Good evening, Madam Mayor, everyone. Would you please pray with me? Lord of all, it is the glory of every human being to seek your wisdom and strength.


You are admirable in your power and wisdom and truth and for your mercy and grace.


All well and doing well. We're glad to meet you. We're grateful for you. We're grateful for all of you for being here.


We know every true good thing that we know is sourced in you. So thank you tonight for your gifts that you've given each one here of life, of health, of community, of gifts for leadership and governance.


Or do we thank you for this City, our home, and for those that you have put in place to Thank you for this Mayor and this Council, for these Department Heads, this City Manager, and for so many others, even in the seats here tonight, that you give their time and talent for the welfare of this city.


Lord, you care about integrity, about wise planning, about justice. and we ask that you'd give both the leaders of this city and its citizens the humility to seek these things from you and may they find your mercy and grace that you offer freely and so tonight we ask that you'd help each one of us here to act honorably before you and with deference and grace toward each other for you have made us to speak and act with both love and truth I ask all Alderperson, Klemm, Johnson, Simmons, Absent, Parker, Stacy, Shadle, Sanders, Sellers and we'll wait until Alderman Stacy is able to get up to her chair because she leads the pledge.


Madam Clerk, could you please make note that 603 Alderman Simmons arrived and then if you could all please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance led by Alderman Stacy.


I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.


Motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle. All those in favor signify by saying aye.


Aye. Opposed? That motion passes. Item number two is approval of the minutes from the regular meeting on July 21st, 2025. Is such a motion?


So moved. Second. Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Klemm. All those in favor signify by saying aye.


Aye. Opposed? That motion passes. Davis. Item number three is recognition of service awards. Manager Boyer.


Thank you, Your Honor. Rick Lineman has been with the city for 10 years. He started out as a swing shift operator at the wastewater treatment plant. He is now the chief wastewater operator. He's also received his Class 1 wastewater license as well as his Class B water treatment license. We're very appreciative for his service to the city. Being that he could not make Thank you. Item number four is public comments. Madam Clerk, did you have one that you had for reading? I did. This one was emailed in and relates to agenda item number 24. It is from Kelly Hobock. Please consider the following as my letter of support for grievance 01-2025.


I am writing to emphasize the necessity of stalling curb ramps to ensure accessibility for individuals who use wheelchairs and others with mobility challenges.


Curb ramps are essential for safe and independent navigation across sidewalks and streets. Without them, wheelchair users face significant physical barriers that can prevent them from accessing public spaces freely and safely.


These barriers not only compromise mobility, but also dignity and independence. I would also like to reference a previously submitted grievance, 01-2025, specifically concerning the corners of Park Boulevard and Church Street. The lack of curb ramps at these intersections continues to pose serious accessibility issues for community members with mobility impairments. While I appreciate any steps taken so far, this location remains a critical area in need of attention. Installing curb ramps is not only a matter of legal compliance and others under the ADA. It is a matter of equity and inclusion. These ramps benefit not only wheelchair users, but also individuals using walkers, strollers, bicycles and delivery carts. They make public spaces safer and more accessible for everyone. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I urge you to prioritize the installation of curb ramps at Park Boulevard and Sure Street and take meaningful steps towards creating a more inclusive and accessible environment. Sincerely, Kelly Hobock.


and then we have Ernestine Edmond on a bid package. I'm not sure if I said that name correctly. Did you want to comment on a bid package? Yeah it's a that's a bid Package. I just wanted to be here because I am in the midst of all this because we're We're in a rental property, and months ago I got letters saying that the property had been sold.


Okay. Okay. So that doesn't have to do with the bid package. So if you want to talk about rental properties, then you have to wait until the end.


Okay. Okay. Okay. May I address you, please? May I address you, please? Sure. Thank you. You guys, stand up. Stand up. All of you, stand up.


Which item number are we talking about? I asked if I could address you and the council.


Okay, according to public comments... I appreciate it. Okay, but it doesn't have to do with... These are you guys' constituents. These are your constituents that are being and others that are being gentrified out of this town based around properties that have been sold and is increasing their rents.


These are your constituents that are going to be homeless with their children, one of whom has been hurt in one of these pieces of property.


You guys don't want to hear us? You will hear us one way or the other.


You're going to either hear us today and then not make these people stay here all night.


They've got to go home to their kids and their family and their homes that they will no longer be able to exist.


I'm passionate about this simply because I've been in that situation. I live in transitional housing.


and I have been in that situation. I live in transitional housing for 18 months, not in the same conditions that they're going through. And you guys need to hear them. All of you need to hear them. You need to listen to what your constituents are saying and what I'm saying to you guys simply. If they don't listen to you, get them out of here. Register, everybody need to register. Put them out of their seat. They need to hear you. If they're Okay, you, you, you are out of order. It has nothing to do. Well, then you will be asked to leave. Could you please escort her out? For those of you that are standing.


for those of you that are standing I just want to say we are sorry for the hardships that you are going through but please know that the city has you you I want you to know you can talk at the end of the public comment if you'd like You can talk at the end of public comment if you like. If you would like to be escorted out as well, that's your choice.


Chief, if you could handle this. For those of you that have stayed I would just like to say I'm sorry for what you're experiencing but please note that the city has no rent control we have no right to govern what another business puts out for a price we don't there's nothing we feel bad that you're being increased but we have no authority to stop them from doing that so we will move on we have other public comments and I'm going to speak on item 14, but I do think that demolition, item 26, is an important issue and that we are demolishing properties that could be turned into useful rentals and that is a concern that we should be talking about.


But I'm here to talk about the lift station. and others. And that is a concern that we should be talking about.


But I'm here to talk about the Lyft station. I was upset about it last time because I've been knowing about the Lamb Road Tiff and this Lyft station which just came up.


But that Tiff has been in existence since 2003. And Walmart and Menards were forced out there by a handful of white men who bought up land cheap and stuck them out there so that they could collect their property taxes.


This is not Wal-Mart or Menard's fault. This is this group of creepy men who dictate what happens in Freeport and steal our property taxes and so that's what's happening in the Lamb Road Tiff.


Wal-Mart and Menard's property taxes are now funding a lift station to pump sewage out of there.


Now when that development went in in 2005, I sat on the Planning Commission. I questioned all of this.


Guess what? I was kicked off the Planning Commission because they didn't want to hear what I had to say.


That's what happens to people who look up and find out the facts. So here we are today paying for a lift station.


I just talked to Mr. Stekel, Darren, and I asked, why do we not know how much this is going to cost?


Tonight, you're about to approve $234,000 for engineering services. Do you know what that means?


It means you're going to pay him to oversee and Stegall. Do you know how much a lift station is going to cost you?


Do you know how much it costs to run a lift station? I asked Mr. Stegall and he gave me an answer which I appreciated.


He said it's going to cost around $2.8, $2.3 million, which we do have in the TIF.


But that's not the point. Why are we spending the money on a lift station?


When they put that development out there, they should have paid for water and sewer.


If they didn't have sewer out there, they had no business putting Walmart and Menards and Mr. Boyer, I'm telling you this for your benefit because you weren't here. I'm not blaming you. I'm bringing you historical information that I hope you will appreciate. So right now we've got this same group of creepy thugs who are running developments who want a lift station to get water and sewer out to Mill Race Crossing, 400 or 500 acres, which they bought the land cheap, had no water out there, and guess what? Now we're going to pay for with those property taxes that Wal-Mart and Menards are paying that are supposed to be coming to our police, water, not water, we pay for water, our police, fire, schools, city, we're supposed to be using those property taxes to pay for our expenses here, but instead, you're being asked to vote now to approve engineering costs so that we can put a lift station so that these thug developers who are sitting over at the county can run Wal-Mart and Kinsey Graham, Item Number 10 Good evening, Council. My name is Kinsey Graham


with State Line Solar on behalf of Harmony UMC. I'd like to address you in terms of Item Number 10, the approval of the ground-mounted solar array on the property. Mostly, I just wanted to answer the questions that came up from the first reading. That being, why not put solar panels on the roof? Main reason to not put panels on the roof is because it's due to be replaced soon and that would add extra cost to the church to have to remove them and put them back up at that time. We also moved it to the back of the property to remain out of sight as per the code request.


And our sizing of that ground-mounted system does comply with the current ordinances as they are today.


Thank you very much. Thank you. Akiya Sanders on item number 23. Let me try to make this as quick as possible.


It's a lot to cover. I'm going to show you how God revealed everything on this agenda there that you say that don't have nothing to do with it.


The root is Wayne Duckman. Wayne is responsible for knocking down these houses that does not have to be knocked down.


We are in a housing crisis right now and we're looking at the man to give him some money, a contract after he quit on Freeport.


He quit, put his two weeks in, don't want nothing to do with us, but he want a thousand dollars for 16 hours a week.


That's insane, insane. We're in a housing crisis. Rob Boyer, it's your time to put on a Superman cape.


Try to act like you care about the community. We are a rural community. Rural means you guys have made the rules to fit your needs.


Now it's time to make the rules to fit the community needs and what they actually need.


Have you went through those properties and seen if they honestly need to be knocked down?


Wayne Duckman is very vindictive. He harasses a lot of people. He gives all kinds of hell to a lot of people only because they are consistent in hustling.


He mad because he got to do a job. He done left his job five times.


And now you're putting on a contract. You want to give him some money for begging him to stay.


Feel his position. Last time you said there was nine people that filled out an application, I can't believe out of those nine people we don't have one that can and others.


He's the reason that we do more than 16 hours a week. He's the reason that all of our whole community is failing.


He's the reason that the progress for the Eastside projects, he's trying to stop that.


And your whole election was ran off Chicago slum landlords and I ain't going to believe that you can't do nothing about what coming here and trying to fix it.


Make it so it fits the cap. You cannot do 500 to 1,000. You cannot make somebody pay that much.


You are in control. and Booth were here and is now President of Baby contributed 100 million dollarsasting Mrs.damila.


I'm so snob bj soap awareness, but I'm like say, maybe you guys don't care cuz half of y'all living good but it's people that need help, Social Security, low income job you ain t got no jobs here Rob Freeport Partnership created I don't see. It's time for somebody to do something that actually can, that's done, for the community. Keep your topic on and the rest of the community in a way we can't live.


Go through the properties once. How often do you go over there? How often do you trail those properties that's being torn down?


Mine, for one, didn't need to be torn down. It couldn't want to some of these families.


But instead, he wanted to target me, knock it down, and now we in a housing crisis.


Fix it. Care about it. Don't look down, look up. Look at the people you're about to fail.


and John. You can count your blessings and get out of here. You can count your blessings and get out of here.


. » Cheryl Alderman on item number 23. » Mine is also concerning Wayne Duckman and Rob.


I have tried to talk to Rob. I have an 8 unit apartment building that can get fixed up, but because Wayne has got to and Ikea, shake your head yes Wayne, I know it, all these people, 8 units, can you imagine how many families I could put in that 8 unit? Get off your ass and let us fix this property so that these people have a place to live. Let's not swear or you're done. Don't swear at him. But it's okay that he can rip people off. What am I talking about? You're an exception Doe. But you guys sit here. These people are looking for homes. Give me the permit so that I can fix this back up. You already stole one of my houses. If you think you're going to get this one, you're going to have a fight.


Next is Joseline Risley. I'm sure I'm saying that terribly wrong. Excuse me, I don't know the rules and regulations. This is my and Dr.


Jodi, I don't know the rules and regulations. This is my first time attending a meeting like this. I did want to speak on the impact of demolitions and outside takeover.


» Okay. The item that you spoke on is the contract. » Yes. And that's part of the demolitions, correct?


» No. » No. From 23, 26 and 27? » You wrote down item number 23.


» Oh, I'm sorry. » So if you want to talk about is it 20 yeah if you have something specific about bid package stuff you can talk about it yes it's in addition to the the recent rent hikes it also is including the several properties that have been demo demolitioned over the last few years is that's not the appropriate time to speak about that so those items that are on the agenda about demolition there to demo to their voting to accept a bit to demolish a certain group of properties here so if you're and I'm talking about old properties. No, it's not on point. If you're talking about these properties, then you can. That's on point. It's in addition to that. It's it's the the big picture of it. I know that there are additional properties that are proposed to being demolitioned, but it's in addition to what's already been done. They kind of go hand in hand if you will. Probably then you can certainly talk about that, but it's probably meant for the public comment at the end of the meeting because it's a non agenda item. But it's in addition to what and I don't mean to go back and forth with you and waste more and the rest of the city.


It's a really important area of my allotted time. But it's in addition to the properties that are looking to be demolitioned, because it's causing just a greater strife for the residents of the Freeport community, because it leaves even less areas for them to reside.


And it is related to the rent increase, which of course is not on the agenda.


Yeah, these are specific addresses. Yes, I understand. So if you want to speak about rent, then that's going to be at the end of the meeting, isn't it?


I think your comments are going to have to wait till the end because I just don't think they're really not about the bid packet. The bid packet is who's the lowest bidder? What's the price to demolish it?


I understand that that's your perspective on it and I will respect that. So I'd be happy to see that.


I think they're really not about the bid packet. The bid packet is did who's the lowest bidder? What's the price to demolish it?


I understand that that's your perspective on it and I will respect that so I'd be happy to speak later in the meeting. Thank you.


Thank you. That concludes public comments. We don't have executive session. It's always a standing item.


We don't have anything on there. just so you know we're not going into executive session okay go ahead my name is Robert Holt I'm the AFSCME Council 31 Staff Representative for Local 3367, the Municipal Employees of the City of Freeport.


I received this letter that they've asked me to read today, so I'll begin. Over the past few years, Public Works has been promised a $5 an hour increase that they have not received, and now that the City does not want to come through, now the City does not want to come through on their promise.


In 2019, the Local took a 0% increase because the City said they did not have the funds to give us our negotiated increase, and after the city got their COVID money, they only gave it to the police and fire pensions and no one else.


Without the street department, the city would be paying millions more to get streets paved.


Come winter, the streets would not get plowed to ensure safe traveling for our citizens and police and fire.


Without the water and sewer construction crews, we would have to pay someone else thousands to fix main breaks.


You would also have to figure out who was going to run sewer lines when they get backed up and don't flow properly.


Without the telecommunicators, all the calls would be directed to other agencies, which would take even longer to dispatch our officers and fire department personnel.


Without the water treatment crews, there would not be safe drinking water. If there is a fire, no one would be there to turn up the pumps to help support the water Water Supply needed to put out fires.


So pay us what you owe us, because if you don't pay, we don't stay.


Item number five is the Consent Agenda. The Consent Agenda is considered to be routine in nature unless there's a member of the council The consent agenda is approving to receive and place on file the board and commission minutes from the Planning Commission May 8th, June 12th, 2025, the Zoning Board of Appeals June 5th, 2025, Board of Fire and Police Commissioners June 24th, July 1st, 2025, Finance and Cash and Investment Reports for June 2025, the Greater Freeport Partnership July 2025, Building Permit, Fire Department and Police Department reports for July 2025. The finance bill is payable in the total of $5,658,211.16 and payroll for pay period ending July 26, 2025 in the total of $685,042.99 and payroll for ending August 8, 2025 in the total of $671,983.85.


is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? So moved. Second. We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers. Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll?


Stacy? No. Shadle? Aye. Sanders? No. Sellers? Aye. Klemm? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? Oh, I'm sorry, Ann Parker? Aye.


The motion passes 5 to 2. Item number 6 is Appointments. Could you please read?


Connie Craft to the ADA Commission, effective immediately through May 31st, 2029. Is there a motion to approve?


So move. Second. A motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle. Discussion? Alderman Stacy?


Why Connie Craig? She served previously on an old commission that was stood up years ago.


She expressed interest, asked if she could be a part, and I had an opening.


She's an outstanding citizen in this city? Is she what? Is she an outstanding citizen in this city?


She's very involved in this city. I wouldn't put somebody on I didn't think was outstanding.


Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll? Stacy? Aye. Shadle? Aye. Sanders? Aye. Sellers?


Aye. Klemm? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? Still absent. And Parker? Aye. Motion passes 7-0. Item number 7 is the second reading of Ordinance 2025-44.


Could you please read this? Commence amending Chapter 460, Section 460.16, Written Permits Required for Overweight Vehicles of the City of Freeport's Code of Ordinances.


Thank you. Manager Boyer? Thank you, Your Honor. Just following up, we had our first reading in July.


This is our second reading, now in August. Staff requests moving forward with some changes to the ordinance for oversized vehicles, so that would be creating an overweight and oversized permit form, permitting required within city limits no matter what roads are used within the city.


Also adding $150 for individual one-time permits, $1,200 for an annual permit, that would be for individuals licensed within the city, and then $500 penalty for non-compliance with permitting.


Staff recommends moving forward with this ordinance. Discussion? Alderman Shadle. I had a conversation with Garrett Miller from the Crane Service. He brought to my attention that the state fee, the yearly fee is $1,400 and he felt ours was excessive at $1,200 and was hoping we could get that somewhere down more towards a $500.


$500 range any other discussion I would just comment we'll make it whatever the council decides to be Make it whatever the council decides to be. I did a little bit of research on different types of fees and other communities charged by the overage of weight over the 80,000 pounds.


That would be very difficult for us to do. We don't have that kind of employees or tracking time. I tried to, you know, make it a break rather than doing individual permits.


I just like to mention we could probably do something like $500, that's unreasonable to council.


At this time, you know, we don't have anything on the book, so something's better than nothing, so.


Alderman Stacey. I don't think it's fair to just make up a price here based upon what someone is wanting.


If we need to move it to the next meeting and re-look at this, then let's all re-look at it.


But to sit here and change 1200 to 500 tonight, I don't think that that's right nor fair.


Manager Boyer. One thing I might wanna mention is I've only been contacted by one Alderman who is concerned and expressed some interest from a local business that will be operating overweight within the city and so from that standpoint we did look at various other options but $500 would be a good start on any kind of annual permit and that would also keep some of the overhead lower for operators that are overweight.


Alderman Klemm? Yes, I know in this, you had eliminated certain vehicles. The example that Alderman Shadle used is, needless to say, this guy does a lot of work with the cranes, a lot of the around the area, and needless to say, it's got a place in town, so he'd be using it all the time, would there be a possibility of putting him into that group that, with Garbage Trucks, so on and so forth.


I don't believe so. The cranes he operates are fairly large and completely different than a garbage truck.


They're enormous. So I don't know if Darren wants to chime in on some of that.


I talked to the one business they called, and they typically run over the weight limit.


That's the size of a crane. They have multiple cranes, but the one that they, I think, use very regularly is significantly overweight.


Our roads are permitted between 60 and 80,000 pounds. And I think the unit that we discussed was about 125,000.


So the permitting process is really to control where these vehicles operate within the city.


So for instance, unless we had a crane job at somewhere on Locust Street, I would not permit somebody to go drive a 100,000 pound load down Locust Street, because we just replaced it.


So the whole idea behind this permitting process is to map the exact routes that they're traveling.


It's not just a free pass to do whatever they want, whenever they want. It is actually to map it out to say, okay, we fixed these streets, so please don't operate on these streets as we move through the network and cycle of it, right?


and that's the people that, cause we actually have an ordinance. This ordinance is already on the books.


So we do have people that already submit for permits all the time, out of town crane carriers and stuff.


We just don't have any fees tied to this ordinance. It actually already exists. I reviewed it with the attorney and it just says the fees will be made up by the Public Works Director at the end of it.


And there was no fee schedule and I didn't feel like it was right to impose a fee schedule that wasn't approved by council.


Alderman Sanders? Yeah, I'm listening to the scenario that you got or the comprehensive conversation that you guys are trying to establish before council.


But we have no comprehensive scaling chart for over the road driving here in the city.


And I think we should establish that. if we don't have one, we should have one.


Okay. We have one, it's 80,000 pounds. No, what I mean is we as council need to be able to examine and do an accessibility of those charts to see if we're within the guidelines of scaling prices, fees, and whatever the nine yards is on that matter.


So what I am saying is before we set fees and others. We're going to have to set fees and try to impose these fees based upon coming out of our head.


I like to see this in writing. I like to see a chart mapping of the city where trucks can drive and cannot drive.


And I like to see that visually. And I think the people of the city would like to see that visually as well.


When they see trucks driving in certain areas, knowing that they have no business in these Fautier and Ken,members of these competition, and I like for us to get this thing prioritized before we decide to allow this thing to be done.


I don't know if there's a time limit on it or whenever you guys want to implement this program or whatever the case may be, but if it's not in effect as of now today, then before we do that, let's have all of our tools in place and making sure that council is very aware and others, and we want to make sure that we don't have to worry about what is being done on these matters and not have us listening to something that may happen or may not have happened and things are changing. So we want something established where that has some form of foundation that we can go to altogether, not only that, even be placed on our website where people can have accessibility to these kinds of things. So that's I would just like to make a motion that we move this to the first meeting in September where we can get clarity for those who need clarity or want clarity and I don't think it's fair to start a motion that we move this to the first meeting in September.


for those who need clarity or want clarity. And I don't think it's fair to start adjusting prices.


That's why our constituents already feel like we support who we want and who we don't, we don't.


This is a prime example of willing to drop from 1,200 to 500 because of one business which Director Darren Steekle said is over 1,000 pound truck.


Okay, we have a motion on the floor to move this ordinance to the next regular scheduled meeting.


Is there a second? Second. Mayor? Sure. Can I respond to Mr. Sanders comment? Just for some clarity.


So currently the way the ordinance exists, Anybody can drive anywhere they want without any issue, right?


And so if you're a truck, that's under the legal moving weight, which is 80,000 pounds, they can drive up and down every street in Freeport without any control and it's not illegal for them to do it.


We don't have routes that are cars only or non truck routes, right? So they can go wherever they want.


This is really for the oversized overweight loads to ensure that they're just not cruising down our streets We're trying to put some teeth to it. I have done research on this. What I have proposed is what most communities have. The fee can, I don't want to say it's negotiable, but it's whatever you guys feel is fair. I personally, I did not talk to this business, but I talked to other businesses, and the fee that I proposed, they thought it was fair. So, we're trying to put some teeth to it. I have done research on this. What I have proposed is what most communities have.


Felt was fair based on other communities and how they move their loads. Currently, the way the state moves vehicles around the city, excuse me, the state of Illinois moves vehicles, they fill out a permit and in that permit that they supply to the state, it says you have to get permission or permitting from local jurisdictions.


We have found many trucks that drive down our residential streets with no permitting process that are way overweight.


I'm trying to get control of this because we're investing millions and millions of dollars in the streets that we don't want destroyed. This is just an extension of our street program. I will say that the one person that called in now if he's doing an RDA to develop his business in the future we know where he's going to be at so when we reconstruct that street we will make that street of heavier and others.


Johnson. It doesn't mean that there shouldn't be a permitting process for it. This is very typical per community.


Some places have automated systems. We don't have enough truck traffic to have these automated systems to do the work.


So again, just my clarity on it. Manager Boyer? The purpose of first and second reading is to allow time for people to have things settle in.


I think this was one of the points that was brought up after the first reading was this seems excessively high.


and because we have nothing now, I personally don't see an issue with lowering it to making it $500 and then we'll see how things go in the future, but whether it's $500 and $1,200, it's not going to change our ability to repair roads and we'll continue to do that.


So staff just recommends moving forward with the amended amount. I made a motion. Why are we still talking?


I want to come back to that. That's why I let them say, as department heads, say what they want to, but we do have a motion on the floor, you're correct.


Okay. So the motion on the floor, seconded by Alderman and Sanders, is to move this on to the next regular scheduled meeting.


So if there's any discussion on that motion itself, otherwise, Madam Clerk, would you please take the role?


On that? Yes, on that. I'm just wondering if it was the first reading on, well, I wasn't here on the committee as as a whole, and that was on 7, 714, and so we've had a whole week or so to look over all of this.


I do think that just staying at the 1,200, if that's what they brought it the first time, just staying at that and moving forward to keep things moving, but I think if we already looked at it at 714 and they talked about it as a committee as a whole, why are we...


You're correct. This is our third meeting of discussion. On Alderman Stacy's motion to move this, Madam Clerk, could you please take the role on moving it to the next meeting?


May I say something? If we stick at what was given to us, if we stick at what we've looked at for the last three weeks, I would withdraw my motion.


but we haven't made an amendment yet so are you withdrawing your motion then are we gonna move forward with this as is someone would have to make a make a motion to amend the change no I'm not talking about changing it I'm talking about leaving it at $1,200 to move it That's the way it is right now.


As is. As is. That's what I was saying. Alderman Sanders? That's what I was saying.


Comment on reestablishing what this is, this sounds like it's being placed in a position of hastiness.


That's what it sounds like to me right now at this moment. And I don't like that kind of feeling that I'm getting.


I like all the data information that Brian is recommending what he is stating right now before us.


All of this data information and related to this issue should be brought before us so we can see that, well, for three weeks we have not seen tangible data.


I'm looking for tangible data, assessment of what we're discussing right now. and I think it requires more than just us having these small discussions here at council.


These type of things needs to be overviewed by a larger agenda, far as how are we going to get down to the nitty-gritty of all of the things that we're trying to recommend to the city and suggest for the city.


I think there's more variations of data that could be implemented to the council and it's not done.


This is not coming forward. So I'm just giving, I'm just saying I'd love for a Boyer, Darren, to give us a little bit more information on how we're going to assess all of this and where, and let the people of the city know where the clarity comes in so they can digest what we're trying to do here.


and I'm just saying I don't like us coming to council just talking about something and I also want to direct my attention to our city clerk as much as I can.


Any time that we are having these meetings, I know she has, I know she brings it out in and the Mayor's Office.


And she brings in a format for council to see, not only for council to see or to hear, but she brings it in a format of tangible documents so we can revert back to it, recite back to it, or go back over what it is that we've been discussing.


When I see this kind of format that is happening within the and many more.


We have to have that before us so we can go line by line knowing exactly what was said, how it was said, what was being done and what the citizens of the City of Freeport is listening to.


I think it's more, it brings us back to the center to where all of this came from because right now we have nothing tangible before us and so I would like for us to continue that sequence of documents or data before council before we even start the process of anything on the agenda and let the council be able to briefly look over the things that we have been discussing through council on a weekly basis so we can keep it refreshed in our mind of what we talked about because trying to say that what we've done two weeks ago does not all the time is retained of Information that should be there and and we're talking about it and we're discussing it. So I think the council should be able to Revert back to it and refresh their memory on things that has been said over the council Chamber and that's that's my recommendation. I think that should happen and Let's move forward with that because I'm listening to it, but I'm not getting enough data. That's what I'm not getting We're talking about things that does not have your time Yes, you have a time late. Manager Boyer, did you want to respond to that?


I did. Just a quick minute. Alderman Sanders, we've talked a couple times on the phone. We've never once discussed this subject.


You've never asked any questions about it. We have had scheduled times to meet. We've had scheduled times for a minimum of six to eight months and we had not had a time to sit down.


So I haven't had the opportunity to discuss those questions with you. and others. So we have an upcoming meeting and I hope we can get together then.


Okay. Okay, so back to there's still a motion on the floor. Alderman, Stacy, what do you want to do with that?


Okay, I have a question. So if I pull my motion in hopes that it moves forward as it is, but then someone else make a motion to amend it, that can happen?


you know it's like we respect Darren's opinion on everything I mean it's like fairgrounds runs this city he have an opinion on everything and we give him the to express and respect his opinion. And so I don't understand why it can't be respected now. So in good faith that we're going to move forward as we have talked about the last three weeks as what has been presented I will remove my motion.


Alderman Sanders, will you remove your second? I like to do that based upon what our City Clerk presents to us from this day forward.


She's been doing the job. I commend her for that because it does keep us abreast to the meetings that we are doing.


and she has the only mechanism in place that keeps us abreast on a weekly basis that I like to see continue, to continue. But yes, I do amend it, but the thing is...


No, I'm asking if you'll remove your second. Oh, yes, I will remove it. Okay. So now we're back to the original ordinance on the second reading. Is there any discussion?


Alderman Klemm. Yes. Darren, this is a question. Understanding the ordinance, basically, do I see two parts of this? One is basically the financial end of it, but the main thing is if this goes through, basically, then you're going to work with that person on it, whether it be daily or whatever basis, to plan their route of where they're going with their heavy equipment, correct?


Correct. Our process, and I've talked to a couple people on that, is they submit an email with their route if they're an annual.


and I, and I'm going to be very clear with their route, if they're in annual, they submit it with the route and we approve it if there's no issues with that route. If it's, I keep using Locust Street because everybody knows it, if it would be down Locust Street, I would say no reroute and go down West Street, right? Which we have, with the permit process, we have that opportunity to do that because we're reviewing their path. You also have to remember, you know, the local people that truck through Freeport all the time, they're moving trucks, you know, O'Neill, 5-6 days a week, so there is time and expense and issues to this and I'm sure a lot of those people would do annual permits.


The one-offs are for people that occasionally come through. I don't, I guess I tend to agree with City Manager Boyer that I don't think the amount is as important as the process, right, so, but I'm fine with whatever I suggested, what myself and the Public Works team what little research we could do because you have to remember something in a city of Freeport whether we're talking about water or sewer or roads the city of Freeport has its own DNA right our costs are different than other towns costs our staff size is different than other staff size so what may work for one town won't work for another that being said you know i'm flexible we're not trying to drive people out of Freeport we're We're just trying to make it a system that's used and can be monitored and tracked by the public works team and the movements through town to eliminate failing roads and issues.


That's what it's for. Alderman Johnson. So like you just said, the main purpose of this is to try to protect our roads that we've already done and try not to break down the roads that we haven't been able to get to to yet to try to make them so they're at least drivable.


Also, you said you've asked other cities kind of what they, you've done some research other places kind of what they charge and that sort of thing.


And again, some of the bigger towns that we have to compare to, they have very sophisticated systems similar to the state, where it's all automated processes.


People get an annual thing, and then they turn in their routes and things like that, and some of them, like Rockford's, if you look at theirs, they pay by the pound.


We don't have scale systems, and those would cost an immense amount of money to put scale systems in, so we actually have the owners figure out their weight on their own and show that to us if they're overweight.


Again, I mean, we spent a lot of time talking about this. We're probably talking in the neighborhood of five to ten trucks a month, honestly, that are running overweight, right?


Johnson, George. Most of them run legal weights, and this does not pertain to them.


Okay. Alderman Johnson, Joy. Just two more questions. If we pass it with the amount that we designated at this time, what was it, $1,200 instead of $500, would there be any time possibly that we could change that if we felt like it was, I mean, the Council could come back together and renegotiate that if we felt like that was a problem?


also I was wondering where does the money from the permits what what does that money go toward when we get get the money for the permits where does that money go sure so yes it could come back to council at any time just like any other ordinance and have the cost change to a lower amount higher amount whatever the pleasure of the council and it just takes city manager the mayor or any Council people to bring that back up to the meeting and then all of our permit fees doesn't matter what department it comes to or goes back to the general funds they're paid in and finance believe brings them all back through the general fund. Okay thank you much. Alderman Sanders, you've already spoke twice. Is there any other discussion? Alderman Schaefer. I just would like to reiterate that this gentleman mentioned this because the state fee is $1400, the city came in at $1200, he felt that was exorbitant for what it was, state versus the city. The $500 he felt would have been more another comment on to our City Clerk that I think she's doing a fine job the


notice is on this agenda under item 7 says view memo view state statute and view permit application I think was pretty much everything you were saying if there's no further discussion yeah I'm just saying is it is it prudent that someone makes a derogatory comment to another council sitting right in his ear about something that's not on the agenda that's what I want to make reference to and that and and just because he made that comment I think there should be some kind of discretion being presented when a council does that you know when he has no he's not agenda he's not on the agenda I should not have been implemented in that agenda that's what I'm getting at and he put me there and others.


Alderman Sanders, I think you had indicated that you wanted the clerk to do certain things there.


To give you that information, I think Alderman Shadle was just pointing out the fact that everything that you're asking for is hyperlinked to the agenda by the clerk there.


I think that's all he was saying. He was kind of answering your question. Okay.


All right. I'll accept it today. I'll accept that. Okay. So is there any other discussion?


if not we'll take a vote. Madam Clerk please take the roll. Stacy. Alderman Simmons. Manager Boyer what is the amendment? Is it stand as? There is no amendment it's the way it stands.


Unless you want to make an amendment. We're voting on an amendment. No. You're voting on an ordinance that there's no amendment that has gone forward. If you'd like to put and and others. So the ordinance itself, the ordinance that's been presented at COW and First Read and now Second Read, it is an ordinance that is amending the existing ordinance to add a process there. And in that ordinance that's amending the current version of the code, it has a fee of $1,200 in it.


Tonight's discussion, there were talks about an amendment to the underlying ordinance to change it to 500, but there was no motion to actually change the dollar amount, to tweak the ordinance as presented.


That's what I'm saying. Right. Okay. No, there was no motion, but Manager Boyer agreed to doing it.


No, it can't. He just said, that's fair, city recommends that. So as long as that's not being changed.


Correct. Okay. Councils. Manager Boyer, he said that he's fine with it being $500 as a recommendation of his, but it's still up to you guys to decide whether or not you want to make the motion to change, actually implement that $500 change.


That's all I wanted to clarify. Okay, thank you. That it wouldn't be changed once we voted yes.


Madam Clerk, please take the roll on the ordinance as is. Stacy? Aye. Shadle? Aye.


Sanders? Aye. Sellers? Johnson, Simmons, and Parker. The ordinance passes 8 to 0. Item number 8 is the second reading of ordinance 2025-48. Could you please read this?


Ordinance amending chapter 1252 of the Zoning Code of the City of Freeport Concerning Physical Culture Centers. Thank you Madam Mayor. So this ordinance, We've had, since, nothing has changed since the first reading, but there were some questions about number of actual physical cultural centers slash gyms that have come into the area, and how often a subject like this would occur, and in the past year we've had four actual athletic centers, physical cultural centers, gyms come through the city of Freeport, we've had, and March 3rd we approved it in council, 18 South Chicago was Magicians Academy, MMA, so that was in March 3rd, then we also had a new gym who's still working on their build out, so they haven't given their name yet, but that was at Cub Foods, so that was July 7th at 25th.


We just recently had the Studio Elan Pilati Studio at 2-6 East Stevenson, that was July 21st, 2025, and then we also had the Freeport Martial Arts at 105107 West Main Street.


So those are, and that was called Freeport Martial Arts. That was July 21st, 2025. So that gives a little background on why staff has presented this, what's known as a text amendment. We brought it to Planning Commission.


We brought it to Planning Commission and we looked at our comprehensive plan and we stated that we're seeing an influx of what is a positive land use, which is physical activity.


There's plenty of complaints that our community doesn't have enough positive activities to do and we're seeing quite a bit of an influx of these gyms, physical cultural centers, and the others, and you know, the the business district. They're having to go through to city council. And so, you know, what to consider here is when your constituents say, and it happens, council members will come up to me and say, why are you putting this business owner through all this red tape to open up a gym or a Pallotti Studio and well the answer is well I mean now's your chance to vote for that. Now you're considering does every gym, as every Pallotti Studio, every aerobics studio, you know anything in this city should they go through a special use permit or do or does councils see it as our Planning Commission sees it and that this is a use where we they should be allowed to do it by Wright, and certainly anybody in this city is subject to building codes. They would still have to get their certificate of occupancy. They would still have to pass their fire code inspections, etc. So that's really what's before you today.


Thank you. Alderman Sanders? Yeah. Are you receiving complaints from these business owners? I would say 9 out of 10 business owners complain on any permit they have to fill out.


Okay, and so does the permit stipulate exactly what the criteria is for them to meet certain things with inside of this permit?


Is that presented with inside of the permit itself? Every permit states what is requested and what's going to be reviewed, yes.


So why are we, why are we listening to people that is trying to alter the permit if they don't want to work inside of the guidelines of the permit, why are we allowing the permit to be altered to be convenient to some and not to others?


That's not true. That's not true? Well, that's what I'm hearing. I can explain again.


Well, you may be able to explain that, but what I'm saying is it's not anything that if our permit is not stipulating with guidelines that a business owner wants to open up their business and understand that these are the parameters of this permit and I have to meet all of the things that are within this guideline, why are we having a complaint issue Plattie, and Eric, the other members of the Board of Trustees.


So, I'm going to take a moment to take a few comments from your perspective.


I brought four physical cultural centers before council this year. And I will gladly do four more, 20 more.


This department will stand by and bring every single Jim Plattie Studio to City Council. That's what's before you today.


and it simply was brought because when a land use, when you see an influx of people wanting to start gym studios and you're looking at it and saying does every gym that opens up, it does that warrant having to come to council and delay opening their business every time a gym comes to the city to get their proper permits and we've seen four people do it in and the last year, if that's what the pleasure of council is, I'm not arguing that.


Mr. Duckman, the permits are self-explanatory. Sure. And we are. And there's no argument. And the fact that you are, I understand that you have to listen to the business owners and things like that.


If it's better to serve them in a particular way, I can understand the alterations in permits ShFrade.


So if it's all agreed upon, especially coming from the council, if there's any changes in the permit that satisfy them all together, I don't want it to be one side and the other side. And if that's the case, we need to be able to look at it again. Have another assessment about it. Talk about it again and the comments that you're making.


I don't like to drive people out of business neither. I want them to be able to be comparable in what they're doing and being able to serve the city of Freeport.


And so when we're doing that, that's all I wanted to do is bring clarity to and let the people know and not only let the council know, but let the citizens of Freeport know and others.


So that we are looking into these matters with our eyes open, you know, that kind of thing.


So that's all I'm saying. I understand that. I respect that. Alderman Johnson. I just have some information because I know we had a question of what Physical Culture Center means.


The definition is a place dedicated to the systematic cultivation of physical fitness and health through various exercises and practices.


and others. The concept is rooted in the belief that physical development and health are interconnected with cultural values and contribute to a holistic sense of well-being.


And I just went through and hunted how many of these are in the city of Freeport.


And what I could find online, there was 22. That includes your martial arts, that includes exercise places, that includes yoga places.


So just to let you know, there are 22 already in the city. So I have a question, is there a place where they can open up these without having to come to the Council for rezoning, without having the permit?


There is, it's more restrictive because anytime you have, right now it's in the B2, B3 or manufacturing districts, so anytime when you're creating a plan of your city, when you get Get into more intense business districts, B2, B3, the city is going to typically have smaller areas where you could have factories or more intense uses, body shops, et cetera.


Right now, physical cultural centers are considered by our zoning the same as a body shop, the same as manufacturing, and what we're seeing is staff is seeing it and we think that that's and to our community, we're just trying to be more business friendly to say, we shouldn't have to bring these, every single gym that opens up would be bringing it to council for approval.


Thank you. Yep. Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Stacy? Aye. Shadle? Aye. Sanders? Aye.


Sellers? Aye. Klemm? Aye. Johnson? No. Simmons? No. Parker? Aye. The ordinance passes 6 to 2.


Item number 9 is the second reading of ordinance 2025-49. Could you please read this?


Ordinance amending chapter 1252 of the Zoning Code of the City of Freeport concerning service of alcoholic liquors.


Director Duckman. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So nothing here has changed yet. Nothing has changed on this since the first reading.


and so essentially what this is is our codified ordinances state serve and not sell alcohol.


So currently what we're saying is that you would not need to get a special use permit if you are in a BYOB, bring your own alcohol establishment because our current ordinances say sell as opposed to serve.


So what this is essentially, this is a cleaning up of the language review by our legal counsel saying that we're trying to be, we're trying to hold our BYOB establishments to the same standard that our bars and restaurants in town are and that's, so to make sure that they would still have to get a special use permit.


Any additional discussion on this reading, Alderman Sanders? Can you repeat that again on the last thing that you said about bringing their own BO program?


So, you know we've had plenty of discussions over the past year. over the past year and meeting halls are typical use where you're going to have a bring your own alcohol establishment and you're going to serve it.


You're not going to charge a fee. You're not going to go buy a glass of wine or a beer.


And so all of the liquor licenses are required to have a special use permit first.


So there's a loophole that currently exists where if you're in a BYOB or you're not charging per drink, they are not, it's a loophole, it's we're cleaning up the language that says, it says sell alcohol. So since that establishment, the meeting hall is not selling alcohol, they would not have to go get the special use permit. And our attorney did a review of the, our code and said we really should clean this up to make sure that they're on the same playing Field, to make it fair.


What you're saying is at these meeting halls, I'm trying to get the interpretation of where this product can be served.


Is it meeting halls or is it in any other establishment type of venue or establishment that this BYOB?


BYOB. Yeah. And do we have the correct meaning of interpretation of where this can be served? I mean, is that established? Have we established that?


Because we need to be able to make a differentiation of which one is which.


And that's why we're here, that's why this is here, is that it's been reviewed and anywhere that's serving or selling, either one, and others.


They're going to have to be on the same playing field. That's why this is here, to make sure we're fair and we're doing every, treating everyone the same.


Okay. Now, now my question also is, did you want to use your second time Alderman?


Yeah, let me do that. These meeting venues or meeting places, as you make reference to, are not always established and other people who are actually in those meetings.


They're not just restaurants, what we call bars or whatever the case is, and people are just out having a convention or an event.


But they're actually in those type of meetings, alcohol is being served, but they're also being charged.


What's the difference between the two? and I have a question for you. The venue already established a prop bar for sale. Is there a problem there?


Yes. There are two different classes of liquor licenses. If a meeting hall gets their BYOB liquor license, they are not allowed to sell alcohol.


and John. So that takes care of your concern. You know, as soon as you say I'm going to sell a drink to you as a bar or restaurant, that's a different class of liquor license.


Well, I'm referring to any venue, meeting hall that sets up a bar. When at a meeting people want to have something at the bar and and the City of Michigan.


Thank you. I'm going to go to the next item, which is the requirement for a permit for that.


Am I correct? You are correct and they do. Yeah. And how do we determine whether they are eligible to do so?


We have, well, that's part of this, right? We have a Liquor Commission. And if somebody wants to sell alcohol, serve alcohol, they know what they would like to do.


They come to City Hall. They talk to my department. You have to go through a special use permit process, which is through the Community Development Department.


What this is saying is the language is clearing up from sell to serve, because some establishments don't charge for alcohol.


Right. My point is there are a lot of them that does. and I like to know whether or not they're receiving permits that allows them to be eligible to do so because in that same, in that same sector, a BYOB, whatever that is, I don't know the right term, might want to be able to walk into an establishment of that nature and bring his own liquor without propping, without notifying the bar, whoever to find out whether they're eligible or not.


and John. And I think that the responsibility is okay to bring their own liquor into an establishment or an event that they're in, that there's a bar in place, which one governs over the whole event when it comes to sale of liquor or service of liquor.


» I'm sorry. I don't understand. » Madam Clerk, would you like to say something?


Fowler. We are not going to require them to get a meeting hall license for their banquet room.


It was decided that places that sell liquor are pretty heavily regulated and we would not put them through the meeting hall process.


So if they are a bar or a restaurant, they are not a meeting hall.


and the other thing is, if they are a meeting hall, they have the option to have a BYOB. Or there can be a meeting hall that doesn't have BYOB. But if you are bringing your own liquor.


My point is how do you establish that? How does a person not knowing what the establishment permitted, if they don't have a and When a person come off the street and want to attend this event, they need to know whether they can...


Okay. Wait a minute. Alderman Sanders, you've actually spoken like four times now. Oh, have I?


Yeah. So, if you want to... Well, I just wanted to bring that up. I just needed clarity on that.


That's all I wanted. Well, I mean, yeah. Rest assured that it's a process. We have a Liquor Commission meeting and anybody who is serving or selling alcohol is regulated Shadle, Sanders, Sellers, Shadle, Sanders, Clem, Johnson, Simmons, and Parker. The ordinance passes 7 to 1.


Item number 10 is the second reading of ordinance 2025-50. Could you please read this? Ordinance approving special use permit application at 2600 West Pearl City Road submitted by Harmony UMC to examine the special use of an R3 one family residence zone property to allow for solar energy systems which utilize High's Ground-Mounted PV Arrays per Section 1250.01b20.


Alderman Shadle, or who wanted to present this? Director Duckman, is it you? I guess I would just bring it, I'll speak on behalf of this. So essentially this was brought originally to council on July 21st and it didn't, it essentially was brought to the floor and there was no motion made on it for a vote or discussion at all, it was just brought and there was never a motion or a second to discuss it so what we're talking about here it's been brought again to council and essentially Essentially what we have here is, this is the church here, and you can see these are the existing panels on a shed roof, which is allowed by right, they don't have to go to council to ask for permission here, but they're asking for 120 feet here, I'm sorry, it's 120 feet from the property line here, which is, you have a natural barrier of trees, and you have the building line here, and you can see that the solar panels Back further away from the view screen from the road here. So essentially this is


Pearl City Road here as you come down. Originally the developer or the church and State Line Solar were discussing filling this entire area with solar panels as well as this entire area with solar panels. It's a lot of a lot of electricity there.


A lot of electricity there. Um, they now are down to this small area right in here, so, um, it's been brought again on the floor, um, and it's up for approval.


Any discussion? Alderman Johnson. So this will not be seen from Pearl City Road, right? It's pretty well hidden.


I would say you'd really have to look for it, you know what I mean?


you know what I mean you see where if you're coming down here you'd have to like you might get a shot of it right through there but you'd really have to be you know what I mean you'd have to be looking for it because you're going by here so fast and then from the other direction if your eyes are focused I don't think you would see it going eastbound okay thank you you're welcome standards then they're not asking for major changes there in that area my opinion my opinion is no you can see these are the changes see that little No, section of solar panels right there, that's what they're asking for.


Yeah, so that's not an eyesore or anything. Not in my opinion. Okay. If there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the roll.


Stacy? Aye. Shadle? Aye. Sanders? Aye. Sellers? Aye. Klemm? No. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? No. Passes, 5, 6, 611, thank you. Item number 11 is the first reading of ordinance 2025-51, could you please read this? Ordinance amending part 4, traffic code, title 8, parking, chapter 480, parking generally, section 480.24, disabled persons and veterans of the codified ordinances of the city of Freeport at 304 to 310 West Garfield. Thank you, Manager Boyer. Thank you, Mayor.


Mayor, the tenant at 304 through 310 West Garfield contacted the city requesting an accessible parking space.


The actual property doesn't have a driveway and they have on-street parking only in that location.


The neighbors generally park along the street edge and block the only accessible sidewalk there is, walkway to the residence, and staff is inspected and is making the recommendation know we move forward with adding a parking restriction which includes the disabled parking spot on Garfield. So also staff is requesting suspension of the rules so we can move forward with this. Is there a motion to move this forward? So move. Second. A motion made by Alderman Seller, seconded by Alderman Shadle to move this ordinance forward. Alderman Shadle. Yes, the only question I I have, I'd be all for this. We need to take care of people that need that. The only question I have is in our ordinances, is there any stipulations that as these people, if they would move or if they would, I guess, ultimately not be disabled anymore, is there any provisions for them to contact us so that we can move this back into a normal parking space if it's no longer needed.


Yeah, and I agree with that. I'm not aware of any, but maybe the clerk has...


I don't think he does. I'm not aware of any requirement for them to notify the city that they've moved.


Just saying maybe we should think about that. Yeah, understood. Alderman Stacey. Is this something that would be considered, no matter where you lived in the city, do everybody have this right?


Well, if you're mobility challenged, I think we've got to do our due diligence to ensure that we can do this for them because, I mean, there are a lot of people here in town that we've done this for.


This person doesn't have a driveway, correct? This person does not have a driveway. Okay, but I'm just saying, would this apply to everyone that had mobility problems that lived in this city, regardless of where they lived?


Well, so far, we have not had very many requests, and of the ones that we've had, we've granted.


Yeah. Alderman Sanders? Yeah. I am very aware of that, and the fact that it's been done expeditiously, considered, I think, like the recommendation for all citizens in the City of Freeport that has immobility to manage their exiting, their entry and exit to be efficient enough for them to get in and out of their property.


And I like the fact that Alderman Shadle brought up the fact that if there's any changes in their status, will it go back to normal status of that property or that particular area.


I like that. I think that should be something that we should continue to look at and to continue to consider.


And I think it should be applied to all people in that condition, in that situation.


Alderman Klemm. I make a motion to suspend the rules. Second. The motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Shadle for suspension of the rules.


Suspension of the rules is non-debatable. It must pass by two-thirds majority. Madam Clerk, could you please take the vote on the suspension only?


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


Aye. The motion passes 8-0. And before your council, is the final passage for this ordinance, is there any further discussion?


Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Stacy? Aye. Shadle? Aye. Sanders? Aye. Simmons Parker and the ordinance passes 8 to 0 as well and item number 12 is the first ring of ordinance 2025 52 could you please read this ordinance authorizing the sale recycling donation and or disposal of certain personal property owned by the city police department abandoned personal property and bicycles and an old chair in my office. Police Department. Thank you Madam Mayor. The background is the Freeport Police Department is currently in need of disposing property at the Freeport City Yards 1001 North Island Avenue and auction off abandoned property being held by evidence and property. In discussion there are abandoned bikes that have been in the possession of the Freeport Police Department for at least six months being stored at the Freeport and others.


The City of Freeport has been in the custody of the City of Freeport for six months.


There are also items being held by evidence and property that can be considered abandoned property.


These items have been in the custody of the police department for at least six months.


The owners of the items have been notified to pick up the property, however the owners have been unresponsive.


The Freeport Police Department would like to use PropertyRoom.com to auction off abandoned property. Any proceeds earned would go to the City of Freeport General Fund.


Additionally, the clerk has one office chair that can be added to the disposal list.


Funding, there is no funding necessary. Request, staff is requesting to recycle the bicycles, dispose of the clerk's chair, and auction off the abandoned property.


Strategic plan alignment for responsive and efficient government. Is there a motion to move this forward?


Second. A motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Klemm. discussion on this ordinance. Yes. Alderman Shadle. I'm sorry, Alderman Sanders. Forgive me. I was going to ask you if you want to wear a pair of these here.


Just got to turn my hearing aids up. Well, I wanted to ask is this the notification that went out to the community that you guys are going to do this disposal or auctioning and and things of that nature where they can get more data information about if they want to come take a look to see if they want to take an opportunity to look at items that could be sold or things that needs to be disposed.


And I just wanted to make sure that we are, our community is well informed about this and not only that, whatever the proceeds are that is generated from that, I think we should let the community know exactly what we've received from those donations, those sales that we're making.


Is that okay with you? So to answer your question, this is the notification that we're doing.


If anybody in the community would like the opportunity to bid on those items, they are and others that are on, or will be on, PropertyRoom.com, PropertyRoom.com, when items sell, they then provide record of what it was sold for, what the amount was, and then that, those funds go back to the city, period, so.


That's all. Any further discussion? Alderman Parker? Motion to suspend the rules. Second. Motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Klemm for suspension of the rules.


Well, before we do a suspension of the rules, Mayor, that's what's on the motion right now.


Yeah, I know the motion has been made, but are we done having a discussion before?


We can come back to it if you want. Okay, that's what I'm getting at because...


So a suspension of the rules must pass by two-thirds majority. Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll on the suspension only?


Stacy? Aye. Shadle? Tracy, Shadle, Sanders, Sellers, Klemm, Johnson, Simmons, Sint, and Parker. The suspension passes 7-0.


So now before you is the second reading. So Alderman, Sanders, did you have another question?


You know, Mayor, when I get interrupted like that. Well, there was a motion on the floor, so if we want to come back to you, we can.


Stacey, Shadle, Sanders, Sellers, Klemm, Johnson, Parker, The ordinance passes 7-0. Item number 13 is the adoption of Resolution 2025-86.


Dupont, Dupont, Zitt, Program. So, I've looked through the proposed budget. It's been approved with through the Illinois Department of Transportation and staff is recommending approval of this resolution. Is there a motion for approval? So moved. Second.


Any motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Sellers? Discussion on the resolution? Sanders. The grant, how is that prioritized throughout the city and who's receiving this grant and how it's going to be beneficial to the constituents of the city where when everyone should have the opportunity to utilize, to utilize all of the services of this grant opportunity I just don't want it to be a targeted type of grant for any particular department entity or whatever the case may be I want to know how we prioritize in all of these kinds of things okay so this city manager would you like to address that please yes I would alderman sanders I just wanted to reassure you this is pretzel city transit everybody has access to it and that is what this is for well you may make a short statement like and I, and I'm making a comment that is making a reference to what I'm talking about already.


And my point of the matter is, if he's going to say stuff like that, I should be able to rebut it.


That's all I'm saying. I should be able to rebut what he is saying without using my own question.


Okay, so you're using your second turn. So is there anything more? I'm not using a second turn.


Okay, then we're going to move on. Do we have anything else on this? You know what?


Alderman Stacy? Explain to me what this grant agreement consists of. Who weeps the benefits from it and what does it do for our city?


Sure. The short answer, to not complicate things, but I'll get complicated later, the short So we've gotten this grant before. Always. And all of this 2.1 million goes to Pretzel City.


Yes. And that's how they've been able to exist all this time in Freeport? That is correct.


That is a hundred percent correct. Okay, so why wouldn't the memo say that? Keep it plain, make it simple, make it plain.


it says we need this for pretzel city to exist without it there is none I thought it was clear in the memo but I can say it more I said it more plain now I can certainly make it more plain next time next round I like to make us yeah I hope what I said earlier was not ignored okay because of the fact that I asked the and the priorities of entities that are going to be utilizing this grant.


That's what I did bring to the floor. I wanted to make sure that we had clarity to what entity in this city is using that particular grant, not just to Pressell City, but whether or not any other department or whatever that's throughout the city going to be utilizing this grant.


That's the part that I want to stay focused on. and others. I don't discard that or dismiss it like I didn't even mention it. I would like to know if there's any other establishment or department heads or whatever department are going to be using this grant. And I hear Pressell City. I understand that. But the breakdown of this grant, is it just for the Pressell City or any other governing body?


Fowler, Wichita, Joseph, Thomas, Cedric, Michael, Mr. D'Angelo, and Ryan. That grant is specific for rural communities, which we are, per their grant guidelines. It is for public transportation. This grant money is only used for Pretzel City Transit. That is all it can be used for, and we apply for it every year.


Petzl City Area Transit provides on-demand transportation services within Freeport and Stevenson County. Funding to provide transportation services are obtained through annual applications under the State of Illinois 5311 and Downstate Operating Assistance Program grants.


So to your point, Alderperson, Stacy, that's where I had said it does not exist with the and the City of Freeport.


Then I go on to discussion and say as part of our annual transportation grant application to the State of Illinois under the 5311 Transportation Program and Downstate Operating Assistance Program, the City of Freeport is required to have Council approve the following.


One, an ordinance adopting transportation services within Freeport and Stevenson County. Two, a resolution authorizing an application to be made to the Office of Intermodal Project of the City of Freeport.


That is what you are on right now. Items one through two were approved prior to the submittal of the transportation grant applications.


Resolution authorizing the execution of the Downstate Operating Assistance Program grant is now presented to accept and enter into the grant agreement.


And the recommendation is staff recommends approval of the resolution in order to move forward with the grant agreement.


Thank you. Alderman Shadle, did you have more? I just would like to say that I, that was in the memo hyperlinked by our City Clerk again.


Mayor, you've already spoke twice. Yeah, but you didn't ask me if I had more.


You did not ask me if I had more. Well, that's because you just interrupt all the time.


Yeah, well, you can't say that. My point is, when I was on the board...


Alderman Sanders, will you please wait until you are called on? Yeah, but you didn't ask me if I had more to say.


You're being disruptive. Please don't make me call you out of order. Alderman, Stacy, did you have something? Is there any other discussion on this particular resolution? 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 14 is adoption of resolution 2025-87. Could you please read this?


approving an agreement with Fehr Graham to provide construction engineering services for Walnut Avenue Lift Station. Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. Just to touch on Walnut Street Lift Station, the idea is would the and I are going to be talking about the lift station.


The idea is the lift station we put near the corner of Land Road and Walnut Road.


The purpose of the lift station is to convey waste under pressure from that location to the interceptor on the other side of the bridge on Walnut Road to the north side.


The reason this is necessary is because we currently have industry in that area that Utilize a very old lateral that connects to the interceptor that if ever failed it would be very challenging to work on due to its depth of over 20 feet and its proximity to the landfill. Therefore, that is one aspect. The other aspect is there's additional development that needs to be done there. There's empty lots that need to be brought online. And when we add additional demand on the system, we will be challenged to convey that waste to the Interceptor. And lastly, as we build the Well 12 project on Forest Road, designs are including the Walnut Street lift station as a way to convey the waste from that area of Walnut and Lamb to the interceptor. So with that being said, we need to have a construction over supervision contract so that we can make sure that the lift station is built appropriately.


and Fehr Graham is designed and bid the Sanitary Sewer Lift Station, forced main piping and gravity piping, improvements on the Land Road Area Sanitary Sewer Flow. The sewer system on Land Road District carries a significant flow to the City Interceptor on the daily basis and a public bid was opened and was held on Tuesday, July 22nd at 1030 in the morning. I might also add that our largest water customer Miller uses this section of lateral every day to dispose of the waste for the processing of food.


This is very important because they go through a lot of water and their contribution to our utility is what helps keep our utility rates at a reasonable level.


The Fehr Graham Scope Service will provide professional full-time on-site construction engineering and observation as well as a contract management services for the City of Freeport.


Fehr Graham shall additionally provide GIS survey collection, staking layout for the sewer piping, roadway boring, and road improvements.


Construction observation will include materials, shop drawings, field construction engineering, required documentation, specification adherence, and the required QAQC methods.


Fehr Graham will ensure the project is built in accordance with the city, state, and county Sanders, along with filling all required documentation in accordance with IEPA water pollution policies. Buy America, Build America certification and material compliance will be tracked to infrastructure requirements, geotechnical testing services for aggregate density, and hot mix asphalt QAQC testing will be provided by Fehr Graham through a third-party professional geotech agency as required. The city plans to fund the $224,250 construction engineering contract through the Lamb Road TIF. Staff recommends moving forward with the contract with Fehr Graham. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers. Discussion on the resolution? Alderman Sellers. Could you also explain what TIF, the money for TIF out there at the Lamb Road can only be used for economic development. Yes the TIF money is for economic development and this is necessary infrastructure as we move forward with additional economic development. So you also the TIF money cannot go to any any of the city citizens or anything the money has to go Fowler, and I'm going to go to redevelopment of that area.


Correct? Yeah. In line with TIF, the use of TIF funds that can be used for economic development incentives, it can be used for infrastructure improvements, but things that are related to the land road TIF in the form of economic development.


Lawrence Sanders? yeah I I've been been studying this whole process and far as I am concerned we don't have the historical fact of that development area I'm talking about council I'm directing this information and things like that to council since we're the ones that are voting to to move forward on this on these matters and and I don't hear no one speaking out on the real issues that are being considered here and we have not evaluated.


And I feel that we are being incompetent not looking into these matters because obviously that's the reason why I always want the clerk from this point on to submit to council what we discussed previously.


and the fact that we're not hearing what they're talking about. We're just being passive at this point of not really getting down to the real point of the matter, whether or not we should be moving forward, whether or not we're not addressing the historical facts about that whole area, that whole development area and why it's there and is it causing the city and others.


We have not discussed any complication that creates the taxpayers to have to fund these particular matters.


We have not discussed how much material stuff that's going to be involved, how much it's going to cost.


We have not talked about who's running the project. We know that we have engineers who's doing a survey of it, but my point is who's in charge of the project.


So we have not established our own understanding of what's going on out there because we have no clue to why these things are put in place or trying to implement these things to put them in place. Is it necessary? Absolutely. If it's necessary, I can understand it. I understand what Brad Boyer was talking about. Future development. This thing has been in for over 30, 40 years. There has not been a disruption. There has not been any complication. I don't even know if they're still doing monitoring which I know that the city used to monitor those areas and then not only that go into those areas of the sectors and the sanitary and all these. They usually and others.


These are the things that we need to do. We need to constantly monitor these things and there should be reports, data on who's keeping this type of material before the people of the City of Freeport.


I know these things are in place, but are we getting the right proper information at this current time to establish why we should put a lift station that's only going to serve We're not talking about that. Is it necessary? If we're not talking about that, then why are we setting up a lift station that we have no understanding of why we need this because of lack of capacity or lack of industries that have not utilized the capacity of the flow that's supposed to be pushing through these force mains or through these lift stations?


and others. So to put a lift station in at this current time does not have us in a position where we should be voting for something to move forward on this until we have done an assessment, evaluation to understand the whole historical point of it all.


Thank you, Alderman. Your four minutes is up. Did I? Four minutes? Yep, your four minutes is up.


Alderman Shadle? is all coming about because when Snack King does their washout, this does run at virtual capacity.


That's why we're here. No, that is not why we're here. And... Please stop lying.


Stop lying. I would at this point, as the fact of the matter I was called a liar sitting on the floor, I would like to ask Manager Boyer or Mr. Steele to clarify my statement, please.


I think what you're talking about, Greg, is the fact that we have a human dependent process at Snack King.


and if that human dependent failed at any time that would complicate things substantially there at the corner of Lamb and Walnut Road right near an important facility on the county nursing home so in addition to the benefits of having the proper capacity for existing industry having the availability for the build out of future industry and also the convenience of wastewater backwash from the new Well 12 and then a potential for build out along the and then a potential for build out along Forest Road.


I mean, these are all the reasons that this is an important project. Alderman Parker.


We already have it. Alderman Stacy. Okay. I need some real numbers. Miller. Not a portion, because truth be told, the $234,000 is engineering fees only, am I correct?


There is 11 other processes that have to be completed, and they're not little things, they're big things.


So we can approve this $234,000, but to have this project completed in full with all these things that's not mentioned, that's not talked about to the public, the traffic studies, the permit fees, the utility locates, the restaking, all of it, what are we looking Net, cost-wise to have this done because up to this point, SNAP King is still functioning.


We haven't had no issues. There's no government, nothing that we're violating. So do we need this now?


Can we afford this now? No we cannot. Darren, did you want to address those questions?


Certainly. So with every contract there's always exclusions that are put on there for unforeseen.


But realistically this project should come in at this amount with our fees or even under.


We have lots of projects where we get a fee here and we end up coming in under and not charging the whole amount.


So we put those exclusions in, we wrote a scope that we think will complete the entire project.


But we always have to put exclusions because I can't put those items in on every thing without charging more, every contract without charging more money.


We don't need a traffic study. We don't do restaking. We only stake one time and then the contractor is responsible for it the second time.


So those are expenses that don't come back to the city but we have to clarify that in and a contract so we know where we stand and we know what the city's paying for.


Okay, so shouldn't we put on the side, not needed, do not apply? That's what an exclusion is.


It's assume that it's not needed. Assuming it's not needed. Correct. Well, you have to make assumptions.


We're working underground. So I can tell you right now, we don't need a traffic study.


We already met with the county, the county owns the road. They're not asking for a traffic study.


So that won't be one that's applied. Reistaking, we always exclude that because the city's not going to pay for it twice.


We pay for it once, and then if it has to be restaked, it's on the contractor to pay for it the second time.


So we put exclusions in there to protect the city, not to provide other costs.


And I mean, you can ask anybody involved with the city, we typically never come back for additional costs.


We try to write good scopes that include everything from the get-go. So, I can tell you that the amount that we put here should complete the construction.


The $234,000 should complete this whole project. Yes, it's already been designed and bid. This is the construction, resident, engineering services.


This is the quality assurance, the construction part of getting the station built and getting all the piping in the ground for an active running station.


And all this money is coming from the Land World TIF. Okay, so let me remind you when the back and forth.


So if you have several questions, you should ask them all at once. That is correct.


And there's no debt on that TIF? Is there a debt on the Lambroke TIF?


Is there an existing debt? I can't answer that, but I believe there's no debt.


I know there's no debt. It's $2.3 million is what you're having to pay for it.


So there's actually money in the bank. There's no debt service that I'm aware of on that.


I actually think it's closer to three minutes. Shadle, did you have? I did, please.


Manager Boyer mentioned the future expansion. This new well that we're putting out, well, 12, there's gonna be sewer added, water added out.


This is the opportunity that we've been looking for for quite some time to have shovel ready land for development.


One of the main reasons we haven't seen a new factory in this town is we don't have a place shovel ready to put it.


We can put the sewer pipes in, we can put the water pipes in, but if we don't have this lift station, there's not enough capacity in the existing to handle the future development.


That's why we need this. Yes, that's called forward thinking. Alderman Sanders. Yeah, well, Alderman Shadle was making these comments about something that has not had a survey to them, first of all. And he does not have a, what we call a prediction, a pendulum or crystal ball. He don't have any of those things before him. And the city is not just Boone, and Andy, come from a big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big city that's going to have items sitting out in the field for God knows for how long waiting for a manufacturer to show up to make a development or whatever the case is that the council don't have no clue about any of this city needing all kinds of grant program fundings and things of this nature.


And we just got done listening to part of our constituents here in the city complaining about other items that has not been looked at.


So I think what we have not done was looked at the whole scope of the matter, whether or not we're using the money considered here to put on these projects for future, for future advancements.


And I don't think that should be something that we should be doing at this time.


If it's not an emergency need, if it's not anything that is gonna help the city currently, right now kind of project, then there shouldn't be shovel readies to come in unless we have perspective prospects that are considering moving to this city.


And then we would make those alterations and the City of San Diego. I think it's important to keep all of those changes as necessary and as needed.


But before then, the funds should not go anywhere until these things are absolutely needed.


That's my opinion on that and I think that's how we should move forward. » DARREN, DID YOU WANT TO ADD TO? » Yes.


So you're entitled to your opinion, but I would like to give you some facts.


and the day it was constructed because the waste from all of the Lamb Road TIF district would be going into that as soon as it was built because we have the need now.


The line, the capacity of that line is at max capacity. We've even had to go to Snack King and ask them to throttle down their flow so we can effectively serve that entire district.


I would like to put another question out there. I've heard numerous times mentioned in the last two weeks, because we talked about this at the COW, this station is not built for millrace. Millrace will never be an opportunity. It was a once, once in a lifetime deal with the county money. The county's expended all of their money. There is no way the city of Freeport nor the county can effectively cost to run out to millrace. It would require two or three more lift stations to even get that far. So that project's never going to to happen in our lifetimes unless somebody comes and gives us a massive gift of free money.


This station is truly to service the Lamb Road District area and probably some development probably from Baileyville Road and then maybe on Forest Road.


That is what this station will serve. The City of Freeport currently has nine lift stations in service that we service flow from all different areas of the town because of our elevations.


This is adding another lift station to our capacity. We do and have talked for years since I've been around here about having shovel ready sites that we currently don't have.


If we don't want to have shovel ready sites, we don't want any expansion, then we should just fold up because we're not going to get more business here. We don't have ground available for somebody to build that we can put in place.


for somebody to build that we can put the waste into, and if we don't have that ready, no one's going to come here.


They're not going to wait for us to say, hey, we can construct this in a year and a half if you come.


That's not the way shovel-ready sites work. And so those are just facts. Everybody's entitled to their own opinion, but the facts are that the TIF money is for and Frank, and we are the TIF money for the Mill Race.


Excuse me, talking too many subjects. The TIF money is for the Lamb Road District.


They created this. This lift station is to service that area that they created the money from.


And so that's why it's an eligible expense. If we were trying to put this in for a project at Mill Race or at the airport or something, the funds would be ineligible.


We just created the station big enough to handle expansion which is just good planning. That is all it is. There's no further discussion? Yeah.


You've already spoken twice. If there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the role.


You didn't have to cut me off like that. I don't agree with what you just did. Madam Clerk, would you please take the role? Stacy? Shadle? Aye. Sanders? No. Sellers? Aye. Klemm? Aye.


Johnson? Aye. Simmons? No. Parker? Aye. The motion passes five to three. Item number 15 is the adoption of resolution 2025-88. Could you please read this? Resolution approving acceptance of a grant from the Illinois Department of Transportation Aviation Fuel Tax Program. Thank you. Manager Boyer? Thank you, Your Honor. The city's received the aviation fuel tax grant from the Illinois Department of Transportation for the past three years the grant does not require a match and the grant funds are to be used by local governments for airport related purposes in the case of the city of Freeport we have utilized the funds as a reimbursement of expanded airport management expenses there's a small table in the memo for your for your review the city of Freeport has received a notice of grant award for the 2025 2024 aviation fuel tax grant in amount of 49,078.77 cents. There is not a requirement for the match and once approved by City Council, City will submit invoices and proof of payment of airport management expenses in order to receive the grant. Upon review and approval of the invoices submitted to IDOT, allocations will be distributed to the City of Freeport and staff request approval of the Resolution, moving forward with the Fiscal Year 2024 Aviation Fuel Tax Grant.


Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. A motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Shadle.


Discussion on the resolution? Alderman Stacy? What is the match? You keep saying there's a match.


What is the match? Zero. You said there is no match? That's correct. but when you were speaking and was reading, you said match. Gotcha. It is in the memo, it is written, and I said it in the same way I read it from the memo, so there is no match.


Any further discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Stacy? I'm sorry, did I miss your vote? Shadle? Aye. Sanders? Aye. Sellers? Aye. Klemm? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? Aye. And Parker? Aye. The resolution is adopted, 8-0. Item number 16 is the adoption of Resolution 2026 Co., 2590. Could you please read this? Resolution approving redevelopment agreement with Kendall and Grace at 712 West South Street. Thank you, Director Duckman. Thank you, Madam Mayor.


So what we have before you currently is a redevelopment agreement. The name of the company is Kendall and Grace, but this is Whit Plastics. Right behind Aldi, to kind of give you a little Fowler, So, staff has reviewed this proposed development and sees that it is eligible for TIF financing and it's in particular it's within the Meadows TIF district and what staff is proposing is in line with our other redevelopment agreements upon completion of this project staff would provide a $5,000 and reimburse the developer $5,000 and upon the lifetime of of the TIF District, which sunsets in 2037, they would be eligible for the TIF increment they produce.


So once this structure is built, it's assumed and it's reasonable to assume that their taxes are going to increase and they would receive 75% of that increase in taxes over until 2037.


There's a cap on how much money they can get and that would be $50,000 and this is typical for the lifetime of a redevelopment agreement.


The reason you have these caps is some developments will drastically increase the taxes on a parcel and a city does not want a developer to receive a windfall of an economic development incentive.


So it's capped to say that they will never, you know, if the tax is increased astronomically from this development, they would be capped for a lifetime of $50,000.


So this is a great opportunity for our community, a long-time developer, and staff is recommending approval of the resolution.


Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. making motion made by Alderman Shadle seconded by Alderman Parker discussion on the resolution yes Johnson I have about three questions here um where exactly on the property there as you're showing it there is that building going to be placed back and you have more than one question you want yeah I have three okay go ahead and how do they get in and out of that building and will it be the and the third one is what is the benefit to the city by them having this building several so okay I'll try to answer them in sequence the location is going to be this is Aldi down down here the guardrail you can see the guardrail there that's your Aldi and then there's the and the drive behind Aldi that's going to take you up here, and they own the, so you come in, you turn right, and then this would be your view right here, and then this parcel here is where they're going to be putting this facility, this 5,000 square foot storage facility.


A couple different, and you're going to say, well, how are they going to get there?


Well, they've agreed to pave this area in here, so they won't be dragging gravel in and out of our city streets.


So they've already agreed to pave this area. So that's how they're going to be accessing it and then obviously they would be coming back out onto this road and then heading towards South Street.


Benefit to the city, several economic development benefits here. I've talked with the owners, they're lovely, delightful people.


They're building and expanding and they're running out of room. One of the biggest complaints as Alderpeople, as a Community Development Director, you're We've got a better deal.


So this is the city working to keep its business in the city of Freeport.


That's one. Number two, the business owners have told me that they're also looking to add a few employees to also help this.


They're getting busy. They need more room. They need more space. It's going to also help potentially add jobs, not just directly for the plastic, with plastics, Also, you know, the company that's going to end up building this is going to have construction jobs back into the economy as well. So that's something to keep in mind anytime a redevelopment agreement comes up. When your constituents say to you, why are businesses leaving? What are you doing? And the answer is, well, you have a choice to vote to help people expand and keep their business in the community. So that's my answer to that question.


That's my answer to that question. Alderman Sellers. I would just like to know, I know that you said they're gonna be coming in and out of south.


Already right there by Aldi's is a lot of congestion. Yes. You know, just getting in and out.


How are they gonna make that easier? Because I've seen even some people driving, trying to come out of Aldi's because it's such a tight turn.


They have went over the cliff a couple of times. So how can we make that wide enough where it won't be so much congestion there with this business coming in and out of there also.


Well, we can't change the congestion. We know that Aldi is a very successful business.