be able for you to continue to use that property.

As it would speak right now with the legal non-conforming, what would happen is if there was a fire and something happens to the building, and they would have to adhere to the residential building code.

And so there won't be enough area to actually get a suitable amount of square footage anymore.

So in order to make that happen, this is the way to zone it so that the use is correct and that they can receive financing for their residential area.

and also to in to kind of hopefully still utilize the commercial setbacks so that if they had to rebuild they could rebuild.

Okay.

Thank you.

Alderman Parker.

Motion to suspend the rules.

Second.

We have a motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Sellers for suspension of the rules.

Again, suspension of the rules must pass by two-thirds majority.

I'll come back to you after we take the vote.

Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

about the vote about the vote yes um well it's the suspension is non-debatable so before we get to the actual vote then I'll we can do that madam clerk please take the role Stacy no Shadle all right Sanders no Sellers I Clem Johnson I Simmons Parker I and the suspension passes 6 to 2 so now before you is the The final passage for Ordinance 76. Alderman, Stacy, did you have a question then?

Was the suspension even asked for? Yes.

Yes. Yeah, it was on here.

Alderman Sanders?

I, you know, I like for those that are suspending rules, couple it with an explanation so Council can understand Taylor, and the mental state of someone that's suspending rules so we can all get the same explanation and understanding. I recommend that just throwing suspension of the rules out there without evaluating why you're doing such a thing and then not getting a full understanding. We might want to come back and talk about that particular item at any given time, but with with the suspension of the rule, you're trying to make sure that that doesn't happen, that other council members can't inject their viewpoints or expressions about this particular item or any item that you're suspending.

And I see a pattern here without explanation.

And I think the council deserves an explanation when you're doing that.

Alderman, Sanders, just so you know, Director Heimerdinger asked for that on the last...

Yeah, I heard her.

Okay, so it's been her recommendation in order to move it forward, so it gives the council the ability to...

I'm talking.

Actually, you could have asked questions two times within that if you wanted.

Yeah, I could have, but what I'm saying is I see a pattern without an explanation of and others.

We have a lot of people, we have a lot of people who are not aware of the suspending of the rules.

And if you can't provide explanation of the suspension, then I don't think you should just liberally just be casting suspensions before counsel so counsel cannot discuss the matter of any particular suspension.

So that's what I'm stating right now.

And I think we should move forward, even on that, when we're doing that.

I don't have a problem with accepting the zoning change. I did not hear you ask for the suspension.

And like Alderman Sanders is saying, every time you turn around, everything, suspension of the rules, suspension of the rules.

And it just gets a little annoying because everything is rush rush rush like we need this now.

Now.

like we need this now. Yeah, I can, is it okay if I? Sure. Beautiful. So the reason that we are requesting the suspension of rules in these cases is because it has seen both the Zoning Board of Appeals and also has also passed through the Planning Commission. So it's already seen multiple, it's already made multiple steps forward. And so in order to do this, it also these individuals, they they would like their special use permit and of Suspension of Rules Lightly. We do this knowing that it is passed through multiple steps in order to get here and so we're asking that in favor of all the work that was done for the two people who've requested these variants or requested a special use permit. Thank you. Alderman Sanders. Okay, even at that and the City Council.

That is, that you're discussing.

That doesn't mean Council has to agree with it.

Council can come up with other scenarios and ask other questions to debate whether or not this is a very valid thing to do for Council.

We don't want to set a precedent of suspending rules because anyone that comes to the and the development department community might also request suspensions of the rules so they can get things the way they choose to want to get it without council consulting with each other in these matters.

And that's the reason why I'm saying that council should not be so quick to jump on board with a suspension without the council evaluating or understanding and listening to the full detail of this suspension.

You know, I don't have no problem with it unless it's very relevant.

It has to have some kind of validation to it other than just suspending it.

That's the reason why I'm saying suspensions just can't just be something that we throw out there and counsel accepted every time.

Counsel has to get on board with the fact that a suspension has been asked or ruled and the City Council.

We have to know why these things are happening.

There is a pattern going on with this.

I object to it personally.

But from what I understand, we can't just throw it out there like it is something that we can do to circumvent the council in order to get some things done.

I don't think we should have to go through that method.

But that's my whole point.

it's something that we can do to get to circumvent the council in order to get some things done I don't think we should have to go through that method but that's my that's my whole objection of that you've already spoken twice on it I I spoke twice on this at 645 and 647. Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Stacy. What am I voting on? Suspension of the rules? No, we've already done that. That has passed in the ordinance. Aye. Shadle. Aye. Sanders. Aye. Sellers. Aye. Klemm. Aye. Johnson. Aye. Simmons. Aye. And Parker.

Parker, and that ordinance passes 8-0.

Item number 13 is the first reading of Ordinance 2025-77.

Could you please read this?

Ordinance approving variance application at 602 Southwest Avenue submitted by Douglas and Karen Walker to examine the variance application to seek relief from Section 1250.06E3, the Minimum Lot Area Required, 1250-06-F1, the Front Yard Requirements, 250-06-F2C, the Side Yard Requirements, and 1250-06-F3, Rear Yard Requirements.

Oh, and there's one more, 1250-06-G, Lot Coverage Area in a Residential District.

Thank you.

Director Heimerdinger.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

received a variance application for 602 Southwest Avenue in the R6 General Residence District to bring the existing three-unit residential structure into legal compliance.

The variance would allow the property to remain residential and maintain the current setbacks even if the building were to be damaged by fire and needed to be rebuilt.

This request stems from the potential new owners need to obtain financing and building insurance.

Residential setbacks would make it nearly impossible to rebuild with any usable square footage.

Both the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Planning Commission recommend the approval.

The variance aligns with the surrounding use and does not negatively impact the neighborhood.

Staff recommends the approval of the requested variance and we do request the suspension of rules.

Is there a motion to move this forward?

So moved.

Second.

Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers. Discussion on the ordinance.

Suspension of the rules request. Second.

We have a motion made for suspension of the rules made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Sellers. Again, non-debatable. Madam Clerk, please take the roll on suspension only.

Stacy? Aye.

Shadle? Aye.

Sanders? No.

Sellers? Aye.

Kelem? Aye.

Johnson? Aye.

Simmons? Aye.

And Parker? Aye.

The suspension passes seven to one.

So now before you is the final passage of this ordinance.

Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Stacy?

Aye.

Shadle?

Aye.

Sanders?

Aye.

Sellers?

Aye.

Klemm?

Aye.

Johnson?

Aye.

Simmons?

Aye.

And Parker?

Aye.

And the ordinance passes eight to zero.

Item number 14 is the adoption of resolution 2025-134.

Could you please read this?

Building Concrete Sidewalk Ceiling and Staining by NYCAM on Chicago Avenue.

Manager Boyer.

Thank you, Your Honor.

Each year we need to continue to maintain the stamp break on Chicago Avenue.

Staff reached out to several qualified contractors and only received one estimate from NYCAM.

So the work is complete and staff is requesting to move forward with a payment of $14,795 for the ceiling and stain work for that area.

Is there a motion to adopt?

Tomo.

Second.

Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers.

Discussion on the resolution?

Yeah.

Alderman Sanders.

Where's this location at, again, where are we targeting?

On Chicago Avenue between Clark, and Jefferson. Jackson, sorry. Oh, Jackson, at the O'Rally building? Yes. No.

That's not at the O'Rally? No, that was plant two. Honeywell, sorry about that.

Yeah. Honeywell building. Yeah. Okay. Okay. All right, thanks.

Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Stacy?

No.

Shadle?

Aye.

Sanders?

No.

Sellers?

Aye.

Klemm?

Aye.

Johnson?

Aye.

Simmons?

Aye.

Parker?

Aye.

The resolution is adopted, 6-2.

Item number 15 is the adoption of resolution 2025-135.

Could you please read this?

Resolution, approving payment to Freeport Industrial Roofing for repairs of three airport hanger roofs.

Manager Boyer?

Thank you, Honor.

Albertus Airport's got several hanger roofs that were leaking. We consulted with a Freeport industrial who does this type of repair, which is epoxying the nails back into the trusses, and they have repaired three hangers at this point, and staff is requesting to move forward with payment in the amount of $19,670 for the repair of hangers at Albertus Airport.

Is there a motion to adopt?

So moved.

Motion made by Alderman Sellers. Seconded by Alderman Shadle. Discussion on the resolution. Alderman Sanders. Yeah. Do we get receipts on those items? We get invoices.

Yes. Invoices. We'll get that. Okay. Would you distribute that to Council, please?

They're attached to your agenda. Are they? Yes. I didn't see that in my agenda. Yep.

they're right here the quote portion oh okay i see it i see it thank you madam clerk please take the role stacy no shadle i sanders no sellers i clem all right johnson i simmons parker i the resolution is adopted six to two item number 16 is the adoption of resolution 2025 136 could you please read Resolution Ratifying Emergency Purchase of Biological Aeration Filter or a BAF Pump for those cities, Wastewater Treatment Plant from Zimmer and Franciscan.

Thank you.

Manager Boyer?

Thank you, Your Honor.

Report has a biological ac- ac- Report has a biological aeration filtration pump housing which is broken and needs emergency replacement. The BAF is an important facility for the wastewater treatment plant to meet our treatment requirements. The city requires pump to operate at the BAF building as part of the filter treatment process and one of the pumps is fully worn out and needs to be replaced. The replacement cost was given for a direct replacement from Zimmer and Franciscan. Lead time is 10 to 12 Weeks, and the City will be requesting $17,120 to replace the emergency pump.

Is there a motion to adopt?

So moved.

Second.

Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers.

Discussion on the resolution?

Alderman Stacy?

Does this contract come with insurance warranty and if so, for how many years?

I don't believe it has a warranty, but I may be incorrect on that, Darren.

It's a pump housing, so it's a dynamic asset that moves, so it would not be warrantied for more than a year.

And this does not include an installation.

This is our crews doing the installation and the teardown of the other pump and the rebuild.

Alderman Sanders.

Does that include the aeration tank altogether?

It's just the pump.

Just pumps.

It has nothing.

It's just one of the pumps.

Just one pump.

and it's an original so this will be the first time the housing has been replaced.

All right, thanks.

Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Hold it, hold it, hold it, hold it.

Would you like to do another one?

Yeah, I have another question.

This is not, are we replacing it or are we just doing maintenance work to this item?

It's a replacement of the housing.

It's got a hole in it.

It's fully worn.

So we have to replace the whole thing.

Okay, thank you.

Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Stacy, Shadle, Sanders, Sellers, Klemm, Johnson, Simmons, Parker, and the resolution is adopted 8-0.

Item number 17 is the adoption of resolution 2025-137. Could you please read this?

Resolution approving an agreement with Fehr Graham to provide polyflour alcohol substances or PFAS testing and inventory related to City's Wastewater NPDES Permit. Manager Boyer. Thank you. And Kirk, if I could get that item put up on the overhead.

So tonight, Council, we have several items that kind of fit in the same family related to wastewater treatment plant regulation. And I wanted to kind of hit on a few items that we'll get into in a Littlebit, but it does touch on this item as well. So the Environmental Protection Agency is working to improve the receiving streams to the Mississippi River Basin. And why it matters here in Freeport is the highlight of the growing concern about, and in this particular case, is about nutrient pollution, but but NPDES also, I'm sorry, the polyfluoroalkali is also a concern as well.

Essentially these nutrients and in the case of PFAS, they make their way into receiving streams from our discharge and through agricultural and plant growth but when you have too much of it, it enters the rivers and it impacts this area in the Gulf of Mexico which is kind of a dead zone.

and the problem is you have too many nutrients that find their way down there and they're looking to remove those before they get into those receiving streams.

So the Environmental Protection Agency conducted a nationwide wadable streams assessment to evaluate the health of small streams that are shallow enough to be waded through.

The study found that about two-thirds of the streams in the lowest 48 states have high levels of nitrogen and about 31 percent have high levels of phosphorus.

in the Mississippi River Basin, which covers 31 states and more than 1 million square miles.

The numbers are higher.

We also have 40% of the streams tested showed high nutrients, including phosphorus.

On the upper Mississippi, which is our area where Freeport's located, has some of the most concerning results.

Roughly 50% of the streams had high nitrogen concentrations and 23% had high phosphorus.

So the Ohio, as well as other areas including the Ohio River Basin.

So local significance for the City of Freeport, this finding carries direct meaning our local streams feed into the Mississippi River and what we do here affects not only our community but also the water quality far downstream.

Excess nutrient contribute to water quality problems across the Midwest and ultimately lead to large low oxygen zone in the Gulf of Mexico that cannot sustain life.

So as we go through the rest of these items tonight, we're going to be talking about water quality at the wastewater treatment plant.

So this first item that we have in front of us is the phase one study for the perfluorinated compounds or polyfluoroalkali PFAS.

So within our community, we have certain industries that contribute to the waste stream and in those streams, some of them contain PFAS.

So essentially, we have to study this to find out what the scope is, where it's impacting and then work on a remediation strategy with those wherever those point sources are. So tonight what we're asking for on this first item number 17 is moving forward with the requirements of the NPDES that's the National Pollution Discharge Elimination Permit and is required to move forward. The total cost Post of this study is $41,000 for our Phase 1 PFAS.

Is there a motion to adopt?

So moved.

Second.

A motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers.

Discussion on the resolution, Alderman Sanders?

Yes.

Director Boyer.

Have we had any red flags over there at the plant as far as our discharging, any reports, any stagnant type of things happening over there where it brings us to our attention where we are in a position to pay $41,000 to do a study?

Yes.

I mean, I find that kind of expensive just to do the study when they're doing the work before the study. The work has already been evaluated by EPA, which keeps us informed about our status, that keeps us whether or not we in violation any time we're doing discharging and things of this nature, especially downriver. Have we received any acknowledgement from EPA about Regulated Contaminant in the past and now it is being regulated so we have to do

the study to find out what it is we need to do in the next steps. Okay, and who's the... Did you want your second one? I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Did you want your second one? Yeah, who's doing this study?

Well, that would be Fehr Graham. Are they licensed and certified to do such studies? They are highly qualified. They're highly qualified because the reason why I'm saying this, I have never heard that Fehr and Graham ever got into testing waterways and discharging and things of this nature and how was they recommended to the city and have the council considered Fehr and Graham to do that study and have we talked about it or discussed whether or not Fehr and Graham is going to do that study.

There's other agencies out there that does the same study and if we have not gone for and others.

I think we're isolating ourselves from other agencies to come in and do a study as well.

That's the reason why I find that study lucrative, expensive, because the study doesn't require No, more than 24 hours or 78 hours at the max or 73 hours at the max.

I think that if you'll let me jump in here, I think the majority of the cost here is actually the running of the samples at the lab.

It's a very expensive sample to run.

I believe it's anywhere between $1,000 and $3,000 per sample.

Isn't doesn't that I've worked on this with the water side and we have to do we have a fairly.

We have to do, we have a fairly expensive testing regimen but the majority of this is going to be examples.

Are we equipped ourselves to do these kinds of testings?

Absolutely, no.

No.

We're not equipped to do that?

No.

That has to be sent out to a specialized testing facility.

We use PACE in general and they're in Springfield.

Alderman, Sellers?

This is something that we have to do from the EPA.

Yes.

New permit that just recently came through, I gave a copy to Alderman Sanders, requires us to start looking at what's coming through on the wastewater side for the forever chemicals. So as you'll recall, we had indication of that at the old brick street plant, which is basically in standby status. And unless we have like a major fire, we've replaced it with well number 11. And we're working on well number 12. So we're going to all kinds of efforts to take Stacey, Alderman, Alderman, Stacy, Yes, you just said that $1,000 to $3,000 for the testing.

No, one to three per sample. There's so many samples that need to be required for the testing.

I don't have the actual requirement in front of me in terms of what the EPA is requiring here, but the samples themselves are very expensive. That's why I wanted to highlight that.

Okay. I didn't have that understanding, one to three thousand per example. How many phases Will this involve in its entirety?

This is speaking of phase one, costing us $41,000.

How many phases will there be, and what is the guesstimate cost of this project in its entirety?

Well, first we have to do this study to find out what the actual numbers are.

Until we have those, we can't tell you what the severity or what the remediation is gonna require.

Miller. However, I'll lay out a larger term timeline here. When we find out if they exist, if they're in the discharge and they're not, of course, if they are, we're going to backtrack that to the contributing sources. Then we're going to work with those contributing sources to remediate the perfluorinated compounds from entering the waste stream. That could be as simple as say changing a manufacturing technique in their plant. So they just stop using a certain product, say a mold release.

and they go to a non-proflurinated compound one.

That would solve, that's one example of how you would solve it.

But there may be other ones where it actually has to be remitted from the wastewater at each facility that has it present.

So it's a study so that we can understand the scope and severity of what's going into the waste stream.

Okay.

Alderman Sanders, you've already spoken twice on this resolution.

Yeah, Darren, did you want to add to something?

Yeah, I think somebody asked how many tests there are.

There's for each sample point, there's 42 plafornated compounds that have to be tested for at the current time. And that's an ever changing list. They've been adding plafornated compounds every year to the test. This is not a one time test. This is a quarterly test at all the point sources in Freeport. That's what this test requires. It also requires tests of our biosolids as well, which is our sludge production end as well. And again, this This is required by the NPDES permit, so it is a function that will have to be done and it's a study that will take an entire year to do.

Kurt, could you pull up the NPDES permit?

And it's a fairly lengthy document, you're welcome to review it.

Alderman Sanders has a copy of it there, but you know, there's quite a few things in there that we will have to do in the next ensuing years.

Alderman, Stacy? Yes, to say that there's 42 tests and I'm going to keep it low on the 1000 per test. So one test is those 42 constituents. That's why the price varies because they keep adding. Two years ago, there was only 20 constituents. Now there's 42. So it's not each individual One test is the 42 parameters. Does that make sense? When you go to a lab, you buy one test, which has all 42 constituents tested. These are not regulated compounds at this time in our waste streams. They're doing this study to figure out what the waste regulations will be.

So the 42 test is going to guesstimate cost us?

$41,000. It's quarterly at all the SIUs, significant industrial users, as well as our own facilities.

So you would like me to think Fehr Graham isn't getting nothing for their time and efforts in this matter?

No, we're doing the study. That is what, that is what the proposal states is we are doing the study.

It's required to be done by a wastewater engineer.

There's no, Alderman Johnson.

So you said it had to be done at all the sites. How many sites are there where you have to do this?

I believe we have, I believe the number is seven outside of the city owned properties, Please, seven SIUs is what I believe we currently have.

Yes.

Thank you.

That's significant industrial contributor.

Right.

Yeah.

Right.

Thank you.

Madam Clerk, please take the roll on the resolution.

Stacy?

Aye.

Shadle?

Aye.

Sanders?

I'm thinking.

Would you like me to come back to you?

Sellers? Aye. Klemm? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? Aye. Parker? Aye. Sanders?

Okay. That's a yes. The resolution is adopted 8-0. Item number 18 is the adoption of resolution 2025-138. Could you please read this? Resolution approving an agreement with Fehr Graham to provide design engineering services is related to phase two of the construction of the wastewater treatment plant project.

Thank you.

Manager Boyer?

Thank you, Your Honor.

Actually, if you if we want to look at the NPDES permit, there's additional requirements that are up on the screen for nutrient removal, and that is basically going to fit into our phase two wastewater treatment upgrade.

So phase two is essentially removal of phosphorus.

We need to go from a 2.0 parts per million phosphorus limit to a 0.5 phosphorus. So that's a significant reduction. To allow for that we need to generate or the process will generate about twice as much sludge as we currently generate. So that requires us doubling the size of our sludge handle equipment. Now the sludge building, the belt filter press, the and the Gravity Belt Thickener, the various elements and the digesters, they are already fully depreciated and the belt filter press and the Gravity Belt Thickener have presented some issues for staff and maintenance and that being that I believe it's over 20 years old, 25 years old.

With that being said, this phase two process is approximately $45 million in total cost for us to be able to meet our EPA requirements in 2030, we need to have a Phase 2 in place so that we can meet our phosphorus requirements.

So tonight I'm asking for Council approval moving forward with the Phase 2 project design due to the items we discussed in the NPDES program.

The total cost of Phase 2 design is $2,950,000.

Is there a motion to adopt?

So moved.

Second.

We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Parker. Discussion on the resolution?

Alderman Sellers?

So you're telling us that this whole project will take five years?

It should take a little less. I think we'll be done with phase one, which is currently going on. We should be done with that in 26, early 27. But then we would roll right into phase two, which is going to be 28, 29. And then once we get that completed, then we'll be meeting our permit requirements. So it should take two years for construction from the time that we start, but we should be starting in about 27 or 28.

Alderman Sellers.

and then so how are we looking to pay? Pay for it? Yes. Yeah, we're going to continue to pursue and we've been successful at getting outside funding as I mentioned a couple meetings ago. We're on hold, but we're waiting for a potential opportunity of $31 million of outside funding to pay for Wall 12, which is great. But the problem is they're continuing to We'll continue to pursue outside funding every opportunity and we've had relatively quite a bit of success in that. So I have no reason to think that we won't have success moving forward. However, we need to get the design done so that we're prepared and we have everything we need to show the EPA that we're moving along on their timetable.

Ward. However, we need to get the design done so that we're prepared and we have everything we need to show the EPA that we're moving along on their timetable and we're cooperating with their requirements.

Alderman Sanders.

We're talking about an expansion, detached from the waste treatment plan itself. In order to do an upgrade, do we have to do a detachment to do so?

We've acquired some property to the east of the plant, and that sludge would be conveyed to that location.

It's just on the other side of the solar panels for the digesters and the things that need to be done.

Did that answer your question?

Yeah, yeah, you did.

With the expansion detachment and everything, would there have to be any kind of remodification of the plan itself?

Yes, it's going to require digesters, sludge handling equipment, sludge storage.

So that's another...

This is all part of this one we're talking about.

All right, thanks.

Darren?

Yeah, I wanted to point out the special condition 20 is up here on the screen.

it's right out of our permit and it shows the same condition that was in our 2020 permit that is updated in our 2025 that at 2030 we need to be at 0.5 milligrams per liter of total phosphorus so this is that plan I talked about last week that the city has known since 2015 that this was going to be the end date for phosphorus there's many facilities that are having this same limit put on and others on them, just like Freeport. In order to meet it, phase two and three are going to be necessary. Phase three is a biological primary filters and those are needed because our, I think I explained that last week, our biosolids, our sludge is going to increase dramatically from the chemical process of removing phosphorus. So we need these facilities in order to meet the permit. If we don't meet our permit, we will start incurring fines that will come out of user fees for every month that we're not Stacy, Shadle, Sanders, Absent, Sellers, Klemm, Johnson, Simmons, Parker, The Resolution is adopted 7-0.

Item number 19 is the Adoption of Resolution 2025-139.

Resolution Approving an Agreement with Berner-Schober to Provide Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing or MEP Engineering Design and Permitting Services Related to Phase 2 of Construction of the Wastewater Treatment Plant Project.

Thank you, Manager Boyer.

Yes.

Thank you, Your Honor.

Berner-Schober has been our, I guess that would be our Tier 2 design firm for mechanical, electrical, and plumbing for our utility projects.

We use them at Well 11, Well 12, Phase 1 of the Wastewater Treatment Plant, and we've had a good working relationship with them.

They've done an excellent job, and we'd like to move forward with moving forward with design for this Phase 2 project with Berner Schober.

So staff recommends moving forward with a design project to meet the NPDES requirements and establish our phosphorus and PFAS requirements.

Is there a motion to adopt?

So moved.

Second.

Motion made by Alderman Shadle. Seconded by Alderman Sellers. Discussion on the resolution. Alderman Stacey.

This is for the east side of town?

This would be, well, not on the east side per se, but we're the wastewater treatment plant. This would be the design for the mechanicals and electricals at this phase two wastewater plant upgrade.

On Hancock?

Yes. Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Stacy? Aye. I'm sorry, I didn't understand that. Aye. Shadle? Aye. Sanders is absent. Sellers? Aye. Klemm? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? Aye.

and Parker. The resolution is adopted 7-0. Item number 20 is the adoption of resolution 2025-140. Could you please read this? Resolution approving an agreement with Fehr Graham to provide civil engineering services related to South Street ADA ramp improvements. Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. Recently, Representative Capello has worked with IDOT to get direct invested funding to the city of Freeport to resurface South Street from Galina to Locust.

However, part of that deal is that we have to do all the ADA ramps and concrete work. So they can move forward with that.

I believe we have 16 ramps that need to be done and staff would like to move forward with a design of the 16 ramps on the South Street Corridor so that we can get Completed, and ready to go to help encourage IDOT to start the project on South Street next year potentially.

Is there a motion to adopt?

So I'll move.

Second.

Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers.

Discussion on the resolution?

Alderman Sellers.

So, Fehr Graham will do the ADA ramps.

So we as the city, we are we going to help do any of that? And is this also paid by IDOT?

So let me start with your last question first. OK, no, it's not paid by IDOT. They're saying they're going to put in, I don't know, four to seven million dollars in the South Street as long as we get the ramps done. We've budgeted about two hundred fifty thousand dollars to do the ramps.

So that was already in the budget. And this is just the design work and kind of the bidding Process, everything that goes along with us getting a contractor to do 16. So these are 16 intersections, but not 16 ramps, correct? 16 total, eight intersections, okay.

So at the end of the day, we just need to put together a design and bid these projects so we can have a contractor go ahead and do this. Can our city staff do it? Yes, they can. However, they will be busy doing a lot of other things and at at this time. We didn't see, essentially we're just putting in $250,000 here to get millions of dollars back in transportation system upgrades. So overall, I think it's a very good direction for us and staff requests move forward.

Yeah, Rob is absolutely correct. Rob and I and Mayor Miller have been working on this We have any hope of getting South Street redone. This will be our one chance in the, you know, probably next decade to get it repaved and not just patch it. It's in terrible condition. We get tons of complaints on it regularly. And I think we made a significantly good move here for the citizens of Freeport to get that stretch of road replaced. And this is talking from Galena to Locust, where it turns into concrete.

I was just going to ask him, where does it extend to?

Right.

And the hopes are that if we can complete our project by July of 26, that the repavement would happen this fall.

So honestly, I don't think it could get any better than that.

And it is probably close to a five million dollar project through that corridor just for the the removal of pavement and the relaying of it.

Alderman, Stacy? I'm trying to understand this. Okay, so Galena and Locust runs north and south.

Where Galena Y's off out by the Old Ramada all the way to Locust Street on South Street. That's what will get repaved. Okay. Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Stacy? Aye. Shadle? Aye. Sanders? Aye.

Sellers? Aye. Klemm? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? Aye. And Parker? Aye. The resolution is adopted 8-0.

Item number 21, the adoption of resolution 2025-141. Could you please read this? Resolution approving amendment to agreement with MSA Professional Services to provide grant administration services for Housing and Urban Development or HUD Community Development Block Scott Grant for Housing and Rehabilitation Grant.

Thank you, Director Heimerdinger.

Thank you.

The 2021 CDBG Housing and Rehabilitation Grant will move to the closeout period.

We've moved to the closeout period this November, and staff recommends retaining professional services through the closeout period.

With the contract expiring February 28, 2026, home availability grants are very labor-intensive, require coordination with families to make improvements for safety, health, and quality of life to promote transparency in selecting homeowners and also working with the homeowners during the grant process. The City hired MSA to administer the grant with staff assisting indirectly.

The City previously had staff members to, a staff member to assist, but that position was vacant since early 2025, so funds originally allocated for that staff will now be redirected and have already been redirected to MSA to complete the grant.

The contract is being updated to improve transparency and clarity. The previous contract had no cap on expenses. The amended contract lists an estimated fee of $40,000 to complete the grant with payments on a time and expense basis.

Any additional work over the estimated fee will require prior authorization or a new service contract subject to Council approval.

Staff is requesting 64,000 of grant funds to cover administration costs which is the maximum allowed by the grant. Staff also recommends the approval of the resolution to enter into a service contract with MSA for administration and close out of the 2021 CBBG Housing Rehabilitation Grant, supporting efficient government and thriving neighborhoods through home rehabilitation.

Is there a motion to adopt?

So moved.

Second.

In motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle.

Discussion on the resolution.

Alderman Johnson.

Yes.

On the memo, it says the City of Freeport did have staff to assist with the implementing the grant when it was applied for to offset the cost and so forth.

What was that position and how much was the salary for that position?

That position was a planning position.

I think her name was LaVena.

I don't have the salary amount, but I can always get that to you, or we can look that up real quick.

But that one job wasn't solely her focus.

Yes, exactly.

Right, right.

Anyone else while he's looking at Alderman Sanders?

I'm looking, the service providers for this grant, who are they and where do they come from and how is it recommended to the city that we should even consider, well grants and the rest of the board.

I'm going to go ahead and start by saying that we are going to be discussing some of these issues.

And I think that these are things that we should always consider.

But my thing is, where's the targeting location for these types of rehabilitations of grants Police, and that such a program even exists, that people can take the opportunity to sign up for these types of grants, is that going to be exposed to the citizens of Freeport?

So this, yes, this grant actually is in the closeout stage, so it's one that we've already been working on.

It is, we have done nine homes, seven are actually completed.

We have two more that are in the works right now that MSA is currently working on.

This is not a new company that we're working with.

It's the same company we've worked with for years now on these grants.

The biggest reason we're here tonight is that we noticed that there was actually no cap or no transparency about how much we were spending on these grants.

and so we asked MSA to provide some more clarity on what it's going to take to finish out the grant so that everybody is aware of the amount that we're spending on their professional services in order to make sure that because we lacked a cap on the previous agreement that was signed in August of 2022, there was no cap.

So we're just trying to make sure that we have a cap, we know how much it's going to B. until the closeout and just provide an extra layer of transparency to the council.

So how will this be administered to the public that wants to be engaged with this kind of a program?

Yeah, this has already taken place.

So they already requested, they already sent letters to people who probably would apply and also could based on the information that we had would be recommended for use of this.

We then the city in back in 2021 worked with regional one and they selected the homeowners.

The homeowners after they were selected and teamed up with MSA, the state then approved all of these.

So all of this was done in a third party in order to promote transparency and to make sure that equity was in the top forefront.

Alderman Sanders, did you want to?

Yeah.

Could we get more efficient detailed information on this particular program?

Because I'm not liking some of the adjectives that you're talking about at this point.

Because it seems like to me it's strategically designed for some program areas where most of the people in need is not going to benefit from this program.

And so I like to take a little detailed study more to understand the whole process of it.

Yeah.

Because...

I will add the applicants were already selected and we already had all the homeowners selected.

about amending this agreement.

It's not, it has anything to do with this grant.

That's been since 2021.

Alderman Stacy.

MSA, is that the organization out of Iowa?

Yes.

And they're the ones that chose this grant, that chose who would benefit from this grant.

And so the 64,000 that we're asking for, for Administration Services. Who would that go to? Who is the Administration Services?

Yes, so the $64,000 is the amount that the grant gave us, $550,000. And then they also said that $64,000 of that could be to administration costs. So who's reporting, who's doing all of the C., Project Management. In this case, MSA was doing those, so those funds were used to help pay for MSA's admin costs that they would invoice to us.

Alderman Johnson, did you have a question? I just wanted to say I thought it was great that we had a third-party source picking the applications. I really thought that helped with transparency, and did you have my answer? I do have your answer. So, the salary for Alderman, Stacy, So the 64,000 that we're speaking of, you're saying that MSA did not receive their pay?

They did, yes.

This is just as a way to ensure that that money, that council approves that that money goes to them that was benefited.

It's just an extra step to make sure that they received that amount.

What amount did they receive?

They received the $64,000.

It's just basically a procedure to make sure that the admin stuff, the admin clause was granted to them.

So the amount that we could spend within the grant itself went to the proper agency or I don't understand because they've already been paid. And so, we're going an extra step that's going to cost us $40,000 to secure them with the $64,000 they have already.

For the 40,000, the 40,000 is for the proper closeout. That's the stuff that they still need to secure in order to close out the grant itself. So the 40,000 is for their administration fees until the end of February, as that is the of February, as that is the project closeout. That's them wrapping up the two homes that still need to be completed. That's them closing out the grant and filing all the paperwork and making sure they do all the necessary reporting and gather all the necessary paperwork for HUD, which is the agency that's providing this grant.

And grant money, the grant money will cover this, $40,000.

Yes, but if you look in the memo, we have exceeded that because there was, we have exceeded that amount.

If you look at the memo, because there was no cap on expenses.

So yes, but we have gone over the administration allocated amount in the grant based on how labor intensive this reporting is.

How was we allowed to do that?

How were we allowed to do that?

If we only were allotted this much money, how were we allowed to go 40,000 over?

We're not going 40,000 over, but we're going, the grant has the amount that you can spend knowing that it's probably not enough for you to finish out the grant efficiently.

So grants don't give you enough to actually perform the entire grant.

They give you a stipend of sorts, hoping that it helps you fulfill your grant administration needs.

Every grant has a certain amount.

It's never going to fulfill it completely, so there will be some funds that have to come from other sources.

So why didn't we just stop?

When we didn't have enough funds to do nine homes, and maybe we could only do eight, why didn't we just stop at that eight?

We had enough funds for the actual to do the work, to do the rehabilitation.

It's the admin cost.

You can't use, the admin cost is the stipend that they give you.

You can't use the actual funds for admin costs.

So that has to go to the homes.

It has to go to the home owners into the rehabilitation costs.

Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Stacy?

No.

Shadle?

Aye.

Sanders?

No.

Sellers?

Aye.

Klemm?

Aye.

Johnson?

Aye.

Simmons?

Aye.

And Parker?

Aye.

The resolution is adopted 6-2.

Item number 22 is adoption of resolution 2025-142.

Could you please read this?

Resolution approving amendment to agreement with MSA Professional Services to provide Grant Administration Services for Illinois Housing Development Authority, or IDA, Strong Communities Program grant.

Director Heimendinger.

Thank you.

In 2023, the city received $300,000 through the IDA Strong Communities Program for Housing Rehabilitation and Demolition.

The grant was initially managed by city staff, but the position became vacant in early 2025.

Staff recommended retaining MSA professional services to assist with the administration and Closeout, redirecting funds originally intended for the staff.

The previous contract looked at the end date and estimation of expenses.

This new contract explains that MSA will continue through the project closeout period, which is November, which is currently going to be November 30th of 2026.

This amended contract greatly improves transparency, listing a proposed fee of $35,000 and stating that any additional work over the estimation requires prior authorization of or a new contract.

Staff recommends approval of the resolution to enter into a service agreement with MSA demonstrating efficient government and supporting thriving neighborhoods through blight-leading mediation.

Mediation.

Is there a motion to adopt?

So moved.

Second.

Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers.

Discussion on the resolution?

Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Stacy?

No.

Shadle?

Aye.

Sanders?

No.

Sellers?

Aye.

Klemm?

Aye.

Johnson?

Aye.

Simmons?

Aye.

Parker?

3 could you please read the bids approval of bid which was opened on November 13th for four structured demolitions thank you director Heimerdinger thank you madam mayor bid CD 0152025 for demolition and asbestos abatement of four properties was published November 7th in the journal standard and open November 13th with more bids received staff recommends are winning the contract to the lowest and the Director of Financial Affairs.

For the first month of the year, the city has sent out $1,273, cookies, and a bill of MAPS, which is the first responsible bid for a total of $64,575.

Elber and Sun Earthworks at $11,275 for a 602-608 E. Stephenson, Fisher Escavating at $53,328.29 South Joanna and 120 South Rhouses.

Community, and Effective Lamboos.

Is there a motion to adopt?

I'm sorry, to approve.

So moved.

Second.

There will be a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Parker.

Discussion on the bids.

Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Stacy?

I do have a question.

Alderman Stacy?

Let these companies line up with the rules and regulations to even being able to place a bid on such an event.

Is everybody being checked out? They all are in correspondence with government laws and rules and regulations?

Madam Clerk? I looked up Albert and Fisher and they are they have filed their annual report with the Secretary of State and they are in good standing. Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Stacy? Aye. Shadle? Aye. Sanders? Aye. Sellers? Aye. Klemm? Aye. Johnson? Aye.

Simmons, and Parker. Aye. The motion passes 8 to 0. Item number 24, could you please read this discussion? Discussion regarding notice of Safe Streets for All or SS4A public review and comment period will be open from November 12th to the 26th. Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. The City of Freeport participated in the The SS4A, that's Safe Streets for All planning grant with ALTA planning and design over the last 12 months. Based on this overarching study, a draft safety action plan has been created to provide guidance on efforts to improve safety for people walking, biking, driving, and using mobility devices. This is a notice to inform the public that the draft Mayor's Safety Action Plan is now posted on the city website accessible on the homepage www.cityoffreeport.org under the latest news listed tile. Council members and all public members can access the link to review the Safety Action Planning Document along with the appendices. Reviewers can also post public comments and input about the plan, which will be logged by our consultants and the document will be live and available from November 12 to November 26, 2025. After the public comment section is complete, Alta Planning & Design will finalize the Safety Action Plan and present it to the City Council for adoption on December 1st at the regularly scheduled council meeting. Adoption of the SS4A plan will allow the city

opportunities to receive specialized funding for these corrective measures and it fits with our strategic plan.

Is there any discussion on this notice?

Alderman Stacy. Was this discussed at the count? Yes, last week? No. Well, we're having the November 12th to November 26th date. Is there a reason why it wasn't discussed at the count?

Well, I believe this is the time for community input, so we can bring it, you know, we're going to bring it before we've had Alta come and talk to us about the SS4A several times.

And this is just an evolution of that process. So we're just doing what we need to do to advance this.

Aaron?

Yeah, so this is, like Rob said, it's been a 12-month process. So this is the final draft, if you will. And we put it out on the 12th, or we didn't, the city put it out for the 12th. It gives the public time to review it, submit comments. The reason we're bringing this up tonight is to remind it because it was already posted on the social website, but for the council members, if you would like to review it, it's just a reminder that that's the location that's available. It's a very large document. So we posted it to the city's website so anybody could have access to it. So the more input, the better.

and the more input the better.

Alderman Sanders.

Yeah. You know, I'd like for us to demonstrate that here at the council.

I'd like for someone to really articulate that whole process right here so the open public can see it and hear it and that they're not fishing through websites trying to locate what we're talking about tonight.

I would like for someone to come and introduce themselves, open it up like we're at a town hall, and talk about this particular subject.

I think it would come, then the people would, because they're more, people like to see visual and audible, and they wanna have tangible access to what we're doing.

And so I would like for them to look us in the face while we're talking about this, and they can have this they can look right at us and say well yeah okay you know I'm not I'm not mitigating anything right now I'm just saying that um I think it would be a great justice if we can have them to have someone to just come in and talk about it Alderman Sanders um City Manager did allude to that they will be here on December 1st here I didn't yes here I didn't yes here December 1st yeah they'll be here on the first year that part and I think we've had them come at least two and Stacey.

I'm seeing on this website that it's saying there's a public webinar November 19th.

So if you choose to you can be on that webinar and you can give your comments to them in person or you can submit the you can do it on your own time and you could submit the and the response form to them and they'll track all the responses.

So the key here is that they would like to bring their plan presented on December 1st.

So you'll have time to review that, make any comments and we would like to have that adopted by the council on December 1st, because that program will allow us up to special funding in 2026 to try to move some of those projects forward.

and I'll give you just a quick recap of the number one project on there is hopefully the realignment of Carroll and Empire at some point.

That's the number one project that was selected as the number one safety concern in town is that intersection where it's offset.

Walnut and Empire.

I'm sorry, Walnut and Empire, excuse me.

Sorry, thank you for the correction.

And so that is the number one safety issue that came out of the study that has been ongoing for a long time and hopefully we can get rectified with some out of out of Freeport money to do that.

So there's a couple ways for you to inform yourself before the December 1st date. So we'll move on to Department Head Reports, Finance. None tonight. Thank you. Community Development? None. And Public Works? None. Fire? Yes thank you your honor. This evening the fire department responded to a large We're in a large industrial building on Lamb Road.

Upon arrival we found a piece of machinery on fire.

Companies were able to effectively extinguish the fire.

However, the large building was full of smoke.

So we requested and made this response for the large MVU's mobile ventilation unit.

And they just now arrived on the scene.

But what they'll do is they, it's a huge fan on a truck.

they back up to an overhead door deploy that fan and just blow all the smoke out of the building so they're going to be there for a little bit longer but they did a quick job knock down on the fire and I was able to return back to the meeting. Police?

Nothing from the police department. Library? None. IT? City Manager? Thank your honor but I will I will pass tonight. And I just want to remind the viewing audience that next Thursday and Friday, November 27th and 28th is Thanksgiving holiday, so the City Hall will be closed.

We'll move on to Council Alderman Stacy. Yes. I have a letter that I I had drafted to read last week and by it being the COW and not going around to the individuals I forgot that if I wanted to read it I had to do it during public comments and so I missed out but I still feel a need to read my letter tonight to the administration and city council members of the city Freeport, Illinois.

Given the public's outcry over the withholding of SNAP benefits, it is hard to believe that we, as the council of this city, have proposed nothing.

Not even a plan was created to address this issue.

Fripper Township is the only governmental entity in the United States that has allowed $18,000 to distribute among food bank networks and pantries within the city.

This noble act will help our pantries alleviate food insecurities for some of our citizens.

Freeport Township is the only governmental entity in our county to take such action.

This has consistently shown, they have consistently shown that they genuinely care about our Freeport residents.

This is not lip service.

The Freeport Township have proved their commitment through their actions and giving time and time again.

and many others. Surprisingly, the city of Rockford managed to take action, but it's a larger city, and it has more resources, right? However, Freeport Township has far few resources, yet they, along with other community members, found a way to make a difference.

WTVO Channel 17, you get it wrong when you said governments of Freeport.

It was not governments. It was the Freeport Township, the only entity in this city that has done anything.

And Mr. Patrick Sellers, if you have not received a thank you, let me say thank you.

Thank you for your vision to the cries of the people and for not turning a deaf ear.

What I find disheartening is that this city administration has done nothing substantial to help ease the burden of our constituents.

and the rest of the administration. Instead of taking action, this administration simply provided a list of places where people could seek, could maybe seek assistance or frankly tell them there's nothing we can do.

and John.

I have been following the conversations on social media.

People are asking the same questions.

What are we doing to better support our community?

Why the city administration is busy celebrating events like the and the rest of our community.

While the city administration is busy celebrating events like witches and wine walks, there is a segment of our population, the constituents of this city, that was generally concerned about access to food.

I hope Good Morning America was correct in their speaking when they said that the government If not, we yet have an opportunity to stand up and to do what's right for the people by the people.

Maybe it's time for this administration to prioritize the well-being of all neighborhoods and all citizens over its falsely glorified downtown.

There's more to this city than downtown, and there's more government entities to assist in times of crisis than just the Freeport Township.

I propose to both Mayor Miller and City Manager Boyer that when another crisis occur, because it just might, that we don't pass the buck, but we join forces with other governmental entities in our city and county to help alleviate the crisis.

to help alleviate the crisis through joint effort.

This will help to reassure our residents that their health and safety is a top priority and further show them that their governments are willing to work together for their well-being.

Thank you.

Alderman, Shadle. I'm going to choose to pass. Alderman, Sanders. I just want to say all that that I concurred with from Alderman Stacy and the fact that what was said, we just need to look at ourselves to reconstruct this government body which is supposed to be government to to legislate all developments and everything within the city itself.

It is our duty, as Alderman was stating, it is our duty to be someone who is taking up the initiatives and shining throughout our cities to show that our citizens do look forward to us to help them.

We're supposed to be a helper here in this council, but we're derelict in our duties, responding to that, and I would call for or consider us reconstructing our council.

Come up with new meaning of what a council should look like and what the government legislators and others of this body should be doing to legislate for the people here in this city.

We're not demonstrating any of those actions and shame on us that other townships and agencies are doing more than this administration or this council.

It is the duty of the council to shine and illuminate throughout the city.

Not other agencies, we don't shine like we should because why?

We're not doing the effective jobs for the people.

We got this thing upside down.

We come in here to work for the people, not against the people, or just deviate from them and just set them aside as if though they don't matter, that's what I'm hearing.

and I keep saying that to my last year. If we don't show some changes up here, shame on us. We have to evaluate ourself to see if we're being effective to the city of Freeport.

I will preach this until the cows turn blue. But the fact of the matter is, what are we We're going to do as not only the administrative part of it but the governing legislative part of it.

If you don't understand what I'm talking about, we got our whole situation upside down right now and take my word for it, it's probably been like this for decades and because of the fact that it's been like this for decades, people get complacent.

and others.

That includes Council gets complacent to not do the duties of the people of this city.

I think we should take an observation of this whole Council, retune it, refine it and come up with other resolutions for the Council, not for the citizens of the City of Freeport, but for Council, government body and the legislation of how we're legislating throughout the City of Freeport.

and others.

This thing is bigger than what we can imagine.

And the little work that we're doing here in this city is little, very little.

That's the reason why we're having people complaining.

So if someone wants to take the initiative, it doesn't matter which council member.

It can be just one person.

One council member could take up the initiative and have changes to be provoked through the and Mr.

Miller.

I can't see anything being changed since I've been here for three years.

The only thing I can see is only things that happen is that we follow a format of agendas that the people have not placed on the agenda, nor have Fowler, and the city council.

I feel that many people have not placed on the agenda nor have the council put this stuff together to even discuss these matters of ordinances and how we get to the point of ordinances and how we get to the point of spending the amount of dollars that the city spend. We're not focused on that kind of stuff.

Colleagues, that we have to reconstruct and deconstruct this council so we can do better.

That's mine.

So just a little piece of about what was spoken tonight about Township.

It's a part of their job description.

And despite what was said, despite what was said, SNAP benefits have all been reinstated.

So thank you for all of your kind words.

That's why I said I was going to read it last week.

Alderman Sellers.

And I did it.

And then snap what's not real.

Alderman Sellers.

I don't have anything.

I'm ready to do it.

And it's our job too.

Please stop, please stop disrupting.

It's our job.

Alderman Klemm.

Yes, I'd just like to remind the citizens of First Ward.

We have a Neighborhood Watch next week Tuesday.

We'll be there at Schwartz Chapel.

If you have any questions or anything you want to talk about please email them to me or give me a call thank you very much Norman Johnson yes second ward has neighborhood watch on Thursday at 630 if you have any questions please contact me thank you Alderman Simmons Alderman Parker school on we have a neighborhood watch next Monday night on Laurel Street at 6 o'clock that leaves us with public comment is there any public comments St. Vincent CLF Program and SLA is closing down and we're moving this tomorrow and stuff.

and we want to tell you you do a good job doing the mayor in Freeport and we proud of you and we proud of Stacy, everybody, because you're doing a good job working in the city of Freeport.

Thank you, Tommy.

Thank you, Tommy.

And, and, Don Parker went, so, we'll be moving Tuesday, so.

That's what you were saying, yeah, good, it's not fun to move.

Is there any other public comments?

I'll entertain a motion for adjournment.

So moved.

Second.

Any motion made by Sellers, seconded by Shadle.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Have a good evening.

and others.