For middle ground people, this is something that's going to be a piece of shit.
Good evening.
Pastor Anna, could you please give the invocation this evening?
God bless you everyone, we want to pray.
Heavenly Father, in the mighty name of Jesus, we thank you for the privilege and opportunity to be gathered here, and we are grateful for Mayor and all the people who make up this board.
May the Holy Spirit guide you in enlightening and We true wisdom love and peace so that you can make the right decisions That will be of our Freeport community Lord may be glorified in every decision that Is made In your glorious name we pray amen Thank you.
Thank you So we'll officially call this meeting to order.
Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll?
Mayor Miller?
Here.
Alderpersons, Klemm?
Here.
Monroe?
Here.
Simmons?
Here.
Parker?
Here.
Stacy?
Here.
Shadle?
Here.
Sanders?
Here.
And Sellers?
Here.
And if you could please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance led by Alderperson Stacy.
Thomas, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Item number one is the approval of the agenda, is there such a motion?
So moved.
Second.
The motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Klemm, all those in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Opposed?
That motion passes, item number two is the approval of the minutes from the regular meeting on March 3rd, 2025, is there a motion to approve?
So moved.
Second.
The motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Monroe.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Opposed?
Yes.
The first and the second, please.
Shadle and Monroe.
Thank you.
That motion passes.
There were no public comments signed in, so we'll move on to the consent agenda.
The consent agenda is considered to be routine in nature and acted as one motion unless the member of the council would like to have something removed for further discussion.
Seeing none, the consent agenda is to approve and place on file the Board and Commission minutes from the Liquor Commission February 6, 2025 and the Board of Fire and Police Commission from February 25, 2025.
The Finance Department Report and the Cash and Investment Report for January 25, the Building Permit, the Fire Department, the Police Department, the Finance Department and the Cash and Finance Report dated February 2025 and the Greater Freeport Partnership F, as well as the building permit report for March 2025.
Also is approval of the finance bills payable in the total of $3,521,665.74 and payroll for pay period ending March 8, 2025 in the total of $672,488.13, as well as payroll for March 22, 2025 in the total of $676,893.96.
Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda?
So moved.
Second.
Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Parker.
Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll?
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
Aye.
And Parker?
The motion passes 8 to 0.
We have a great network of dedicated ladies in the community called All Our and others.
So, I wanted to read the proclamation on your behalf, which is Child Abuse Prevention Month.
You know what, I'm going to need my glasses, these are way too small, it's a lot of reading.
Okay, so whereas all our kids network is a group of community stakeholders who collaboratively work to influence system change that will strengthen the overall family well-being.
And whereas Freeport's future prosperity and quality of life depends on the healthy development of the children residing across our city.
And whereas preventing child abuse and neglect must be a priority that requires individuals, families, child-serving organizations, schools, and others, and we are here to support the physical, emotional, social and educational well-being of all of our children.
And whereas child abuse is a serious public health issue with wide-ranging societal consequences as data shows, the link between abuse and neglect of children and a wide range of costly medical, emotional, psychological and behavioral issues into adulthood.
And whereas parents and caregivers who have the support system of family and friends know where to find public resources and understand how to maintain resiliency in the changing of times with the best equipping for providing safe, nurturing environments for their children.
And whereas statewide and community prevention programs often serve as proven and effective ways to reduce child abuse and neglect, no matter the geographical region, race, ethnicity, for Economic Status, and whereas the AOK Network and other community partners will host the Blue Ribbon Week, April 6-12, to help spread awareness, hope, and education on the topic of child abuse.
Now, therefore, I, Jodi Miller, declare April 2025 as Child Abuse Prevention Month and the second week of April as Blue Ribbon Week throughout the City of Freeport and encourage all of our residents to dedicate themselves to protecting the quality of life for every child.
Thank you.
Mayor, we would like to thank you and all the Aldermen and City Council.
On behalf of the AOK Network here in Stephenson County and all its partners for signing the of the Proclamation to Prevent Child Abuse.
Bright Point, the company I work for, has provided the blue bows that you may have seen all over the county, they're in front of the office, they're at the municipal court, the police department, and I have provided you all with blue bows.
It all started 35 years ago when a Virginia grandmother tied a blue bow on her antenna of her car to honor her 18-month-old grandson who was a victim of child abuse.
Her simple act ignited a national campaign to raise awareness of child abuse and to prevent it and to take action to stop it.
The blue bow is now recognized as the national symbol of child abuse prevention, and in April of 1994, Bright Point held its first blue bow campaign for Child Abuse Prevention.
And as we continue, it grows, and every year, we are proud to support this good cause.
Thank you.
We want you on the microphone so bad.
So I'm gonna talk a little bit more about the Blue Ribbon Campaign.
I'm Allegra Kozier.
I'm with Tyler's Justice Center for Children, which is the Children's Advocacy Center that provides services for Stephenson, Joe Davies, and Carroll Counties.
So a little bit more on the Blue Ribbon Campaign.
The Blue Ribbon Child Abuse Campaign began in 1989 by a Virginia grandmother named Bonnie.
By a Virginia grandmother named Bonnie Finney.
Bonnie had one daughter who was married and had three children who were 16 months, three years old, and four years old.
Bonnie stated that she had suspected her daughter and her daughter's husband used drugs and she knew that the couple had a stormy relationship.
In her own words, Bonnie recalls a time when she was sure her grandchildren were being abused.
It's been so long since I sat by and others.
I was in the hospital.
I was sitting by his side in the hospital.
Of course, I knew something was wrong as I sat there.
I saw fear on his face, the bruises on his body, and the healing cigarette burns on his hands.
Bonnie's grandson was placed in a foster home.
He told his foster mom, my mama doesn't love me.
Months went by without Bonnie seeing her grandson.
And John.
Bonnie's body was found in a swamp after he had been dumped there three months earlier when he was beaten to death by his parents.
Bonnie tied a blue ribbon to her van antenna to bring awareness to the community.
Said, why the color blue?
I never intend to forget the battered bruised bodies of my grandchildren.
Blue served as a constant reminder to fight for our children.
So thank you Mayor Miller and the Freeport City Council for making this proclamation.
It means so much to us, but more so it means the world to our child survivors.
So thank you.
Lewis, oh yes.
On behalf of the week of the young child, whereas Birth to Five Illinois and other local organizations in conjunction with the National Association of Education of Young Children, we are celebrating the week of the young child and whereas the week of the young child was established in recognition that early childhood years, prenatal through age eight, lay the foundation for children's success in school and later in life and whereas its purpose is to focus public attention on the needs of young children and their families and caregivers and to recognize the early childhood programs and services that meet those needs and whereas children's Smith, and Mary Ann.
Children's cognitive, social, emotional, language, and literacy development are built on a foundation of children's positive interaction with adults, peers, and their environment.
And whereas the week of the young child is a time to recognize that children's opportunities are our responsibility and to recommit ourselves to ensuring that every child experiences the type of early learning environment that will promote their development and growth.
And whereas participation in high quality early childhood education prepares children to succeed in school, earn higher wages, and live healthier lives.
Now, therefore, I, Jodi Miller, declare April 5th through the 11th, 2025 as Week of the Young Child in Freeport and encourage all of our citizens to work to make a good investment in early childhood in Freeport.
You're welcome.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
The Mayor has given me a total of two minutes tonight to speak.
And I put a flyer on each of the Councilman's desks.
This is the same information I gave last year.
We haven't had much movement since last year.
Freeport School District is doing some great things with preschool, which owns Farrar, putting all the preschool classrooms together, which I think will be a great success.
And John.
We need more.
We need more buildings.
We need more home child care.
We need more nonprofit child care.
We need more.
We have got to get our children ready for kindergarten.
That is the best thing that we can do as a community, to give them a good start in school.
In order to do that, pre-school is the way to go.
So I leave that with you.
I We're going to do over the next year, we, to get this done.
Thank you.
One more, certainly not the least.
This is National Library Week 2025.
Whereas libraries spark creativity, fuel imagination, and inspire lifelong learning, and the rest of the community.
We are a community that is a space where individuals of all ages can explore new ideas and be drawn to new possibilities.
And whereas libraries serve as a vibrant community hub connecting people with knowledge, technology and resources while fostering civic engagement, critical thinking and lifelong learning.
And whereas libraries provide free and equitable access to books, digital tools and innovative programs ensuring that all individuals regardless of their background have the support and Whereas Libraries partner with schools, businesses, and organizations connecting the dots to maximize resources, increase efficiency, and expand access to essential services, strengthening the entire community and Whereas Libraries empower job seekers, entrepreneurs, and lifelong learners by providing access to resources, training, and opportunities that support career growth and economic success and Whereas Libraries nurture young minds through story time, STEM programs, Miller, Assistant Principal of the Library andthe Library baking of the phenomenal cultural arts, cultural literature, collaborative programs, and literacy initiatives fostering curiosity and the love of learning that lasts a lifetime.
Whereas, libraries protect the right to read, think and explore without censorship, standing as champions of intellectual freedom and free expression.
And library workers across the country are joining together to celebrate National Library Week under the theme, Drawn to the Library.
Now therefore, I, Jodi Miller, declare April 6th through the 12th as National Library Week in the City of Freeport.
During this week, I encourage all residents to visit our library, explore its resources, and celebrate all the ways that the library draws us together as a community.
And Dr. Taylor.
Thank you.
First of all, thank you to everyone here for your support of our library that allows us to continue to grow and improve the services that we provide to everyone in our community.
Thank you to the Board of Trustees and our dedicated library patrons.
And our library staff.
Thank you for your hard work.
Most of all, thank you for our amazing team of library workers.
I appreciate everything you do to make our library excellent.
Today, I also stand here to advocate for my greatest passion in life, libraries.
On March 14th, an executive order to defund the Institute of and John.
I am a federal agency that maximizes every dollar of its modest budget to deliver exceptional value and meaningful impact for Americans in communities nationwide.
With just.
003% Of the federal budget, IMLS funding helps libraries across the country provide programs and services that provide a more meaningful and more effective way to that support more than $1.2 billion in-person patron visits annually plus countless additional virtual visits.
But how does day funding IMLS affect our community in Freeport, Illinois?
Although we do not receive money directly from IMLS, the Illinois State Library does.
Our consortium, Prairie Cat, does.
Our library system, Rails, does.
The State Library, Prairie Cat and Rails provide our library with resources we would not otherwise be able to offer.
These organizations connect libraries across the state creating statewide sharing for our collections, providing our community with a wealth of information, knowledge, and resource access.
Without funding from IMLS, state grants will not be as accessible, removing the ability for our library to provide needed resources such as the new computers that we just received in 2024.
To celebrate National Library Week, I ask you to stand up and advocate for our library.
Stand up and advocate for the libraries of Illinois and stand up to advocate for libraries across the United States.
Please take time to make your voice heard by calling your representatives and advocating for libraries.
If you need resources to help advocate, you can find me at the Library, and thank you for your time.
And last.
And, last but certainly not least, Happy National Library Week.
Thank you, Ashley.
We'll move on to item number six, which is the appointments.
Madam Clerk, could you please read those for the record?
Appointment of Eric Bornemann to the Enterprise Zone through January 1, 2028, Dustin Wilkinson to the Planning Commission through October 31st, 28, Brad Hartog to the Board of Zoning Appeals Commission through June 30th, 2030, reappointments of Jeff Williams to the Firefighters Pension Board through April 30th, 28, Jeff Williams to the Police Pension Board through April 30th, 2027, and Randy Bukas to the Board of Housing Authority Commission through October 31st, 2030.
Alderman Parker?
Motion to approve.
Second.
To approve.
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Klemm.
Any discussion?
All those, can I do an, I'm sorry, Alderman Sanders?
Have any point in time that these reappointments have been part of the Council's discussion?
That's what Tonight is their mayor appointment and council approval.
Okay, so this is it?
This will be land to ground work for discussion?
Yes.
Okay, I saw the word to know.
All right, anything else?
We can do a roll call?
Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll?
Stacy?
Hold it, hold it.
Oh.
Alderman Simmons?
Yes, I didn't think the floor is open for this particular, because I'm trying to get someone to express the fact that it's open for discussion, and no one has admitted that it was open for discussion.
Yeah, I asked if there was any discussion.
No one said anything.
I don't think that was what I was asking, but I was asking just because the listing was made, there was a listing of, but there's nothing indicated here about discussions.
And so I asked the question whether or not does this lay a groundwork for discussion.
We asked for discussion and the mayor said yes, so now's the time to have the discussion.
Well, I don't know when that's supposed to happen.
Right now.
Okay, no one's there right now.
That's what I'm getting at.
Okay, what would you like to talk?
I was waiting for the right now.
Okay, go ahead.
Okay.
Yeah, I wanted to address the fact that we're indicating reappointments of individuals and and then we are reappointing people that has already been part of these boards and the fact that we have not talked about whether or not the board was open to public opportunities to join these particular boards so we don't have a redundancy of reappointing the same and I are the heads of these boards and I see the date durations of the expirations of when these boards are supposed to conclude, but the thing about it is we're talking about it now had it been open to the public so the public can be informed about possibility of joining these boards so we don't have the same board members on a regular basis.
Scheduled appointments or whatever the case is.
I just want to know What are we doing in regards to that?
Because I don't see any protocols here.
That's what I'm getting at when it comes to reappointing anyone to anything and that's the reason why I'm having this discussion because I don't feel comfortable putting the same heads, the same old heads back in making board decisions, making changes to our city and I have been in the same dynamic with the same board here.
So, I'm saying, what I'm really saying is have we did an extensive public notification for fresh new board members for these appointed positions.
That's what I'm getting at.
And your answer to that is yes.
Okay.
Every time I speak somewhere I challenge people to step up to different boards and commissions.
I just wanted to say, Alderman Sanders, that we don't have say so in this matter.
The Mayor appoints who she chooses to these boards and we vote yay or nay, but she has to say so of who she appoints.
We accept it or we don't.
We vote on it.
It pass or it don't.
Okay.
Thank you.
If there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Stacy, Shadle, Sanders, Sellers, Klemm, Monroe, Simmons, Parker.
Motion passes 6-2.
Thank you.
And others.
Thank you.
Item number seven, which is recognition of service awards, Chief.
Sure.
All right.
So tonight we'd like to recognize Lieutenant Gillian Markham for her 25th anniversary.
Lieutenant Markham was hired on April 4th.
He was hired on April 4th.
All right, so tonight we'd like to recognize Lieutenant Gillian Markham for her 25th anniversary of working for the city's emergency department.
Lieutenant Markham was hired on April 3rd, 2000 and celebrated her 25th anniversary.
Lieutenant Markham has served the city in a variety of positions as a member of our emergency response team, Martin, a school resource officer, a corporal on patrol, a patrol sergeant, and Lieutenant Martin was promoted to a current position, he had used the rank of lieutenant on January 16, 2024.
Lieutenant Martin sits on the Regional Advisory Committee for CESA.
CESA is a community emergency services and support act.
CESA was created to coordinate 9-1-1 with mobile mental Holt, Response Services, being developed by the Alumni Department of Mental Health.
We're going to mark this instrumental and restarting Resource Officer Program with our school, our SRO, assigned to report school district.
SHELCO oversees the Dispatch Center and our report fleet are the social workers.
We're going to mark them collaborating with stakeholders in the community to find assistance for individuals experiencing mental health crisis.
She also maintains and develops the Department of Policy and Procedure and our training group.
Lieutenant Markham is currently working for the Department IV Tier 1 accreditation right now.
And she's spearheading the Department's transition to our new report management system, Central Square, among many others.
Lieutenant Markham is a law enforcement leader who plays a crucial role in ensuring that the particular department provides professional service to the citizens.
Did you want to say anything?
All right.
Item number eight is the second reading of ordinance 2025-14.
Madam Clerk, could you please read this?
Ordinance adopting the official zoning map of the City of Freeport.
Thank you, Director Duckman.
Thank you Madam Mayor.
I put up the zoning map for you to view.
Nothing's changed since the first reading of this ordinance and it's an annual requirement by statute for the city to pass an ordinance for the current zoning map.
So, staff is recommending approval of this ordinance.
Is there any further discussion on this?
Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Stacy.
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
Aye.
And Parker?
Aye.
The ordinance passes 8-0.
Item number 9 is the first reading of Ordinance 2025-15.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance Authorizing Sale, Recycling, Donation, and or Disposal of Certain Property Owned by the City.
Tonight, we have Public Works equipment and Police Department equipment, including bicycles at City Yards.
Chief Shenberger?
Thank you.
The Freeport Police Department and the City Public Works Department, as well as the Water and Sewer Department, are currently in need of disposing property at the Freeport City Yards.
As far as the Police Department's concerned, we have abandoned bikes that have been in and the possession of the Freeport Police Department for at least six months, an outdated and unusable property that's being stored at the city yards.
The property that the Police Department elected to destroy includes three office chairs, a round table with six chairs and then abandoned bikes that were collected throughout the city.
Alderman Parker.
Make a motion to approve and to suspend the rules.
Second.
Okay, we have a motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Sellers to move Ordinance 2025-15 on.
There's also a motion to suspend the rules, which the suspension of the rules must pass by two-thirds majority and is non-debatable.
So, Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll on the suspension only?
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
No.
Sellers?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
Aye.
And Parker?
Aye.
The suspension passes seven to one.
So then before you is the final reading for this ordinance, Alderman Monroe.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
Chief, are any of the bikes that you're looking to dispose of, are they something we could give out to the community, or are all of them just needing to be destroyed?
They're in pretty poor condition.
However, there was Somebody, I prepared this memo a while ago, but since that time there was somebody who approached one of our employees that is associated with the Salvation Army that has asked to look at them before we get rid of them.
So we are gonna do that, so.
Awesome, thank you.
Alderman Sanders.
So and with that, can anyone in the city go and evaluate those?
Yeah I mean we we opened up we have it opened up I mean we can't just go there but to come down the police department if somebody is missing a bike they can come down the police department and we we can take them or if we get a description of it and they can provide a description of it then we can see if it's there but generally like most of these are in pretty poor condition they were just abandoned and and stuff like that so okay there's no further Item Number 10 is the first reading of Ordinance 2025-17, could you please read this?
Ordinance amending the codified ordinances regarding residency requirements for certain Thank you, Manager Boyer.
Thank you, Your Honor.
This came out of a discussion a few meetings ago related to what the residency requirement was for city directors and officers of the city.
So the city is, I am putting forward the proposal to remove certain positions from the residency requirement except for the city manager position.
So the ones that we'd be removing would be the Police Chief, the Fire Chief, Deputy Chief of Police, Lieutenants of the Police Department, Sergeants of the Police Department, Deputy Chief of the Fire Department, District Chiefs of the Fire Department, Licensed Officers or Designee, Deputy City Manager of Finance, Community Development, and Human Resources, Public Works Director, Finance Director, Community and Economic Development Director, and Director of Information Technology, as well as Human Resources.
The idea behind this is it's going to allow the city to have a little more flexible hiring practice in terms of who we can recruit, when they come on board, not having to relocate is kind of an advantage in terms of bringing on qualified staff to work for the city.
So it's my recommendation that we move forward with Ordinance 2025-17.
Is there a motion to move this forward?
A motion to move it forward and also to suspend the rules to vote on tonight.
We have a motion made by Alderman Parker.
I know you are.
Okay, that's inappropriate.
Is there a second?
Second.
We have a second made by Alderman Shadle to move this ordinance forward.
We also have a suspension of the rules, which is again non-debatable and must pass by two-thirds majority.
Madam Clerk, could you please take the suspension Vote, please.
Did we get a second on the suspension, Mayor?
No.
Alderman, Shadle.
Shadle, thank you.
We'll begin with Stacy.
No.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
No.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
No.
Simmons?
No.
Parker?
Aye.
The motion fails to get two-thirds vote.
Okay, so let's Let's go back to the first reading, which would be, is there any discussion?
Well, actually, you know what, yeah, no, I guess we've covered all that.
Is there anything else that you want to discuss?
Otherwise, it just moves to the second reading on the next, Alderman Sanders.
Okay.
This was something that we was considering avoiding this ordinance, per se, that for no further discussions.
We're doing right now.
Yeah, I'm bringing the fact up that we shouldn't be discussing this on another Council Meeting cow or whatever the case is.
Does this kill The opportunity for this agenda part of this ordinance to be brought before the council in the future Attorney Zito So this is first read So it will come back to council at the next City Council meeting for second read and vote by the City Council This was previously at a committee of the whole meeting a few weeks ago City Manager Boyer out of these 15 positions Williams.
How many of them already reside in Freeport?
I'll have to get back to you on the specifics.
I know we have some folks that are not currently in city limits.
Of course, that is something that happened before I was here.
So I'll have to get back with you.
We have more out of city limits than we do in.
Would that be a correct statement?
I'd have to get back with you on that.
Okay, you know, and it was before I was seated, so I get that part before your time.
But we put these ordinance in place, and then we, the city, do not even follow them.
And that's a problem and so I apply for a position and I'm told after accepting the position, I have six months to move to the city, correct?
But I never moved to the city and it's never enforced.
Be happy to explain we've got folks here that have worked for the city for many years, did not have a residency requirement at the time of when they were in their position, they were promoted and they essentially were asked to take the position and they informed council that they were not willing to move for that and that was accepted in one specific case but we have a number of situations here, it's more about hiring, it's more difficult to and Chris.
So we have to recruit people because when we have the residency requirement, for instance, with, let's just say, one of the district chiefs, they may not take a promotion because they don't want to, you know, pick up and move.
And according to the ordinance, they should not take the position if they don't want to get up and move.
Okay, so in some cases, you have folks that work for the city for many years and and I think it makes a lot of sense for the City to step back from this residency requirement because it doesn't really do us any good.
What this does is it limits our ability to recruit.
It creates a situation where we have to limit the folks that are able to work for the City by who wants to live within the City limits, which essentially is most communities are moving away from a competitiveness.
From from a competitiveness aspect.
So it's we're in a challenging time for the city.
We have a budget that's certainly not as big as some communities, and we are having to compete for outside employees.
And with that competition comes whether we have a residency requirement on so we're not only very it's hard to be competitive on the pay level, but it's also adds another layer layer of difficulty for recruitment with the residency requirement.
So what I'm Haskin is that we modernize this ordinance and we alleviate these residency requirements for anyone except for the City Manager.
Truth be told, well, before truth be told, when was this ordinance created?
I want to say right around 2017 is my guess, but let me double check.
Miller.
Well I understand that there's an exemption being asked according to this agenda in regards to residency and and the fact that an individual or or individuals are, in other words, to get rid of the residency, we're asking to exempt their status for our residency.
Is that what we're implying here?
Yeah, we are.
And if we are, and if we are, who's excluded from this, who's, well, who's all included in this exemption and are they individuals or is it a collective body of people that has already been chosen or have we explored the opportunity, the whole residency thing and the hiring practice?
Have we had an opportunity to look at the justification for why we are considering outside When we have not explored an opportunity for inside residents, have we done the exploratory surgery for the citizens of the city of Freeport as far as their qualification is concerned?
Have we done that?
The positions are listed in your packet.
So they're there.
And Alderman Stacy, the answer to your question is 2017.
I'm already talking to someone.
I asked a question.
I want to get a direct answer from the person that I'm talking to.
I wasn't talking to you.
I'm asking this gentleman about the fact of our policy and the procedures and our protocol.
I want to know how we're going through this thing to make these determinations in order for us to and I have been working on this issue for a long time.
And I think that we have to neglect the people in the city of Freeport the opportunity for the opportunity to get these types of jobs if they have not been conveyed to them as far as their openings is concerned.
And I'm curious, I'm really curious, how did outside residents get this information?
That has applied for these positions and we need to know whether or not that even happened.
I know HR would probably have applications and things of this nature to determine whether they qualified or not.
You know, that kind of thing.
So, I'd like to know all of those things.
Well, let me see if I can address your concern.
Number one, when we put a posting out for one of our directors or whatever, there is a very, very small pool of people that apply, period.
And folks from city limits, it's even smaller, okay, if any.
What we also have here is we have folks that work through the organization, whether it's the fire department or police or public works or whatever, city hall.
And these folks have worked very diligently for the city and we're kind of in an environment where it's been a trend of all communities to move away from the residency requirement because they understand how it ties their hands in terms of hiring the best people for the job.
Scott.
So we may end up having a position sit empty if we continue to abide by the residency requirement when we would simply be able to hire someone from a surrounding community, whether that's Lena or Pearl City or our surrounding communities, or whether that's some of the larger metro areas.
Okay, so one of the things that we were trying to do here is get a higher quality staff by just making a small adjustment to the residency requirement here for everyone but the City Manager.
The City Manager still has to live in city limits.
Chief, did you want to add to that?
Yeah, just some background on the police department.
Our bargaining employees do not have a residency requirement.
So our non-bargaining employees, sergeants, lieutenants, deputy chief, the most recent, I think the most recent ordinance, this has changed at at least three times since I've been here for, in the 26 years I've been here, now have to live within 15 mile radius of City Hall unless they're under the prior ordinance, which was 20 miles.
So if they're under the prior resident, our prior ordinance, they can be within 20 miles, but if they move again, it has to be within 15 miles.
So the only one that the ordinance requires to reside in the city would be the Chief of Police, Selders, not the other officers.
And all the other officers, the non-bargaining officers are in compliance with the ordinance.
I just want to clarify that, so.
Alderman Selders?
Yes, I guess Chief did answer my question.
I was wondering, was there a radiance that they have to be in?
And I also had someone that called me and said, could they also just be, they live in Stephenson County?
You know, is that, you know, part of a requirement that could add to it but I do understand because we're looking for qualified people to do these jobs and it's not that we're saying that people that live here can't apply for the jobs it's just that we're opening up to make sure that we get you know the best person for the job so that's why you know I I'm in agreement with it.
Thank you Alderman Stacey.
Truth be told most of these These positions are hand-picked and when they were accepted, they knew they weren't moving to Freeport and the people that accepted them knew that they were not moving to Freeport.
It's not because a lack of interest or filling a position.
A couple weeks ago, retired Chief Summers coming here crying over the mic about how he couldn't throw a football without someone coming by giving him the finger while he was throwing the football with his son.
Nelson.
Why did he really come up in here crying?
It's my question.
Because we got mothers here that have had to bury their sons and daughters due to the violence here.
And I think if people are held accountable according to the rule that's in place, according to the position that they want, maybe we would have a little more control over things because I just feel that it's just a little different when it's your city or your town.
Manager.
I just wanted to add one point to that which is we are in a dynamic labor market.
We have to be as flexible as we can to get the the best candidates for the jobs that we have available.
This is just one thing that we can do to make ourselves more competitive with the rest of the communities in our area.
We hired you for Public Works Director and then the City Manager before for you, wanted you in that position, and you got it, hand-picked.
Alderman Klemm.
Attorney Zito, could I ask attorney a question?
Sure.
Being on the school board for a number of years and being here on a couple of different sides of all this situation.
Can you talk a little bit about the situation?
Sure.
Being here on the school board and being here and volunteering on a couple of different sides of the Situation.
Attorney Zito, could you politely tell me if we can legally tell somebody where they can live today for a job?
So the city is allowed to have residency requirements.
We are allowed to have that and the council at one point in 2017 did set residency requirements there.
Now, what staff is proposing right now is ordinances, whether they be residency requirements or other types of ordinances, sometimes become outdated, sometimes, you know, trends cause an ordinance to be outdated.
I think that's what the City Manager is saying there and that's why he's proposing to the Council to remove the residency.
Booker, Yvonne & You know hiring difficulties and the such so Yes, you can have requirements.
Thank you Alderman Monroe, thank you madam mayor you know This boils down to you know, what's best for Freeport and and it's it's a complex issue but one issue that Really keeps coming back is You know this this Council passes tax increases and we we hold people accountable to the rules of law to the rules of the community and we've got district chiefs living in Wisconsin from the fire department we've got a fire lieutenant that drives a vehicle to Stockton every day and back it's 11,000 miles a year just on that vehicle plus we're paying for the gas we're playing paying for the wear and and Taylor.
That person's getting free travel to and from work.
Why don't we do it for every employee in the city?
Why don't we do it for everybody?
And the point is this.
The people that don't live in our community don't understand the problems.
They don't communicate with our local community on a daily basis.
They're trying to establish relationships without knowing the people.
And these are big issues.
Because if you don't know where the problems Fremont.
You don't live here.
You don't get it.
You don't drive through the town every day.
You don't understand really what's going on.
We've had zero houses built in this community in years.
I mean, in the city of Freeport, how many new houses have been built in the last 10 years?
Darren, you know that answer?
I don't know the exact number, but we just had houses built on Rye Ridge this year, two or two or three, but I couldn't give you a number over 10 years.
It's not many.
Wright Ridge is about it.
And otherwise it's condos, which people have complained about left and right.
You know, they create issues.
But it comes back to the rule was in place, and we ignored it.
We totally ignored it.
That would be like me driving down the street at 50 miles an hour and tell the chief, well, Well, I've been driving fast my whole life, and nobody's given me a ticket, so it's okay.
And the Chief's, his officers would tell me, well, here's a piece of paper.
But yet, we haven't done the same thing.
We've got members of this staff, your staff, who have said they lived in Freeport, and we have proof they haven't.
It's fraud, plain and simple.
There's nothing else to it.
And it basically falls into the point that if you're willing to do what a certain core group of people in this community want, we'll bend the rules for you and that's wrong.
That's wrong.
It's a crime.
Plain and simple.
You know it, I know it.
And you can change the rule now, but that doesn't change the fact that people haven't been following the ordinances that were put in place, not by this council, not by the last council.
And I.
And I'm not responsible for that.
2017.2017.
I mean we're talking eight years ago.
And this has come up, and I seconded Alderman Parker putting this on here for a conversation.
Because I think it's worthwhile.
You know, what are we willing, we can't even do certain things.
We talk about a water main going out, Stephenson, so that we can get more.
But yet we're spending money with vehicles, with gas, with other things where people are commuting outside of our community and that hurts the community and those tax dollars go elsewhere.
You can't tell me that that district chief who lives in Monroe buys any gas here, buys anything in the city of Freeport.
And that's a problem because we depend on those tax dollars to fix our streets, to fix our infrastructure, but yet those people use it every day and they take $100,000 plus a year salary and they go right out of town and that's not right, it's not right by any stretch of the imagination and to even hint that the citizens of Freeport, that we can't get qualified candidates, Out of 25,000 people for some of these roles, that's crazy.
That's crazy to me.
There's a lot of bright minds out there, a lot of good people.
And we really need to stand up for the citizens of Freeport.
And I think this sets a bad precedence for that.
This was one of the suggestions that have been a part of the Illinois Municipal League for a couple of years now, because it so narrows your pool of qualified applicants.
That's simply what this is.
So, Manager Boyer, did you want to add to that?
You know, there's so much to unpack there.
It's very, it's hard to get my hands around it.
All I can really say to you, Alderman Monroe, is you brought up a couple of individuals, yet we're not talking about the fact that we've got them on call.
They come back whenever they need to.
They're on call 24-7 in some cases.
We've got situations where we've got outlying communities, Fries, where a lot of folks live, they get promoted, and then all of a sudden now they're outside city limits.
All this does is create management flexibility and allows us a broader pool of people to qualify the individuals to apply for certain jobs within the city of Freeport.
That's all this does.
Okay, so, you know, if we're going to talk about, you know, how much wear and tear on a vehicle, I'd like to tell you one good decision cannot weigh any wear and tear on a specific vehicle that you might have driving back and forth to a community nearby.
So all I'm going to say to you is what you want is the best people.
We always look at our internal hires as the people who live within city limits, but we do not get enough applicants from the city of Freeport.
They're just not enough.
Just a reminder, Alderman Sanders and Alderman Stacey, you've already both spoken twice, so- No, no.
Yes, sir, you have.
You spoke twice, and I would appreciate that you stay in order.
No, don't do that again, Mayor.
Don't do that again.
And I'm going to call that out of order.
So please refrain from speaking like that.
You are out of order.
I'm warning you the last time.
Don't be out of order.
Alderman Klemm, did you have your hand up?
The only thing I was going to ask, if that's the absolute truth, that we've got guys using city vehicles driving out of town in those positions.
That's what I was going to ask.
We have the Fire Marshal, drives her vehicle, because she's on call 24 hours a day.
Alderman Sellers.
I would just like to know how long have these people in these positions held these jobs?
I wish I could give you a straight answer on that because I don't know some of them.
I will tell you that Chief of Police, Fire Chief, obviously the Fire Chief has an apartment here in town.
Here in town, the Police Chief, that was part of his hiring, what was discussed when he was hired, Deputy Chief of Police, I don't know, I'm guessing it's one of those was promoted into that position over a period of time.
Lieutenant for the Police Department and the sergeants for the Police Department, and these are listed here, but as I understand, Chief, these aren't required to be residents anyway.
Just a radius, yeah.
So all we're asking for here is let's just move forward any way that's productive for the city which is going to allow us to have appropriate level of candidates for our empty positions and not punish the folks that have been doing a good job for the city for many years.
There's no real reason to have this anymore and it's my recommendation we move forward and remove it.
Deputy Chief Segal, did you want to add to that?
I kind of wanted to park on the sideline of this, but I decided that I would speak up for the people that I work with in my department.
I've been a resident of this city for 38 years.
I make my home here, and that's my choice.
Every fireman starts out at the bottom rung, not at the top, and they make their way through the fire department.
Throughout their career, contracts are established that establish the radius under which people can live.
To piggyback on Chief Shenberger, throughout our career, the radius has extended three times throughout the 27 years that I've been with this.
Davis, Fire Department.
As far as that radius is a circle, it extends up into right before Monroe.
It doesn't make Monroe, it's right before Monroe, Wisconsin.
So it takes them over the line.
These are individuals that while they were blue shirts, determined that under the contract that allowed them to live a 20-mile radius, they built brand new homes.
And other brand new homes, it's their home, just like my home is my home.
I think that home ownership is one of the most fundamental and precious things that each of us have.
It doesn't matter where we work, so that's that part.
As far as compensation, I understand that, you know, it's a touchy topic for people to talk about compensation.
But my people and myself, we work hard for our money.
You know, tonight I'll end up speaking about 13 hours worth of work that happened two weeks ago.
It's hard work.
People can get hurt.
People could get killed.
But we're compensated for our work.
That's part of our contractual arrangement, just like everyone else gets paid.
And once you are compensated for the work that you do, that money is each of ours to spend how we choose.
Meaning if we want to go to Rockford and have dinner, we buy dinner in Rockford.
They get the benefit of that.
It doesn't mean we don't spend money in this community, I mean it would be presumptuous to say that no one ever buys anything on their way home or gets gas.
If we decide to go to the Dells, that money doesn't, that goes to there.
These are decisions that individuals make on their own determination based upon the money that they earn.
I don't know if it's right or wrong or what the broadness is of that, but I do know what the fairness of that is.
There's no one in our department that works underneath of me that is not compliant with the residency requirements as they stood before and as they stand now.
As far, the last thing I'd like to speak to is our Fire Marshal.
She does take an emergency response vehicle home.
Her and I are on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
We go to every fire.
We're the last people there after everybody's gone home.
We're there in the dark.
We're sloshing around through the water that's filled the basement and everything.
We are the last people.
In the course of her duties, beyond just being the fire marshal for our city, she is a trained arson investigator that is certified by this state.
And throughout R. County, other Chiefs and other towns call her to investigate their fires, to begin those investigations.
She works side by side with the State Fire Marshal's Office.
So in many ways, we're never not working, number one, even if we're at home.
And the other part is, I've never known Hillary to not respond to a fire, to not be here within and at the station.
So I don't know what the residency requirement is.
I believe that strongly that is your decision to arrive at.
But I do believe on behalf of the members that work underneath of me, they all give you fine service.
And I wouldn't make the leap that because they they don't live here, that they're not here and they're not making a difference and that they don't care.
We go, whether it rains, whether it's snowing, whether it's 20 below, we don't care if you're green and eight feet tall.
If you call, we come and we deliver to you the best service that we can dependent on whatever the emergency is.
So I just wanted to stand up for the men and the women that work in our department.
I think they do fantastic work.
Again, I respect the council.
I respect all of your decisions, but I want you to know that these people are living where they live and they're working for this city under the rules as they've been established.
And I thank you for hearing me.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chief.
Okay.
So, Alderman Sanders, you've had your hand up for a little bit, but I just want to remind you of what the ordinance is, and I'm happy to allow you to speak a third time, but it's according to the ordinance, so it would have to be by a unanimous pass of the entire Council in order for you to do that.
Okay.
So would you like me to ask the Council that?
Well, yes.
Yes.
Okay.
So, Madam Clerk, can you take the I just love how we selectively enforce ordinances.
Yes, let that man talk.
Parker?
No.
We are tied 4 to 4.
Attorney, is this a simple majority?
It needs to be a unanimous vote per our ordinance, so.
Parker no we are tied four to four attorney is this a simple majority it needs to be unanimous vote pro you know we are way past so I'm sorry Alderman Sanders you were not allowed to speak a third time I don't think Alderman Parker you I don't think you've had a chance to speak yet saying we've talked this forever I make a motion to go call the question well there isn't a question this is just first reading so okay that's all right Alderman Monroe did you have your I did, Madam Mayor.
You know, and I guess my question really comes back to everybody gets real hurt when you when you hold people accountable.
The rules have changed.
The state of Illinois requires that Illinois employees live in the state of Illinois.
But yet, Freeport Fire Department, you can live in Wisconsin, we're good.
And that spending of the cash in our community every one of us goes to Walmart we go to Cubs we go to Sullivan's on a regular basis we're paying our taxes to maintain our community nobody questions giving and what you do every day in and day out but you didn't follow the ordinance that's the problem yeah you can shake your head note you're wrong the ordinance is very clear and that doesn't say oh we're gonna allow you to stay you were 16 miles 20 miles 31 whatever it was before the ordinance if you read the ordinance it says you live in the city limits of Freeport period just like you're holding him accountable but yet you can't hold other people and you ran Against a man who you said was an outsider and You said he's not fit to leave Freeport.
Well, first of all, I know said that and you're getting way off to know No, I'm not that's exactly what would you like me to pull up the stuff?
I've got screenshots.
I Can't help I got the receipts mayor.
So sit there and Here's the situation Miller, and she's cutting me off and I'm getting a little bit heated because the problem is this, you can apply the rules in an onerous manner to people that you don't want to have your way, but yet when somebody else says, look, they call BS, you're like, no, it's okay, it's kind of gray area, City Manager can do what he wants, that's been a problem.
And I, and that's where you and I got off the rails, I, in my time of living in Freeport, have had fire trucks roll up to my house because, oh, I had a few leaves and a fire, and, oh, you can be ticketed for that, held to the standard of the ordinance, and all I'm saying is that we have not done the same for the city employees.
Director Duckman is one of them.
You know, we.
That's wrong.
I live here.
Yeah.
You're wrong.
So I just want to you want to call everybody else.
You're wrong, sir.
Here's the deal.
He's out of order.
He is out of order, but that it's okay because and the rest of the community.
And I'm going to talk about the rules because he's her buddy.
So my situation is this.
You need to follow the rules for everybody equally.
But you don't.
And that's because you get a benefit from them for not following the rules.
That's where the problems underlie.
And I can give you further examples, if you would like, who haven't followed the ordinances and they get away with it.
But meanwhile, every taxpaying person sitting in this room is held to a standard that no other person sitting around this U-shaped table except for a couple of Aldermen are held to the same standard.
And that is not right.
That's not what America's founding principles were about.
It was equal justice under the law.
And I. It was equal justice under the law and we don't have that in this city.
And that is the problem with how you manage the city.
Congratulations on your re-election.
But unfortunately for Freeport, that's going to be a bad thing.
Well, I'd just like to say that that's inappropriate as well.
Held to the standard, I'll just remind this council that it was this council that approved Chief Shenberger because I know that's ─ that's where your pointing the fingers at when manager Boyer said he does not live within the city limits and you tied his hands to not allow him to go out with a further search, and he said then that's where his appointment will go and you all said that was fine.
It was this council.
So just to make sure you realize that you were a part of that.
I think Alderman Shadle, you are probably the only one that hasn't spoke yet.
Thank you.
So I guess in my opinion it comes down to how do we fix this?
If it's broke, how do we fix it?
We passed this.
This is the fix.
If you're saying that people don't live in and the ordinance says they're supposed to, then let's fix it.
Clerk.
Did you have an add-on?
I just haven't heard a concept all tied together.
It kind of piggybacks on Alderman Shadle's fix it.
It kind of piggybacks on the mayor saying this seated council tasked or approved to hire from within.
But I, whoever can answer, all three of our unions have removed the residency requirement, correct?
Am I wrong on that?
So fire and police have removed the residency requirement.
I believe by removing the residency requirement is forward thinking.
We already have an issue, we have, we can agree on on that, but I'm trying to tie some points together sir Taylor, because I have been here for the 8 years.
I haven't gone through 30 years, but I have seen two different residency requirements.
So I have seen the changes over the last 8 years.
I also am aware that it's difficult.
We don't get the number of applicants for police officers like we used to.
We don't We get the number of applicants for firefighters like we used to.
We have trouble attracting applicants.
We have removed the residency requirements for that.
I'm just going to propose if we don't change it, we're going to compound this issue and we're going to keep running up against this because we're going to be hiring people that don't have the residency requirements.
And then as Mayor Miller said, we were directed to hire from within the police department, but you're going to have people who don't live in city limits and that's just going to compound itself if something isn't changed.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
So Alderman Sanders, again, you were voted down on your third talk.
Yeah, I know.
So Alderman Parker, Alderman, you're out of order.
I've warned you once.
You can't.
Alderman, Simmons, Alderman, Parker, Alderman, Shadle, you have the ability to speak more if you'd like, otherwise this discussion will move on to the next regular City Council meeting.
Okay, then we'll move on.
Item number 11 is the first reading of Ordinance 20-25-19.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance amending various parts of City of Freeport Code of Ordinances regarding the regulation of wells and septic systems.
Systems.
Thank you.
Darren.
Yes, this is the same topic that we discussed at the cow.
It's been a little bit.
So just as a refresher, we would like to pass this ordinance to restrict wells and septics within the city.
This would still allow the city to have an exception.
If in fact, we couldn't serve somebody.
But for the most part, there's only two areas of Freeport that we currently don't have systems to that we really would struggle to serve at this time, which is the westward expansion and also Woodside with the wooded area back there.
Those are the two areas that we would struggle to service without, you know, some major investments.
But this is really to protect our water supply, as everybody knows.
We're spending probably close to $30 million here soon on our wells and well systems.
We have some good drinking water, Freeport's systems are top notch, and we don't want people to have wells within the city limits.
We're a developed community, EPA is backing this 100%.
The county also backs this as well.
Outside of our city limit territory, they have a blocked zone within a thousand feet of our borders that people have to connect to the city.
This is so people can't just pick up and move right outside the city limits and draw a bunch Walsh Water from the aquifer that most of the residents.
So it's really in a protection.
If you want to know how we view it, the city residents own our system, right?
We're user-based, so we all own this together.
So this is for protection standards.
With that, we kind of reviewed the rest of it at the last meeting.
This is suggested by EPA and IDPH, the Illinois Department of Public Health.
We also already have codes and ordinances within our general and others.
We have a very codified structure that backs all this up.
This is just a much clearer ordinance for people that are looking to move here.
We've had a few issues lately with people that said they couldn't find it or they couldn't see it and so we're just trying to tie this up in a bow.
And with that I will take any questions.
Well, actually, I need a motion to move this forward.
So moved.
Second.
Director, Darren, when we're talking about the whales and the septics, the possibilities and many more.
These are the kinds of studies of having documentation demonstrating that these things are in compliance with what your studies are when we're talking about installing water wells and understanding the contamination of the septic tanks in conjunction or they're adjacent to one another or parallel to one another or anything like that.
And so on.
But what we don't see is documentation demonstrating to council that all of these areas have been explored, that we can rest assured to the citizens of Freeport that we have done our due diligence in regards to the EPA requirements and any other requirements.
And so what we're doing is taking your word at face value here right now at this moment.
But if we can see a drafting of you guys exploration of everything so we can also look at what you have evaluated so we can have a clear conscience that it was evaluated.
Alderman Sanders, it's already a fact that no one can drill a well or a septic in the City of Freeport.
That's already in our ordinance structure.
This is just clarifying it for everyone.
We've had some issues recently.
Was with the school district trying to drill 50 geo wells into our drinking water supply.
That was one issue.
They didn't recognize the code and their architect didn't look at it.
We had another builder right outside the edge of Freeport that tried to drill a well in a septic right on the city corporate limit line.
So we need to clean this up.
This is supported by EPA and IDPH.
Anybody can Google that and look at it.
It's called Source Water Water Protection Act.
We're required to enact this as a municipality just like every other municipality is.
Source water, if anybody does the research, is a huge thing and it also includes storm water as part of this as well because storm water goes to drinking water eventually, right?
So this is a big blanket portfolio.
This is just really cleaning up our ordinances so people that are moving here or building here or want to do something here Do is give the confidence of the people of the City of Freeport that these tasks are being evaluated and taken care of without any kind of documentation that demonstrates the fact that these tasks are actually being taken through and processed.
We don't have anything tangible as counsel.
Alderman Sanders, we went over this at the time.
I know we went over it, but we still don't have any documentations of anything that you You are supposed to demonstrate to us.
To demonstrate to us that these things are, we have done our construction of looking into these matters and that we have done everything that we possibly can to draft up some kind of concept for the City of Freeport that they can build confidence in the work of water and especially contaminant and well water.
We need to be able to get more information regardless to all of these, and you may have some already.
You may have this stuff out there on the website, but do the people know from the directors and people like yourself, from hearing that, listening to you, do they know that for sure that your task is all about taking care of the citizens of Freeport and making sure that they have the confidence in what you're doing?
Well, I'm not going to bring everything with every draft and every memo and every document that we reviewed to council.
That is not the point of this session.
Well, it's a concern.
If you can't trust us to do our job, then you should be leaving them.
Well, it's a concern of the people.
Well, we have experienced contamination already.
Let me start opening up gates and doors about what we have not done and what we have not presented to the citizens of the city of Freeport of things that has not been disclosed and what we should be talking about is those things why we're talking about building the confidence of the people here in Freeport.
Well the thing about it is if we're not doing a disclosure to everything that concerns our our water, our septics, our storm waters and things of that nature, then the people in the city of Freeport is in the dark.
We're in the dark about what you're doing, what your task is.
That's ridiculous.
Yeah, well it is.
It is.
Okay, okay.
I'm talking.
Out of order.
You are out of order.
Who is?
You are.
He's out of order.
It's time to be done with this conversation.
Let's stop this back and forth.
This is a day-to-day task.
She's the chair of this meeting.
She maintains decorum in this meeting.
I think she's telling, I think she's telling both of you guys this is not a back and forth between staff.
That's right.
I'm talking.
I'm the one that's talking.
You no longer have the floor, Alderman Sanders.
Please be respectful of that.
Our department heads are the professional day-to-day operators and they come under the direction of the city manager.
That's his job.
And Madam Mayor.
So you stated, Director, that this would apply only within the city limits of Freeport.
This doesn't extend to those homes and the properties just outside the city limits, or does it?
So for the city of Freeport, this only applies to our corporate limits.
But the county also has an ordinance and act that does the first thousand feet on our corporate limits.
That's their policy, not ours.
But that's pretty much what the state is directing them to do.
So this ordinance only pertains to the City of Freeport and it also does not pertain to somebody else that has a well already, they're grandfathered in.
It's only for anybody building a new one and as those go out of commission, then they won't be permitted to come back in if water's available to them.
Okay, fair enough, thank you.
Yes.
If there's no further discussion, Alderman Klemm?
Would you request for suspension of rules?
Yes, this would like to be put forward as quickly as possible to get these ordinance in place concerning our wells and septics.
Second.
Was that a motion or are you thinking?
Yes, it's a motion.
Okay, was there a second?
I have a second.
Motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Shadle.
Again, suspension of the rules is non-debatable and was passed by two-thirds majority.
Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll on the suspension only?
Stacy?
No.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
No.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
No.
Simmons?
No.
Parker?
Aye.
The suspension fails for lack of two-thirds vote.
The vote is four to four.
Okay, so we will move this ordinance on to the next council meeting.
Move on to item number 12, which is the first reading of ordinance 2025-20.
Could you please read this for the record?
Ordinance approving amendment to vehicle lease agreement with Senior Resource Center for Pretzel City Area Transit.
Thank you, Director Duckman.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
On May 5th of 2022, so it's going on almost three years, city staff submitted an application to the Illinois Department of Transportation, and they've requested three vehicles.
Little background here, back in 2022, I'm sure people remember there was a shortage of vehicles even at the state level.
So we were putting in an application through the state for buses, specialty vehicles, and it's taken this long for these vehicles to get here or the state notified us that three vehicles would be available.
And just to give a little background on what the vehicles are, We have a 2024 Chrysler Pacifica.
That's a five passenger vehicle, wheelchair accessible.
We have a 2025 Ford Starcraft 12 passenger and a 2025 Ford Starcraft, which is a 14 passenger.
So what we have here in this ordinance is to agree, to amend our agreement with the Stephenson County Senior Resource Center doing business as the, I'm sorry for the Pretzel City Transit Program and what this amendment would be is for dollar leases with the Illinois Department of Transportation for those three vehicles and staff is recommending suspension of the rules so that we can spend a long time coming and we really would like to get the vehicles out into use.
Madam Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to move this forward and also to request a suspension of the rules.
Rules.
Is there a second?
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Monroe, seconded by Alderman Sellers to move this ordinance forward as well as suspension of the rules.
Again, suspension of the rules is two-thirds majority and non-debatable.
Madam Clerk, could you please take the role on the suspension?
And we have Monroe and Sellers as both?
Correct.
First and second on both.
On the Suspension Only, Stacy, Shadle, Sanders, Sellers, Klemm, Monroe, Simmons, and Parker.
The suspension passes seven to one.
So then before you Council is the final reading for ordinance 2025-20.
Is there any further discussion concerning the transit?
None.
Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
Aye.
And Parker?
Aye.
And the ordinance passes unanimously.
Item number 13 is the first reading of Ordinance 2025-21.
Could you please read this?
Variance application at 1209 South Wallland Avenue submitted by Madonna Renewal Center to seek relief from 1468.25B1 regarding restrictions of one sign per zoning lot and to not exceed 16 square feet in area and relief from 1468.25B3 regarding restriction of height of sign of less than one story or 15 feet above curb level.
Director Duckman?
No, I'm sorry.
Oh yeah, it is.
Nevermind.
Go ahead.
Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor.
Okay, so on November 20th of 2024, we had an application for a variation from the Madonna Renewal Center to install a sign.
And I'm going to kind of just show you, it's a little bit easier to kind of explain what we're talking about here.
I can scroll down, please.
Kirk, keep going.
You can go, keep going down.
Okay.
So we can start here on this section.
I think everybody should know where the Madonna Renewal Center is.
This is a good explanation of essentially what the sign would look like.
As you can see, it may not be explained too well here, but in reading through the application, you'll see that it's actually the bottom of the sign would be 45 feet and then the top of the sign would be 61 feet it says 60 feet but the sign is a 16 by 13 foot sign so what you're looking at there is being proposed is the Madonna renewal sign and that's essentially what it would look like and in order to do this they need a in order to do this they need a variation because rules the current zoning rules allow for a sign it cannot be any taller than 15 feet and also not to exceed the 16 square feet in area so obviously this is going to exceed the square footage and also the height of the sign so this was brought Lots of the staff in November 20th and on March 6th of 2025, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval by a vote of 5-0 with zero abstentions.
And during that, there was no testimony from the public at the zoning hearing.
And then on March 13th, the Planning Commission also recommended approval by a vote of 6-2 and then six yeas, two nays and zero abstentions and the two nays was Director Stiegel and then also Commissioner Huffins and their concern was about the weathering of the sign, keeping the sign repaired in good condition.
So certainly valid points that were made but in light of that staff and their own review Their recommendation is in line with both Sony Board of Appeals and Planning Commission recommends approval of this variation.
Also want to state that we are recommending suspension of the rules.
This was the petitioners here are really looking forward to getting this sign installed.
Is there a motion to move this ordinance forward?
So moved.
We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Parker.
Discussion on the ordinance?
Alderman Sellers.
So that's the sign right there?
That is, yes.
So does it have to be that big and that high?
It doesn't have to be.
I mean, we had those discussions, you know, with them and said, said, you know, I said, hey, you know, why don't we make it smaller?
They were really animate and passionate about wanting to have their sign out in the community and they made a passionate plea to put this forward.
So I had discussions with them, our staff had discussions with them and they said, no, we want to make a petition and we want to move forward with this.
So at any point in time, so council understands if, you know, we are They're always, as a staff, going to talk to petitioners and give our professional opinions, but if they want to move forward with a variation, we're going to grant them that.
That's their right to do so.
So they are passionate about the sign being this, they want the sign this size.
Alderman Sanders?
Yeah.
Since they're being passionate about it and they're asking you for your expert opinion about it.
Is that what we're looking at?
Because this has nothing to do with taxpayers' investments, things of this nature, because a sign that big and it's weather-prone can receive some damage to it, and that my question would be is, who's going to be responsible to maintain such a sign if that ever occurs?
It's theirs and certainly if the signs weathered the city would issue violations for it and then they would have to fix it, you know, but just like anybody else.
If they let that sign, you know, go to disrepairs, you know, if it started falling off, they'd be issued violations and they'd be responsible for fixing it just like any other citizen.
So they're taking on that responsibility.
Any other discussion?
They are asking for a suspension of the rules because they'd like to get this signed moving forward.
If that pleases the council.
So move.
Second.
The motion to suspend the rules by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Sellers.
Again, non-debatable, two-thirds majority.
Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll on the suspension?
Stacy.
Abstain.
Shadle.
Aye.
Sanders.
Aye.
Sellers.
Aye.
Klemm.
Aye.
Monroe.
Aye.
Simmons Parker we have six of the eight attorneys Zito do I need that's that's enough that's that's enough so that's six to zero six to zero to one two thirds of eight is six okay six to zero one the final passage for this six one one with this ordinance is there any further oh wait a second 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 1, 1.
Thank you.
Welcome.
Any further discussion Council?
Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Stacy?
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
No.
And Parker?
Aye.
The motion passes 6, 1, 1.
And we'll move on to item number 14, which is the first reading of Ordinance 2025-22.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance approving hangar leases.
Tonight we have C7, K5 Aviation, K5, which is where the name came from, K5 Aviation, K6, Dan Tepper, K7, Jeff Matica, M5, MIG Aviation.
Manager Boyer?
Thank you, Your Honor.
So again as staff is working through these leases getting them signed we have a group of five that we'd like you to approve tonight so staff for recommendation is to approve all five leases the I'm sorry I need a motion to move this forward second motion made by Alderman Sellers seconded by Alderman Shadle discussion on this ordinance Alderman Monroe thank you madam mayor a few questions here how many it seems like we're getting closer and closer to having a complete list of all the leases is Redone.
How many are outstanding beyond beyond this list so far?
I think I think we still have about 20.
Yeah, we're about so we're only half.
Yeah, we have 25 executed.
We got more to go.
Are there any that look to be challenging?
Or are they just all pretty much straightforward?
I've had a few conversations with some of the folks.
They've gone ahead and move forward with signing the lease.
So I guess it's going to come down to us contacting everybody at this bottom end and figuring out if if there are, but I don't think there's a whole lot of challenges there we just need to follow up all with them.
Okay, thank you.
Alderman Sanders?
Yeah, also, have those leases been upgraded to, you know, regular standards?
Yes, they're in compliance with the lease format the council approved at the end of last year.
Okay.
Alderman Stacey?
About three weeks ago, these were on the agenda, and N2 was also included, but it is now missing.
Why is that?
There were questions on who was actually in there.
We had a deceased Les E and it just needed a little more following up.
Okay.
So N2, are you telling me that N2 has not been leased?
The lease has not been finalized.
Okay.
And then M5 came in since that time and what honey M5 was also not on there the last time but we've received it since so it got added to okay if there's no further discussion there is an ask of the suspension of the rules I would make Thanks for your motion, Joy.
I just said some of it.
I request it.
The suspension of the rules.
Tom, you, okay.
All right.
We have a motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Klemm for suspension of the rules.
Again, same standards.
Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Thomas.
Oh, pardon me.
Simmons?
No.
Parker?
Aye.
One, two, three, four, five.
We do have six favorable votes, six, one no, one absent.
It passes.
So before you counsel, is the passage of these hanger leases, is there's no further discussion or did you have something?
I do have a question.
Sure.
We have a director over the airport, and why can't she handle this?
Why can't she make these decisions and she decide and she take care of all of this?
That's why we have a director.
Attorney Zito?
Well as far as like the to approve the the leases they have to be approved by ordinance if that's what you're referring to so that only the council can can vote to approve the and Boat to approve the ordinance that approves all the leases, because they have to be approved by ordinance.
All leases have to be approved by ordinance.
Yeah.
These leases have to be approved by ordinance.
These are.
And when was this ordinance created?
The one that's in the packet was probably created, well, it was on the agenda three weeks ago, so probably about three, four weeks ago.
Okay.
Right.
So we can change that ordinance.
I suppose you could change the ordinance, but the ordinance is not like in the code book type ordinance.
It's literally just an ordinance that approves the lease agreement.
So if you look in your packet, it's not like a language that's in the code book.
It just says, you know, we hereby, you know, now therefore be it ordained by the City Council that this group of one, two, three, five leases is hereby approved by the council.
Okay, because, you know, we are expected to respect the opinion and the knowledge of our directors.
So we have an airport director.
No, she's not a director.
And our directors don't approve ordinances.
That's your job.
Okay, well, nobody was approving them once upon a time.
I think is what Alderperson Stacy's asking is, could there be an ordinance amendment to have the airport manager and or the city manager approve these since they approved the contracts instead of them all coming to the meetings, is that correct?
Well, I wasn't even including City Manager.
I was asking, can the Director of the Airport do this?
So, I think we covered that before, and since it's a contract lease, it has to be done by an official of the City, or by the Council, one of the two, it can't be done by a contract Manager.
Now, my understanding is that the airport manager has signed off on this template lease form that we're using and that's why we're going to every tenant, you know, to update their leases.
Angie, I see you're here.
Do you have anything that you would want to add to that?
Oh, hi Angie.
Oh, that pink, I didn't even see you.
That is correct.
I ended up signing off on those as far as the lease itself.
And that's all that's bringing forward to you guys is everyone that has already been in place, they're coming forward and signing the new lease.
That's all we're doing here is just approving you guys or approving the new leases, the new formats.
So it's still the same people.
I'm just trying to understand why do every one of these, since we're just approving the new lease, why do it has to come to the council?
Why can't that be worked out?
There's an ordinance that says, and that's what Attorney Zito would like that all these leases come forward to the council.
But if we gave and if we created an ordinance directing you to hand it.
That is correct.
That can be changed if I am correct on that.
And are you skilled and capable of doing that?
I can do that, but I am not a director.
I am just, I am a contracted manager.
I'm contracted to run the airport.
Correct.
So ultimately, if the council wanted to set a policy that says that with regards to these airplane leases, that if you wanted to authorize another person to sign the lease, let's say, but putting parameters, you know, let's, for example, say, you guys approved the lease template form, right?
And let's say that the tenant says, yep, I got no changes to it whatsoever.
I'm good with the template form.
In that situation, if you I wanted to adopt an ordinance that says the City Manager or the Airport Manager has the authority to, in that circumstance, sign the lease without it coming back to Council.
I suppose you guys could do that.
Obviously, that takes the oversight out of your guys' hands though at that point, so.
But you could, but you could.
I mean, every time they have came to the Council in the last year or so, you know, we're waiving the rules, we're doing this, we're signing off, and they're gone.
Alderman, Klemm Yes.
After we get through this, I'd like to discuss as Alderman Stacy has, before 2018 we never saw any of these leases.
There's no sense for us to see them.
You've got a City Manager, you've got an Airport Manager, if and others.
Dixie.
That's acceptable.
Okay.
Alderman Sanders.
Yeah.
I like to say that this particular ordinance needs an amendment to it.
Simply because the format of these leases are not completed, we have a jurisdictional kind of situation here when it comes to contracts.
And I don't think no one individual name should be on a contract without the council going through the process of looking at that particular contract, any contract as far as I'm concerned.
So we're not just going to be passive about contracts and who signs it and who signs off on them.
We have to be responsible for what we're looking at when it comes to contracts and others.
And that means that those format, the format of a contract lease should be what it is.
It should have an update upgraded or whatever the case is, but some changes needs to be made and there needs to be an amendment to that.
So there could be like an organization wants to go sign off on checks or whatever.
You need two signatures to go to the bank and James, and I think I'm going to take over.
And I think there's a lot of work to be done to make sure that we can make a withdrawal when you're dealing with taxpayer dollars.
And so we're not going to be passive in allow this to be just passed on through without anybody having anything to say about it.
So I think the council needs to be able to inject their views and opinions about anything that has to do with contractual things.
And others, Committee of the Whole if Alderman Klemm chooses to put that on.
So right now we're talking about approving these leases that are before you.
So if there's no further discussion on these leases, Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll?
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
No.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
She is absent.
Parker?
Here.
6 To 0.
Thank you.
6-1.6-1.6-1.
There wasn't one.
I give up.
All right.
Item number 15 is the first reading of Ordinance 2025-23.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance Establishing a Special Service Area, Gladewood Subdivision.
Thank you.
Attorney Cox, would you like to start this conversation?
Or Manager Boyer, did you?
Yep, I'll be happy to carry on.
So, the Gladewood neighborhood was established in the 1960s.
The park district raised funds by selling a portion of its land.
The developer built the Gladewood neighborhood and Gladewood Drive as a private street with specific conditions for city acceptance that were never met, such as proper width and drainage.
Over the years, residents and city officials often believed Gladewood Drive was a dedicated city street, Public Street, leading to occasional city maintenance.
However, research related to the Demeter Bridge revealed the road's private status, leading to the prompt suspension of city maintenance activities.
The city staff engaged in discussions with Claywood residents to explore possible solutions for addressing the neighborhood's road condition.
Through these efforts, a mutually acceptable resolution was developed, leading to the circulation of a petition among subdivision property owners.
Over half of the property have signed the petition expressing interest in creating a special service area based on the term outlined in the petition the agreement is in raises in short raises about $90,000 over 15 years from the property owners to go toward the eventual resurfacing of the street before deciding whether to adopt the special service area a public hearing must be held to allow for objections and the ordinance before the council tonight simply sets the hearing upon passing this ordinance notice of the hearing will be published and the proposed plan will be presented to the public for feedback after a 60-day period for objections if fewer than 50% of the property owners I will say 10 I believe that's actually in my correct on I believe that's actually, am I correct on that, Attorney's comments?
The matter would come back for the council for a final vote to establish the special service area.
Accordingly, tonight's vote neither approves nor disapproves the special service area itself but merely initiates the formal process for its consideration and staff recommends moving forward with this ordinance.
So moved.
We have a motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Klemm to move this ordinance on to the next regularly scheduled meeting.
Attorney Cox, did you want to add to anything?
Okay, discussion?
Alderman Stacey?
I would like to see this go to the COW so that we can look into this Gladewood or Gladwood See the information gathered from that community and really see for ourselves how many is on board, how many is off board, and I would just like to move it to the count.
Is that a motion?
That's a motion.
Is there a second?
Your Alderman Sanders is the second?
On moving it to, you're second on moving it to the cow.
Is that correct?
No, I'm gonna wait.
Well, yeah, I second it for the cow, but I was hoping that the floor open for discussion.
We'll discuss it at the cow.
That's not what she's asking.
She's asking for it to be moved to the cow.
Are you with the second or no?
Yeah, I'm with the second now.
I see what she's talking about.
Yeah.
We need to do more We have a motion of moving this to the next Committee of the Whole.
Is there any discussion on moving it to the Committee of the Whole?
Could I ask a question of what was the reason that we were looking for suspension of the rules?
Was there a reason for that?
Because we've been working on this since last year this particular ordinance is just setting a date for a public hearing and there's you know that's that's essentially in the interest of time and just moving this forward to get it resolved as rapidly as possible so it's not passing an ordinance per se it's just a hearing is that word I probably didn't word that right yes this is and basically an ordinance that requires a hearing.
That's why they want the suspension of the rule so they can move forward with a hearing date.
So the hearing date has not been set?
No, that's what he's asking for, is a hearing, to be able to set a hearing.
Madam Clerk?
And that public hearing would be the opportunity for the public, just the community to speak on this, is that correct?
Would that hearing be before the COW?
I don't know.
It'd be a special hearing, special service area hearing, so we don't have a date at this moment.
Okay, but since you don't have a date, if we agree to let this move forward for the purpose of getting a date, would it be before the COW or after the COW?
Because I don't have a problem with moving forward with a date, but I want it after the COW.
Okay.
Hearing after the COW.
You have to be after the COW because you have to have a public notice period and Wayne and I think that's 15 days minimum.
Thank you for sharing that.
Is that correct, Steve?
Yeah.
Hicks is shaking his head yes.
And it's just little things like that that we don't know that changes the whole atmosphere if it would just be said.
So then do you still want to have your motion on the floor of moving this to the COW or not?
I do want it at the COW.
Okay, so then, let's take the role on moving this to the COW.
Stacy?
That's what's on the floor, Alderman Sanders.
Did you have something?
I have a question.
Okay.
Moving it to the COW, is that saying that we can't go forward with establishing?
Yeah.
Yeah, we can.
No, you can't, you don't get to keep going forward with this.
This is.
Okay.
Do you either approve this ordinance of moving it forward or you go to the COW, so which one do you want to be?
Okay, so wait, now, however, if I take it off the floor to move it to the COW, it won't be dated before the COW anyway so we can still have it on the COW.
And then it pushes it back a whole another week because they can't set a hearing date without this.
No, ma'am.
I said if we move forward with the hearing date, but then next week I choose to put it on the COW.
Yes, you can do that.
So you can do that.
So if you want to move this forward to set a hearing date, then contact Dovie tomorrow with who your second is and add it to the COW.
Okay.
There.
There so so are you are you okay removing your motion go ahead attorney Zito I did withdraw Alderman Sanders are you drawing sure you are my boss spoke okay so now before you is the discussion of the first reading of this ordinance which is is the purpose of setting a hearing?
Is there any other discussion on setting a hearing?
And if not, Alderman Sanders.
Yeah, this thing had been something going on.
How many years had this been considered before tonight how many years of that has been on the table I think we really started talking about this last spring last spring yeah okay so it doesn't hurt if we determine a scheduling date that might make it six more months down the line it wouldn't matter it should not matter until we understand that this this property or this location is a private matter.
Am I correct on that?
Have they been annexed into the city of Freeport is what I'm asking.
Okay, they are annexed in, however, that's not the issue.
I know that's not the issue, but the results are the city, they're asking the city to help provide services to that particular area.
And it is well worth the council to know whether it's a private entity or has it been annexed into the city or is it still private?
Because if it's not exposed, if it's not a public venture, then it can't be a private venture is what I'm getting at.
We can't be using asset of the city taxpayers to accommodate a particular location if it was ever considered private.
And from my understanding, that might be what it is.
If I do my homework, but that's the reason why I ask, if six months down the road can give us enough time to understand that whole particular community, so we wouldn't know for sure what governs them and why now, you know.
Well, if I could just answer that.
This is to set up a special service area for that community that lives on Gladewood so that there can be a special assessment to those residents that will contribute to the maintenance of Gladewood.
Okay.
I have a question.
Alderman Simmons.
So everything else, the hearing is posted, the hearing is had, then it comes to us for approval.
Why is this being done backwards, where we're approving the ordinance then having the hearing?
Attorney Azzito can answer that.
So for special service areas, state statute says it's a two step, well let's call it three step process.
You have this initial ordinance that will set the date for the hearing there, so you have to adopt this here.
I refer to it as the proposing ordinance.
You're proposing the special service area and you're setting the date for the hearing.
Then you have the hearing.
After you have the hearing, there's a 60-day wait period where citizens have the ability to file a petition objecting to the creation of the special service area.
If 51% of the owners within the proposed special service area object to it, then you can't form it.
But let's assume that you don't get 51% objecting to it, alright?
Then the last step, the third step would be the establishing ordinance that actually establishes it.
Because of Staple, Staple, and Stacey.
Okay, so by us agreeing to this tonight, are we tying our hands forever to to set a hearing.
No.
This is just for setting a hearing.
Yes.
Right.
You're saying by adopting this ordinance, you're basically saying we agree to move forward with the process and that process that involves, number one, picking a hearing date, two, publishing notice in the newspaper of what that hearing date is, conducting the public hearing so the public can come and express their opinion.
Waiting that 60-day objection period and then having a final ordinance if you don't have the requisite number of objectors.
Because again, if 51% of the owners, property owners say they don't want the SSA, then you can't form it there.
But let's assume you don't get 51 objecting to it, then it comes right back to the council for that second ordinance where you guys can vote on whether or not to form it or not.
No and it won't be formed.
Alderman Monroe.
Thank you Madam Mayor.
So this question is to the staff it you know if this is approved what does that do with Gladewood as far as on the five-year plan and what work was done prior or do we know what work was done with the road surface so does that mean this is an and additional amount of work for the city to repair that road because Gladewood is in horrible shape.
Yeah, I could probably answer that for you Alderman Monroe, essentially we would have to schedule there's two main parts of this, three actually, the entrance and the exit need to be basically taken down and new base installed and the re-asphalted.
At that point that's kind of the most problematic areas at this time outside of just normal maintenance and then it would be up to council as we look forward into our road program as to where that falls in terms of a reconstruct.
So it is fully depreciated, it's in pretty bad shape and but I will say it will be up to the council to decide where that falls within the road program moving forward.
Is that the city's responsibility?
To fix them roads?
If the city brings Gladewood in as a city street, it would then be a city street.
However, the special service area is a way to recapture some of the expenses related to the road by adding that to the residents that currently live on Gladewood to participate with that renovation.
Do you know how many roads is ahead of them roads?
Yep, we have a lot of roads that need work.
Alderman Sanders Yeah, man, it seems like we've been, we're going in a loop here.
That property is private and others.
Simply because you're indicating that it is.
For us to take over and pave roads and things of this nature, it has to be city property.
Okay.
And it's not city property yet.
It's not?
No.
It's not city property.
You can keep shaking your head until I find out much more about the situation.
Because you have not demonstrated or shown any reason for me not to say otherwise.
Okay, so the thing is, the thing is, all of the investment that is being considered, we're talking about restructuring things over there without an assessment, without an evaluation that the council know about.
We don't know what the whole scope of the matter is.
We're in the dark right now, and keeping us in the dark about the whole atmosphere over there, and others.
It's not good practice.
And so my thing is, you bring this to the council, you're bringing this to the council and we're asking things that sometimes we're not privy to.
We're asking for things that you have not conveyed to us.
And if we have not been exposed to any of this, we don't know what we're getting.
You know, we don't know whether we're getting a clown in a bucket.
We don't know that yet.
And so on until we look at the condition and what we're accepting because right now, as the way it looks right now, the investment that I'm hearing is that it's coming on the people to make a proper investment into the project of this thing, of this nature.
And so my thing is, where does the taxpayers come in at or the city come in at to help that particular service?
Are we being used, in other words, are we being compromised with an area that we don't know anything about.
So we need to be able to justify why it is that we want to look into this matter.
And we're not doing that and I don't feel that, I don't feel comparable, I don't feel comfortable with the fact that I'm sitting here with my mind scrambling about this whole thing.
I don't like that, you know.
And I'm going to be frank with you.
Let us do diligence and bring it to the Council in a proper way so we can make an evaluation of what is being done.
The same thing about the water well and the septics over there.
We still don't know what's going on and things of this nature.
Why?
Because we don't have nothing tangible.
We don't have no documentation.
We don't have nothing in writing.
And every time you guys open up your mouth, we're supposed to believe everything that's coming out of your mouth because we're not looking at anything that you're telling us.
And you've got to produce something.
You just can't just come to the council and explain to the council what you want to do and what you and what we can't see that's that I like for everything to be in documentation so I can see whether or not it holds anyone accountable for what they're saying to the Council.
Alderman Sanders please.
Alderman Sanders.
Mayor Alderman Sanders, Mayor Alderman, Alderman Sanders we have not met in many months.
I have called you.
I have asked you to come in.
I have invited you to lunch.
I've done everything I know what to do to have time to discuss these questions you might have show you the only time I get to talk to you is at council meeting.
So I apologize that you're confused and don't understand what we're doing here.
But please come in.
I'll be happy to enlighten you.
Yeah, some things are not being disclosed.
All I have to say.
Is there anything on Alderman Shadle?
Yeah, I was actually just going to mention how odd it was that you hadn't been abreast of any of this because I've discussed it with Manager Boyer numerous times over the last nine months because I get into his office and we have discussions and that's how you stay up on topics.
Yeah, I resent your comment too.
Is there any other discussion well we do have uh.
Request for suspension of the rules if uh.
We want to go, Attorney Texas you want to add to something first if we're going to suspend the rules the ordinances presented doesn't have a date currently scheduled for that hearing the idea was that that would be scheduled at some point so I would suggest if you're going to suspend the rules and pass that this evening you just want to set a range of dates that that staff can set that somewhere outside of 15 days.
There's a statutory requirement there.
So if you'd set a range of dates, I would suggest between, say, 20 and 40 days out, we can find a date that City Hall is available and have that hearing.
But as drafted, the ordinance calls for a specific date, and I think just passing that tonight could create some confusion.
So how do we move forward on this?
Do we suspend the rule, ask for that first, or do we ask for a date?
He's still in discussion, right?
Yes.
So if this is accepted and this passes, then they will get their entryways done right away.
Is that correct?
Like you said, that would be the first thing that needs to be handled.
I get that this is a multi-stage process, so the first step is going to be doing a hearing.
And others.
The next step is going to be doing a hearing.
And that's all we're approving tonight.
Oh, I'm saying though, once we do the hearing and it passes, they agree and it comes back.
If it passes, Council, final step, didn't you say that the entryways to the streets would be done right away?
Well, when I say right away, we're looking at 2026, it'll be in the construction plan for 2026.
We've already scheduled everything for 25.
Okay.
So, follow-up.
Once we're all said and done, if this is approved and passed as final step, for a few hundred dollars a year on their taxes, they get to skip the line and be part of 2026.
Only on the entryway and exit, about 200 feet on the entry and exit, and there's certainly T, and so forth.
They've got to be about a mile of road back in there that needs work as well.
It's just dealing with the proximate issue.
Thank you.
Alderman, Monroe.
Thank you Madam Mayor.
So why is this being brought forward today and why not sooner?
Why has this been kind of an emergency, kind of move forward and get it into 2026?
Because we just received all the petitions we need to move forward so we've been in negotiations talking to the residents they've been talking to each other and I was just presented it wasn't last week but the prior week with all the petitions necessary to move forward Alderman Sellers and also the residents they are contributing to to some of this Swerve, correct?
In the big, yes, there's a $400 per year special assessment on each property out there.
I think the total will be about $90,000 when it's all said and done.
Actually Alderman Monroe, you, Stacy, Sanders, and Simmons have all spoken twice.
So any further discussion?
I was just going to comment that there's several people from the Gladewood area here tonight, one of which Mr. Larson was kind of their spokesperson.
Not for me, I'm not speaking for me, I'm the President, I'm speaking for myself.
During the meetings, he was speaking on behalf of the Gladewood group that came.
Not for me, I'm not speaking for myself, I'm not speaking for myself.
Okay, so, if there's no further discussion on this ordinance of setting a hearing, is there a motion to suspend the rule so we can keep that moving forward?
Taking into consideration Attorney Cox's comment, so again, this is just about moving the setting of the hearing forward.
I would probably recommend a motion to amend the ordinance first to set a date and it can be something generic like after, after the COW meeting, you can set it after the COW and then, you know, within, you know, 20 days after the COW or something like that.
So motion second on that amendment.
Then once the date is, that range is set, then you can ask for a motion to suspend the rules.
So is there a motion to amend?
Motion to amend.
To set the meeting dates from 20 to 40 days from now.
All right.
That would get us past the count.
So we have a motion to amend this, setting this hearing date for 20 to 40 days out.
Is there a second?
Second.
We have a motion made by Shadle, seconded by Sellers.
Any discussion on the amendment itself?
Seeing none, Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll on the amendment of adding 20 to 40 days?
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Nope.
Simmons?
Aye.
And Parker?
Aye.
The motion passes 7 to 1.
Okay now now if you want to have a motion to suspend so we can keep moving forward I'll need that if that's your preference.
Motion to suspend the rules.
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Klemm to suspend the rules again suspension of the rules is two-thirds majority and non-debatable so madam clerk could you please take the role on the suspension only for settings hearing Stacy Shadle aye Sanders no Sellers aye Klemm all right Monroe no Simmons no Parker I the motion fails four to four okay well then we will We'll move this ordinance on to the next regularly scheduled meeting.
Item number 16 is the first reading of Ordinance 2025-24, could you please read this?
Ordinance amending the codified ordinances, Chapter 806, Alcoholic Liquor Sales, and deleting Chapter 844, Mechanical and Electronic Games and Devices.
Thank you.
Attorney Cox?
So, relatively nominal changes here.
There's a suggestion from the Liquor Commission that the gaming fees provisions in 806, you'll see the changes on the chart there for the licensing fee.
We currently charge $250 for an annual fee and then $250 per terminal for video gaming.
The Liquor Commission is suggesting that we we institute an issuance fee for new licenses that would only be paid once.
Currently we have issuance fees for most tiers of licenses and then that the annual fee be increased to $500 and then $500 per terminal.
After some research at the Liquor Commission level it was apparent that we're on the low end of the range for Home Rule communities so So moving it up to the 500 to 500 and 500 kind of brings us more towards the middle, something you would see with the, certainly with the suburbs, we charge much more.
And then Chapter 844 is simply, it's being suggested that we remove Chapter 844 simply because that brings in probably around 100 bucks or 200 bucks of revenue a year and creates and so forth.
So that's a lot of staff time in the clerk's office.
There are very few establishments, and Debbie, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's somewhere in the area of a handful of places that have this license where they actually pay a fee.
We waive the fee if they also pay so we don't double dip.
If you have a video gaming supplemental license, your fee is waived for mechanical gaming.
So we create a bunch of work in the clerk's office and then don't collect any fees for it and is, I certainly remember, I'm sure most of you do, the reason for the mechanical gaming provisions in the first place were the arcades from the 80s and 90s, that's what those were intended for, those weren't regulated by the state, they weren't, so you had all this local regulation.
We don't have those anymore.
Now we have video gaming and that's all regulated heavily by the state.
We regulate that locally, we charge fees on that, but we just are not dollars ahead on Chapter 844, so the recommendation is we just get rid of that.
And I'm happy to answer any questions on any of that if anybody has them.
I'll first entertain a motion to move this forward.
It's all moved.
Second.
Motion made by Shadle, seconded by Sellers to move Ordinance 2025-24 forward.
Questions for Attorney Cox?
Alderman Sanders?
Yeah, you're requesting for the removal of the mechanical part of it.
Is there a reason why you want that to be removed?
Again it's the the chapter 844 mechanical gaming only applies to as Clerk Anderson indicated I think we have three of those licenses that actually pay for for that license fee generating a few hundred hours for the city yet we take in all those applications and the the clerk's office has to process them okay and it's just not something that we have trouble with something that the staff feels really needs to be regulated at this point again it's not the 80s and 90s where we had our video arcades and pinball and all this stuff this is a few pool tables and dartboards really that we run into okay all right thank you thank you madam mayor I'm gonna put this into you know normal speak if you will do away with 844 which was double dipping as you called it and double the We're going to double the tax on the machines, which is double dipping.
It's mind boggling that we're going to double the rates.
The rates and increase of taxes generates $60,000 more in revenue and you know here we are again raising a tax on the citizens of Freeport and we've been doing that over and over and over again and we hide it in the water bill, we hide it in the tax on the machines, we hide it into every tax and you know at some point you have to draw the line and you say enough is enough and the citizens of Freeport, gentleman that was in here earlier is upset about having to pay an extra fee when he's already been paying city taxes on his property.
So these types of things have got to be addressed in a more succinct manner and you just can't say okay well we're going to do away with this but we'll raise this fee.
When this brought in $200 this brings in $60,000 and think you're doing the community good, We're helping two people, Ms. Anderson, who I agree she probably needs the help along with her deputy, but $60,000 a year in increased fees, you know, you got to wonder how it's going to affect the businesses and the bars and everybody else that we're actually bringing additional tax dollars in on, on the beer and the, you know, the food and everything else that they're serving.
Do you want to say anything?
Alderman Klemm.
That's not quite true, but it sounded real good.
There isn't a person in the room here that has to go use a gaming machine.
This has been through the Liquor Commission, been talked about, excuse me, in the Liquor Commission for about a year and a half or so.
We found that we are completely, completely way under what other cities of our size are charging for these units.
And if you take a look at the gaming board that you can go to and look at everybody's making a nickel, there isn't one of those people going broke and all that we're asking for is a little more fair share for the city.
Thank you.
No further discussion?
Then we will move this on to the next City Council meeting.
Thank you, Attorney Cox.
Item number 17 is the adoption of Resolution 2025-31.
Could you please read this?
Resolution ratifying agreement with United Diagnostic Service or UDS to provide firefighter health and safety screenings.
Good evening Madam Mayor, Manager, Board and Councilmembers.
Before you is a request for adoption ratifying an agreement with United Diagnostic Services, LLC, to provide firefighter and health safety screenings.
This resolution was discussed at the March 10th Committee of the Whole meeting and was previously placed on the agenda for March 17th Council meeting for adoption but was not able to be completed due to scheduling, completed before the scheduled date of the screenings.
The screenings have since taken place and were provided to 45 members of the department.
The dates of the screening were established on three consecutive days, March 20th, 21st, and 22nd.
These screenings again utilized ultrasound to look for conditions related to cancers, related to thyroid, liver, gallbladder, bladder, prostate, proper heart functioning, and assessment of the aorta and carotid arteries.
These screenings have now established a baseline for our department, and we hope to continue them, the recommended every two years.
The cost of the screenings was $14,625, that is $325 per individual, and the full cost was covered by funding from the department's Foreign Fire Insurance Board Fund.
Thank you.
Is there a motion to adopt?
So moved.
Second.
Motion made by Alderman Seller, seconded by Alderman Shadle.
Shadle, Sanders, Sellers, Klemm, Monroe, Simmons, Parker, The Resolution is adopted 8-0.
Item 18 is the Adoption of Resolution 2025-33, could you please read this?
O'Rourke, Mayor, Mayor, Mayor, Mayor, Mayor Pass is an ordinance which adopts the transportation services within Freeport and Stephenson County.
The next step is a resolution authorizing an application to be made with the Office of Intermortal Project Implementation, which is IDOT, for financial assistance under the two grants.
And that's what we're talking about in this particular resolution.
The subsequent resolution is going to be about accepting a special warranty for public transportation and I'm not going to get to that right now and then finally after our applications been submitted there has to be a resolution accepting that the City of Freeport is participating in these grant programs.
So there's several steps that are laid out for us to successfully operate our Pretzel City area transit program.
So in this step staff is recommending a resolution authorizing an application to be made for these grant applications.
Thank you.
Is there a motion to adopt?
So I'll move.
Second.
A motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Sellers.
Discussion on the adoption?
Alderman Sanders?
Well, I really don't want to inject because it's such a valuable tool and I just wanted to commend you for getting involved in this with the grant processing and that it is so so much needed for those that are unfortunate to be able to be mobile is as accessible that they like to be.
And so, yeah, just keep up the good work on that.
I like what the whole concept is.
Thank you.
I appreciate that.
But I do want to thank Sadie Grande.
She's our transportation planner.
She does a done a great job with this program, keeping everything on track and also Director Richter does a great job helping us as well there's a lot there's a large amount of financial work involved helping this program keep going but the support of council is greatly appreciated thank you very much.
Any other discussion?
Madam Clerk please take the roll.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
Aye.
And Parker.
The resolution is adopted eight to zero.
Item number 19 is the adoption of resolution 2025-34.
Could you please read this?
Resolution accepting the special warranty for public transportation funding for the federal 5311 grant for Pretzel City area transit.
Director Duckman.
Thank you Madam Mayor.
So as promised earlier this is the subsequent resolution that would accept the special warranty for public transportation funding.
This affirms that Transit employees will be treated fairly and equitably under the terms of the warranty.
So in line with this, staff is recommending approval of this resolution.
Is there a motion to adopt?
So moved.
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Sellers.
Discussion on this resolution.
Madam Clerk, please take the role.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
Aye.
And Parker?
Aye.
The resolution is adopted, 8-0.
Item number 20 is the adoption of resolution 2025-35.
Could you please read this?
Resolution adopting a certificate of authority to vote regarding Rock Salt Contract Joint Participation Agreements with the State of Illinois.
Thank you, Manager Boyer.
Thank you, Your Honor.
The City of Freeport buys rock salt for snow removal operations every year.
We are part of the state bid and they've made some changes, so we need to approve things a little earlier than in the past.
So staff requests council move forward with this joint participation agreement so that Freeport can become part of the state rock salt program.
Is there a motion to adopt?
Motion to approve.
Second.
Shadle?
We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers.
Discussion on the resolution?
Alderman Sanders?
Yeah, Manager Boyer, looking at the rock salt, we're just finalizing some roads that we're just installing.
And my question is which we know that salt rock can be very, very destructive on roads and especially on new roads that have not settled within, within the frame.
And the framework that we got everything placed on the surface.
My thing is, my question would be is, is there any other resources or source that is more gentle on roads and still be able to be effective for the snow conditions and the road condition?
I don't know if they have that or not, if it's going to cost us, I like to hear the difference between the comparisons and things of that nature.
Just to answer your question, I think there's nothing more cost effective per ton than rock salt.
Obviously the city used sand for a number of years.
Sand plugs up the stormwater system.
We end up having a lot more maintenance doing that.
And there's some other melt products and Stacey.
They're far more expensive than rock salt, so I hope that answers your question.
Yeah, it does.
There's no further discussion.
Alderman Stacey.
What does joint participation consist of?
It's essentially the commitment to the city to work with the state on this rock salt program in the past.
We essentially order it and what's happened is some communities didn't need it backed out so they're adding this change so that they can make sure that everybody who participates Johnson, John, John, John, John, that's correct for the most part we we use everything we order it's hard sometimes to to guess because it all depends on the weather but we've been somewhere in the 300 ton range for some time there's no further discussion Stacy, Shadle, Sanders, Sellers, Klemm, Monroe, Simmons, and Parker.
The resolution is adopted 8 to 0.
And item number 21 is the adoption of resolution 2025-36.
Could you please read this?
Resolution ratifying emergency repairs of a blower at the city's wastewater treatment plant by precision drive control.
Manager, Thank you your honor.
Recently we had a failure, bearing failure on one of our large blowers that services the BAF building or the biologically activated, I'm sorry, the biological air filtration system.
So this particular project to have it rebuilt is about $17,000.
That's compared to $41,000 to replace it so we're repairing it and staff is asking City Council just to Radify this Emergency Equipment Repair.
Is there a motion to adopt?
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Shadle.
Discussion on this resolution?
Madam Clerk, please take the role.
Stacy?
Can I ask a question?
Sure.
How old is this blower?
Oh, gosh.
And Parker with one abstentia the resolution is adopted.
Item number 22 is the adoption of resolution 2025-37 could you please read the resolution?
Resolution Approving the Purchase of Streetlight Fixtures from Electrical Resource Management Manager Boyer Thank you, Your Honor.
Now the City of Freeport has an annual maintenance agreement for the traffic signals and streetlights in I-DOT corridors.
Many of the streetlights on top of the traffic signals are failing due to age and require replacement.
Parts of the incandescent lights are more complicated to find and expensive, and the City staff submitted a grant proposal to ComEd and was awarded $20,000 toward the 70 light replacement project, which includes changing to LEDs.
Each light will be 252 watts, as requested by IDOT specification, and the city needs to replace 70 of these aging street lights, which are metal halide, that are still dim and failing in the IDOT corridors.
We're talking primarily about West Street, Galena, and South Street.
As part of the maintenance agreement, the project was planned for 25 due to the large number of lights that are experiencing issues.
The city crews can self-perform these installations to these lights as the signals have power shut off that are accessible to staff.
Public Works Department can charge IDOT for our installation.
The costs include traffic controls that are needed.
Each intersection area has a varying allowable percentage of established replacement in cost share on the schedule between 30 and 100 percent and that's per our maintenance agreement with IDOT.
This is a quick hitting project that must be completed by June of 2025 and that is primarily due to the fact that we are working with that ComEd grant.
So the project cost for the fixtures are currently estimated to be less than $10,000 but it will Costs the City less than $10,000 after the ComEd Grant and the IDOT share reimbursement are completed and the City Street Department budgeted $20,000 for street lights in 2025.
$10,000 Was anticipated to fund this project.
However, please note the City has spent $23,000 on the new crime reduction lighting recently.
So staff recommends moving forward.
Is there a motion to adopt?
So move.
Second.
Motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle.
Discussion?
Alderman Sanders?
Yeah, this will be a contract even though a grant is being presented.
We'll be contracting this out if we are awarded a grant.
How does that work?
No, the staff is going to reduce the cost of the installation by doing it ourselves.
We're going to do the in-house we're going to do it in-house we have our own what I want to say skill guys that can go out and do this work and we do we have a lot of projects to be working on all the time but this one is really necessary and it's a good use of so would that cover all of the street lights throughout the city no no the the map that's included with your Taylor, John, O'Rourke, Dan, John, Uswine, Patrick, and 70, 70 of them.
And we're getting 20,000 from ComEd and IDOT?
Yeah, we'll get approximately 20,000 from ComEd, and then I think IDOT's a cost share depending on the cost of each intersection.
So the total project's around 40,000.
We should get a little over 20,000 from ComEd.
If we can complete by June, there's a little bit of a, they call it a kickstart bonus.
And then we can cost share the rest through our IDOT maintenance agreement so our public work staff will keep track of their time and materials and we'll be able to bill that out to IDOT.
Each intersection in Freeport, so these are the lights that are on top of the traffic signals.
Each one of them in town has a different cost center so one intersection might be 30%, the next one might be 50 and the next one might be 100.
We have an Excel spreadsheet that shows that so we can take our hours and let's say just for simple math we had $100 to put this intersection in or $1,000 and it's a 30% so we can bill them $300 of our time and we get to mark our time up like we're a contractor so it's a good benefit to us Okay so how much is this going to cost the city?
It will be less than $10,000 I can't gauge that until we have the time to put it up but we'll get 20 from comments and we should be able to bill out of the remaining 20 at least 10 if not 15 tied up.
And this is coming out our original this 10 or less is coming out our original streetlight fund?
That was the plan in the budget.
It's the plan.
Alderman Sanders?
Yeah do we have the manpower to get this in at a time period where we do not have have to pay for any additional costs because of late installments.
We do, I talked to the Public Works Superintendent, the Street Superintendent, and he said that they'll make time to get it done.
Even if we went into overtime ranges to get it done, we can build the overtime out because our guys don't make the same as what union contractors do, so we'll be able to build that out just like we normally would in our wages.
Also.
And others.
Speaking with him, we are a little short staffed at the moment.
We had a couple turnover positions, but he's committed to get the resources to get it done to get the grant because we don't have another way to pay for the lights.
And we are, we were, we're spending more than $10,000 a year trying to fix these lights with parts and pieces that are just not acceptable anymore.
These are, these are, they're called seven-pin lights, so they unbolt.
You shut the electric down, you unbolt them, you slide them on, bolt them Backup, Test Power.
It's a relatively simple process outside of traffic control and our equipment which is the bucket truck that we already own.
Okay, thanks.
Alderman Stacey.
Director Darin, I am a little concerned using our street light money on that project because of the amount of areas we still need to fix.
And there's money available for our streetlights and polls where there's not money available for our streetlights.
Am I making sense?
I think I understand what you're saying.
I think you're talking about more money for exchanging more crime-ridden area lights, right?
Yes.
Yeah.
But there's no funding out there for us with that.
No.
And is there some more funding we can go after for?
We can reapply next year for the Select Communities grant.
This is the select or whatever the heck they're calling it this day.
That is what this grant is.
That's the $20,000 that's coming from ComEd for it.
We can continue on the light exchanges, but as I told you before, those are gonna be roughly about $400 a piece installed, and we can order as many of them as we want as council approves, it's just we have to find a funding source for that if we're gonna continue to do it.
Exactly.
Yep.
So do we have to do all 70 of them at once?
So the issue is we applied for them all at once to make it advantageous for ComEd to help us fund it.
And we're having issues on most of the lights.
And if you went around town right now and you looked in the IDOT corridors, the lights that are up there are not the right size wattage right now because we just tried to fill them in with something that we had on hand because we couldn't afford to go buy the new light replacements.
So I would say at this time, we're not going to get a better deal to do this in the future.
These lights should last per their warranty at least 10 years of life so it's a longevity and it will help us in the future because we'll have less maintenance cost in the IDOT corridors because they actually pay us annually to maintain these as part of our it's about two hundred and thirty eight thousand dollars we get from them okay so long as the rest of the council understand that ten thousand of that money for those who wanted more than 5th Ward, 10,000 of that kitty is going to have to go to this project which is going to limit what we could do for the rest of the year.
Yeah I you guys get to decide what you want to do I was just stating that when Rob and I and the Street Department worked on the budget we had set 10,000 in that budget for and others who are involved in this project because we knew that we're having a tough time repairing them with public works.
Even just getting the materials anymore is difficult.
Any other discussion?
Alderman, Sellers.
So we're getting $20,000 from ComEd, correct?
Yes ma'am.
And then we just have to put the 10 with it to take care of.
And then IDOT is given what?
We reimburse us.
So again, my example is if we had $1,000 for a four-legged intersection to change the lights, depending on the intersection, because every one of them has a different reimbursement amount, some of them are 30%, some of them are 50, some of them are 70, it depends, we can bill them for the city's time and material, just like we are a contractor to get that additional $20,000.
It might get down to $5,000 by the time we're done.
I just, I can't predict how much it's going to take to get it done.
Remember, these are in I-DOT corridors, so we have to have full traffic control.
So we're gonna have to have four to five guys out doing these to get them replaced.
There's no further discussion.
Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Is absent.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
Aye.
And Parker?
Aye.
Fowler.
Item number 23 is the Adaption of Resolution 2025-38.
Could you please read this?
Resolution authorizing a letter of commitment to the Interstate Renewable Energy Council to become a charging smart designated community.
Darren?
Yeah.
So we were contacted last month by Region 1 out of Rockford.
Taylor, a community development resource, and they asked us if the City of Freeport was interested in becoming a Charging Smart designated community.
The program is 100% funded by the U. S. Department of Energy.
Charging Smart is committed to transforming the transportation system in ways that positively benefit the environment, the economy, through access to charging infrastructure.
The discussion is they're asking us to be part of the program there is no financials for it their team will help us develop codes ordinances and technical assistance on providing charging areas to the city of Freeport whether it be city of Freeport or private development they'll even help us with code resources for homes something that we've talked about at the council level most of these charging units that are in people's homes are the equivalent and a couple of other things.
So, I'm going to go into four households, so it could put quite a strain on our network of infrastructure as they come on.
We all know that the state and federal governments are pushing them with rebates, and so eventually we will see more.
There's another item on here talking about EV chargers.
This one particularly is just helping us establish codes and ordinances and some baseline for of the City of Freeport because while if we become charge smart or not, we're still gonna have people that wanna have charged cars in this community that we're gonna have to deal with and right now we really don't have anything on the books for it.
So again, there's no financial and we're recommending that this would be the time that we would move forward being part of this.
The only investment is staff time to help work with them to get the codes and ordinances in place that would come to you guys for final approval.
Is there a motion to adopt?
So moved.
Second.
A motion made by Alderman Seller, seconded by Alderman Shadle.
Discussion on the resolution, Alderman Monroe?
No it's, thank you Darren.
You know, I think the question I've got is as we scroll down to item number 27, resolution approving agreement with Fehr Graham to provide civil engineering services related to EV charging station, there actually are charges associated with where we're going with this, is that is there any key hours butterflies specially just with BlueD arrival?
Are you talking too salty hay?
There's grants with that and if we move forward 27, I don't want to skip too far ahead but those will be paid for charging.
They won't be free chargers, but these are just establishing the best practices to be a charging community.
Director Duckman?
I did want to add too because I was put in the email chain with Region 1.
Because they're both talking about charging.
They look similar.
They could be connected, but honestly what happened was is Isaac Guerrero is their Community Development Director and Services Director in Region 1.
He reached out to us and said, hey, this is an opportunity.
We're reaching out to all communities looking for support to become a charge smart community and then that would help us down the road.
If we wanted to apply for grants, they would essentially help.
We'd essentially be getting their help down the road.
So while they look similar, they are, they are different items.
Thank you.
Mr. Sanders?
You know, I'm looking at, I was looking at this and I, I had a time, I had a chance to kind of like evaluate what this, what this is talking about and I understand you'd like to change them out, do away with them because they're not available parts and things of this nature.
Have we decided, am I on the wrong subject?
This is not- We didn't move to 23, honey.
Oh, 23.
Okay.
I was in the manager room.
Okay.
Sorry about that.
Yes.
Okay.
Okay, so, I understand that this is 0% funded, no financials currently, but as codes and updates come and is needed, I mean we could get it free this year and next year it costs us ten thousand dollars to upgrade everything to be active and powerful.
Not in this program it would not cost us anything and there would be no required updates to the solar ordinances unless the council felt that that was necessary.
This is just We're just trying to make sure that we get some guidance and some expertise helping us make sure that we're doing the right codes and ordinances originally to get this section set up.
Most communities don't have charging codes or ordinances established, so they're trying to help communities.
That's why it's funded by the Department of Energy.
But it won't ever cost us anything?
Should not.
Nope.
And if it would come back to where it would cost money, we could opt out of it at that point, but the only time when I talked to them and we had meetings, the only thing is the investment of our time to work with them.
That's it.
What is the demand?
How great of a demand is it here in Freeport with electric cars?
So I don't have a ton of experience with it but I do know that we get calls frequently if not weekly for people looking for places to charge.
I believe right now there's one or two spots in Freeport that they can charge which is I believe at the Ford dealership and at the Chevy dealership.
Those are the only two that I'm aware of right now.
There's probably some people that have EV cars that may or may not have a charger in their house already that you know we wouldn't be aware of because we don't have any ordinance that says they have to tell us.
Thomas.
Can we move this to the COW until we find out more information pertaining to how many people or the number, the need?
Certainly can move it to the COW.
I just don't know how I'll be able to answer that question.
Even then?
I don't know how to give you the resource.
I can't tell you what the demand is but but because the demand really comes with 27 this is just about establishing codes and ordinances we know that people in the community have chargers already because there's hybrid cars out there that would require them so we already know people have chargers in town we just don't have the option for people to charge in our community as a as an asset like a gas station or something else like that we don't have that ability currently.
Allen, Klemm Yes, I was at an event Saturday night and a guy came up to me and talked to me about this and he said, keep one thing in mind when you are talking about chargers in the City of Freeport.
You aren't talking about chargers for the people that got electric cars here.
Every one of them has got one in their house.
You are talking about people that are traveling, like you want them to go through.
I know as We move down here, we talk about them being in the city lot or around, but it's an asset for people traveling between point A and point B.
It's not necessarily totally used by the people here because they've got them in their houses.
You're accurate.
Alderman Sellers.
So this is something that's just, it's free, but it's just getting us prepared for having it.
Okay.
So if there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take your vote.
Stacy?
I'm reluctant because I don't know enough about this, but.
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
No.
Simmons?
Aye.
Parker?
Aye.
Resolution is adopted 6-2.
Item number 24 is the adoption of resolution 2025-39.
Could you please read this?
Resolution approving the purchase of fire hydrants from J&R Supply.
Derren?
Yes.
Annually we do fire hydrant replacements within the City of Freeport.
We were wanting to buy 12 hydrants this year, but we went back through the budget and we don't have the money to buy 12 this year, so in the budget we're looking to buy five replacements.
Kurt, if you wouldn't mind bringing that back up, when would you get the light for me please.
So this is a map that I wanted to show you guys just quickly.
This is hydrants within the city of Freeport that currently the red ones which there's only two currently don't work.
There's, sorry I'm struggling to read that, there's the beige color that.
Kurt can you zoom into that a little bit?
The beige color ones are ones that are currently ones that need to be replaced and then the yellow ones are ones that have four inch branches so in the fire stance if they don't have a steamer port a fire engine can't hooked up to them for the yellow ones there so as you can see they're spread all over the community it's not one resources so the city has an annual program that we go out and try to fix and replace on and I have our own because it's much more cost prohibitive.
I believe, I don't have the memo pulled up, but I believe we have 87 fire hydrants currently that are older than 1960.
And I believe we have around 47 of them that are still from 1930 era.
So those don't have steamer nozzles.
So like I said, our crews are pretty efficient about putting them in, but we did look through the budget and we only had enough budget for 50,000 this year.
So that's the proposals in front of you.
Kennedy Hydrant is our preferred manufacturer for the City of Freeport for hydrant replacements.
And we're asking for approval of this so we can get the materials on hand for summer construction.
Is there a motion to adopt?
So moved.
The motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Shadle.
Any discussion on the resolution?
Orrin, Sanders.
Do we still have the flushing program going on?
Yes.
And that's during a particular part of the year that we do that or is that all seasonal?
Spring and fall.
And are we making discoveries of those conditions of those hydrants at that time?
Yep.
And we're taking an assessment of what's needed to be done.
Are any of those those hydrants that that is being mapped out up there could they be rehabbed no they're they're not 200 hydrants that are shown up there are are too old they're 1960 area they don't they don't make the parts anymore okay I I see what you're saying okay thanks there's no further discussion and clerk please take the role Stacey aye Shadle aye Sanders aye Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
Aye.
And Parker?
Aye.
The resolution is adopted, 8-0.
Item number 25 is the adoption of resolution 2025-40.
Could you please read this?
Resolution approving a proposal from OEC for repairs and upgrades to the Albertus Airport fuel station payment system.
Thank you, Manager Boyer.
Thank you, Your Honor.
So the city-owned Albertus Airport has been have been experiencing issues with our credit card fuel payment system.
The system has been attempted to be fixed several times, but it's basically antiquated and requires upgrading.
The airport clients have complained about not being able to purchase fuel as the system cuts out routinely and the current system was last upgraded in 2015-16.
So the airport manager, Angie, has been working with vendors on the update replacement and and we're working with OEC on resolving the fuel system payment issues.
Angie selected the proposed system upgrade to match the public works fuel system currently at use on Island Avenue.
The airport system will be cellular cloud-based instead of the phone line that is currently there, and the fuel master and OEC state that this will be a more secure system for payments and transactions.
Additionally, the cellular system will not have the lag in information that is creating all the payment issues for the fuel purchasing.
So the total cost of the upgrade is $14,954 and the Fuel Master software will have a reoccurring software update fee of $1,400 annually.
So this contract is budgeted in the 2025 airport budget and Staff Request Council approved this contract for the payment equipment.
Is there a motion to adopt?
Motion to adopt.
So, second.
Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Klemm.
Discussion on the resolution, Alderman Stacy.
Wasn't this budgeted like in 23 for this?
No, I don't think so.
It was budgeted in 24.
It was budgeted in the There's a budget in this year's budget.
I think you're mistaken the fuel upgrade down at the city yards, which is just about ready to start.
That's the fuel master system or the fuel upgrades that we used to all of the city employees and public work staff.
Police fire, get their fuel from this is specifically at the airport.
OK.
There's no further discussion.
Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
And Parker?
Aye.
Resolution is adopted 7 to 1.
Item number 26 is the adoption of resolution 2025-41.
Could you please read this?
Resolution approving agreement with Fehr Graham to provide civil engineering services related to Water and Sewer Equipment Rehabilitation and Electrical Upgrades at Laurel Lift Station, Galena Lift Station, and Well Number 8.
Thank you, Manager Boyer.
Thank you, Your Honor.
The City of Freeport is planning utility upgrade projects for 25.
The Laurel Lift Station and Galena Lift Stations were originally built in 67.
While the building facilities are in acceptable shape for their age, the old equipment is failing due to lack of availability of parts and beyond its useful life.
And So electrical systems are outdated, unsafe, and in need of updates.
Additionally, the City utility needs to have automatic power generation at lift stations per IEP requirements for redundancy within the permitted sanitary sewer system.
Furthermore, the water production well 8, so that's Carroll, in the low zone requires generator backup as part of the water capacity redundancy plan and efforts.
So city staff proposes utilizing the existing building enclosures, wet well, dry vaults, infrastructure to fully replace the pumping system equipment, electrical controls, and repair the building interiors.
Fehr Graham Design Team will provide plans and specifications for the completed rehabilitation of the existing lift stations including a new pump, new pumping system, full control panel, SCADA ready so that's the over-the-air computer control system, and level transducers, backup floats, alarms, lights, electrical systems, and startup training.
Additionally, a backup generator and automatic transfer switch will be sized and specified for both lift stations and for well number eight at the Carroll Water Tank.
These projects will be designed specifically and bid in one package so the work is consistent.
And the synergy of the bid pricing will give us a little bit better pricing.
So overall, the cost of this additional design work will be $125,000 and $25.
And the city staff recommends moving forward.
Just as a side note, this was budgeted in the 2025 utility budget.
Is there a motion to adopt?
So moved.
Second.
James, was that you?
Motion made by Alderman Monroe, seconded by Alderman Sellers.
Alderman Shadle, did you have a question?
Sanders, I'm sorry.
Yeah.
I'm sorry.
I do not look like this guy.
Anyway, anyway, question is about the pumps.
Are we, I know at any point in time it can be an emergency situation because of the seasonal time and the rainy period times and things like that when these stations really can break down on you and things of that nature.
But did I hear you say something about additional generators at certain, do we have generators in place at these facilities at this point in time?
No.
Okay, so it is an emergency situation.
Right.
Because the reason why I'm saying that, I know the people over there by Laurel and other places with these wells and things of this nature have been experiencing some serious backup problems because of breakdowns and things of this nature.
And who is doing the overall work for these types of projects?
Who is scheduled to set up the computers, the electrical and where we're buying our pumps and things of this nature?
We have all of these things lined up ready to go like yesterday.
We should have all of this ready to go like yesterday already.
Ready.
But I'm just saying this simply because this is the season for this.
And I like to know that we're on top of it.
We're actually going to be, we got all our team players ready to go to replace these parts and replace these pumps and things of this nature.
So if that That is the case, who is the overseer, the people that's going to be monitoring the installation of these water pumps?
Just to address what you're saying, we need to get the plan together first and that's what this is.
Okay, this is get the plan together, figure out the scope of work, get the generator size, get everything lined up, and then we'll move forward with a bid, with a contractor, with a plan that everything's already been thought out, but this is basically one of the issues Fries, as you noted, is we have a lot of remote sites in the system.
We only have one portable generator.
There's a few sites that have back up generator, but only like Berchard or Field Circle and maybe a couple other lift stations.
But the rest of them, you have to drive all the way around the city with this generator in the middle of an emergency because you have no power.
So we're trying to very systematically go through, update all these remote sites and ensure that they have their own backup capacity if they need it.
Can we have a planning operation?
Yes, that's what this is.
That's what this resolution is.
And we will hear about this next meeting.
Well, when we get the design together, we'll go out to bid on that.
We get this design and everything, because it's an emergency.
Some people may not think it, but whenever a breakdown breaks down, you at the mercy of almighty you know that kind of thing right you don't want to be solving your problem yeah yeah exactly all right there's no further discussion madam clerk please take the role Stacy Shadle Sanders Sellers I Klemm Monroe I Simmons Parker I the resolution is adopted 8-0.
Item number 27 is the adoption of resolution 2025-42, could you please read this?
Resolution approving an agreement with Fehr Graham to provide civil engineering services related to EV charging station installation project.
Manager Boyer.
Thank you, your honor.
So the city is receiving $320,000 in 2025 for EV charger grant funding through the Illinois EPA Climate and Equitable Jobs Act program.
And also incorporated EV chargers in two locations, the municipal lot and the southwest corner of the, I'm sorry, it would not be the southwest corner, it would be the Lindo lot.
Each location is planned to have four chargers.
Additionally, comments, grants now available for the interconnect for each location for which Freeport will qualify up to $240,000.
Each interconnect installed on each interconnect's installation.
These grant opportunities are good only through 2025.
So the City needs to design and bid the EV Charger installations and site for this project.
Fehr Graham will complete the detailed reconnaissance of the two EV Charger locations and collect TAPO survey on each site.
This information will be used to create a full civil site layout plan as well as develop proposed electrical drawings.
The Charger selection, specification, and station layout will be Coordinated between Fehr Graham and Thayer Energy Solutions and the selected local EV supplier.
The engineering firm will coordinate the layout and proposed EV charging station utility interconnect with ComEd and lead the efforts on the grant initiatives for connections.
The Fehr Graham team will provide contract bid documents and project specifications for a bid letting project in accordance with the City of Freeport and state requirements.
The cost of these services This is $90,730.
This Charger Project was budgeted in the 2025 year budget and staff recommends moving forward with the EV Charger Design program.
Is there a motion to adopt?
So moved.
Was that Klemm?
Yeah, I moved to move it forward.
I was just trying to guess it happened too quickly it was it was okay all right so we have a motion made by Alderman Shadle seconded by Alderman Klemm discussion on this resolution Darren I just want to clarify one thing so the by the time the memos were due I wasn't able to change this but while the memo says the southwest corner of Walmart I had a discussion with the funding manager Manager.
Funding manager for the project from the state and we have to stick with our original selections because that's what they approved which were the municipal lot downtown and also we call it the Linda lot but it's the lot of state in Maine those were the two areas that were selected because ComEd power has has the juice required to run these chargers and the what Freeport has selected is level and three chargers so we can have people come in and charge quickly, maybe get a bite to eat and be ready to go or shop downtown or something like that.
That was the intent of this program and they also required and this was per the requirement of the grantee that you have to put at least four up per bank and they have to be ADA accessible.
Alderman, Monroe, Just making one comment, actually those might be better locations at this time just because we already have several at Freeport Ford which I think are the only ones in the county, is that, I think Bakers has one now too, does Bakers have one now too, oh yeah, two, if there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the roll, Stacy, Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
Parker?
Aye.
The resolution is adopted 8 to 0.
Item number 28 is the adoption of resolution 2025-43.
Could you please read this?
Resolution approving Illinois Department of Transportation resolution for the 2025 motor fuel tax or Mayor, MFT, HotMix Asphalt Materials.
Thank you.
Darren?
Yeah, this is annually we get an allotment from IDOT through the Motor Fuel Tax Fund.
The last couple years we've chose to use that money to buy HotMix for our crews.
This is how we are paving streets.
Last year we did about , I believe about 16,000 tons.
We did the calculations for this year and it's about 14,500 tons.
In order for us to go out to bid, we have to pass this resolution through the Council.
So we have a resolution number for IDOT.
This will be paid for with the IDOT money that we receive in 2025.
So it's our recommendation for Council to approve this so we can get it out to bid tomorrow.
So move.
Thank you.
Is there a motion to adopt?
Sellers in.
All right.
We have a motion moved by Alderman Seller, seconded by Alderman Monroe.
On this resolution.
Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Sellers?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
Aye.
Parker?
Aye.
The resolution is adopted, 8-0.
And for item number 29, could you please read the approval of a bid?
A bid opening was held on March 18th, 2025 for lead service line replacement, Phase 4.
Thank you, Manager Boyer.
Thank you, Your Honor.
The City of Freeport has been working on reducing and eliminating lead water service lines for nearly five and a half years and that came through about $12 million in forgivable loan funds through the EPA.
The City has estimated that we started with about 2,300 lead services in the system and we have currently replaced more than 1,350 services to date with IEPA loans and received $9 million so far in funding.
Thanks to the help of our engineer for Graham the lead service line program phase four has secured an additional three million twenty seven thousand dollars in EPA forgivable loan funds for this phase bringing the total to twelve million dollars on March 18 2025 the city held a bid opening for the lead service line replacement program phase four the engineer has several seven contractors pull plans and specifications five contractors submitted final bids Woods, and Five Star Energy Services LLC out of Waukesha, Wisconsin was a little better at $19,731 per base bid.
The total contract project award for this phase will be $2,525,000 for service equipment, I'm sorry, for service replacements.
The additional funds will reimburse for the city for design and required construction engineering per IEPA rules.
Five Star Energy is the current construction contractor on Phase 3, which has approximately $400,000 of work remaining and the city plans to fund the $3 million project with 100% IEPA forgivable loan funding and no cost to the users and this project was accounted for in 2025 and will be accounted for in the 2026 budget.
This is a reimbursable funded project.
So staff recommends City Council approve the low bid from Five Star Energy Services, LLC in the amount of $2,525,000, allowing the project to proceed to construction and once we receive the IEPA concurrence.
Motion to approve as stated.
Second.
Motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Sellers, discussion on the bid.
Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Stacy, Shadle, Sanders, Sellers, Klemm, Monroe, Simmons, and Parker.
The motion passes 8-0.
Item number 30, could you please read the next bid?
Another bid opening was held on March 21, 2025 for installation of video cameras in public transportation vehicles for Pretzel City Transit.
Thank you Madam Mayor I want to take a minute again to thank Sadie Grande for doing a great job on this project because actually the city was awarded this grant money back in 2022 and we've been working tirelessly with the state back and forth and finally we were able to put this out to bid again and so the city held a bid opening on February 9th of 2025 I'm sorry it was published on February 9th and the bid opening was actually held on March 21st at 10 AM And essentially what this bid opening for is to put security cameras on our pretzel city area transit buses so staff received total of five bids two of them were disqualified and reason you would have a disqualifying bid is that Anytime you have a bid opening Occasionally if you need to change language Or specifications before the bid opening you have to have an addendum signed saying you receive the addendum Proof of insurance is another there's different items in a bid package that if you don't supply it at the bid opening your bids Disqualified which is common practice for any bid opening so staff provided a matrix of the results of the bid opening and The lowest responsible bidder was Angel Tracks Cox, they had a bid of $36,000, a little over $36,000.
They also provided a few options and the options were to add cameras at the front of the bus as well as also having a wireless access point in their parking lot.
That added another $4,600.
That kept them still as the lowest responsible bidder at $41,000 and staff is recommending Moving Forward with Angel Tracks for this project.
Is there a motion to approve?
So move.
Second.
A motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle.
Discussion on the bid.
Alderman Sanders.
Well, this is not directly a discussion on the bid.
The bid is.
Wait a minute.
So that.
Yeah, it's part of a.
So it's about the.
Yeah, it's part of the bid.
Okay, it's going to be about the bid, right?
Installing cameras in the bid, right?
Yeah, that's what I'm about to talk about.
Okay, alright.
Y'all trying to second-guess me.
I don't like that.
But you stated it yourself all day.
Well, I may have said it like that, but I didn't mean it like that.
But anyway, the cameras will provide security part of the bidding.
It's part of the bid and others.
We also have the bid that the cameras are going to be also subject to security for the transportation vehicles when they're at the company or whatever the case is.
We also would have that available for possible vandalism or something of that nature.
Cameras would be installed for those purposes as well.
Yes.
That's part of the bid, am I correct?
These are security cameras for vandalism, inappropriate behavior, et cetera.
See, I told you, man.
Okay.
Any other discussion?
Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Sellers?
Aye.
Plem?
Aye.
Monroe?
Aye.
Simmons?
Aye.
And Parker?
Aye.
The motion is approved, eight to zero.
Item number 31 is discussion and possible adoption of resolution 2025-32.
Could you please read this?
The resolution, if adopted, is terminating a contract with Nordic for residential and small business electrical aggregation.
Manager Boyer.
Thank you, Your Honor.
I kind of were behind a little bit on this one.
Apparently Nordic has already, Exter's Day have already canceled this agreement.
So the residents that are on the citywide aggregation program will be transferred back to ComEd so there's really no action to take tonight on this.
Do you know how soon that will happen?
My guess would be very shortly within the next month.
Alderman Sanders.
About to ask you, I'm about to ask you, okay, just getting my thought process in place.
Nordic is canceling.
Yes.
There's no other suppliers that the customers, the city of Freeport can have in adopt, as opposed to commit.
Are there other suppliers that will be available to the residents of Freeport.
Well, not at the moment, but we're going to re-bid this thing, if it's council's will to do so, and then we'll have some other options.
But not right this minute, no.
OK, we'll move on to item number 32, which is discussion regarding the structure fire of the storage building on East Stephenson.
Deputy Chief.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
It's been a few weeks since the fire occurred, but we wanted to give you a report on the actions of that evening so that you guys were in the loop on it.
On Saturday afternoon, March 22nd, at approximately 4:16 PM, units from the Freeport Fire Department were dispatched for a grass fire that was reported to be located at 607 E. Stephenson Street here in Freeport.
Arrival first in crews located fire in a lot located on the west side of the 100 block of South Sherman located directly to the south of a church that was located there initial size up revealed the grass fire had spread from a fire pit and was increasing in both size and intensity and was now involving a nearby structure this structure was located at 525 East Stephenson Street at At 4:28 PM, it was confirmed that a working structure fire was present in the rear of a 450-foot-long structure located there.
Fire suppression efforts were established, however, due to the growing intensity of the fire and its path of travel, location, and accessibility.
Off-duty personnel were immediately recalled to the scene to assist with additional manpower and equipment needs.
Despite all initial efforts, the fire within the rear of the first involved structure advanced westward into the rear of the second and much larger structure, also located at 525 East Stephenson.
This was determined to be the main building of the complex.
At 5:06 PM a Mavis division box alarm, that's an all call for area departments around us, was placed through City Dispatch requesting additional resources of manpower and apparatus to the scene from surrounding communities.
And others who specifically requested were an additional ladder tower and pumper water tankers from 10 area departments that would assist with supplying water to the elevated master streams and hose lines that were deployed in various locations to battle this fire.
Firefighting efforts continued throughout the rest of the evening and into Sunday morning, and by 2 AM an excavator from Fisher Excavating arrived on scene and was utilized to gain safe access throughout the main structure, thus assisting our crews with overhaul and final extinguishment efforts.
These efforts were completed by 3:30 AM and all units had cleared the scene by 4:30 AM factors that our command staff and personnel were called to deal with at this large scale event included a rapidly developing fire conditions dealing with differing types of building construction in in several structure with large footprints the condition of those structures proximity and accessibility issues positioning fire apparatus and personnel around the Structure, there was a lot of overgrowth and stuff surrounding the property, ensuring protection for all the nearby structures, accountability for all unseen personnel, not just ours but also those that were attending and making sure that they had instructions based upon safe operations.
Establishing traffic control along Stephenson Street and Henderson Road, or a lot of people that wanted to see what was going on.
And of course that was flooding into our operations as we were trying to put down water supply lines.
Securing of utilities, we needed to come in to secure this facility from electric while we did our operations.
And assessing our water systems capabilities versus the amount that would be required for extinguishment.
As well as logistical issues related to establishing tanker supplied water operations.
We don't do, because we have a hydrant in the city, we don't do as much with water tankers and everything, but we do train annually with these groups and that proved helpful in us keeping this up.
We have large master stream devices like water towers and stuff.
They can flow 2000 gallons a minute and the hydrants in that area are not substantial to meet the needs of three different water towers that are all flowing at once.
If you were to imagine if we had a bottle of pop here and we put six straws in it, it's not going to last very long.
And I have been in the Department of Transportation for a long time.
We've had to deal with the same thing, which is why we had to have additional water supplied to us from other departments with their tankers.
We had to deal with the potential need to refill apparatus on scene due to the length of the incident, also the feeding and rehabbing of the personnel that and others.
The fire was a major fire that took apart the structure so fire overhaul and extinguishment of the fire could occur.
In entirety, this event spanned, like I said, 13 hours.
It involved nearly 120 individuals and required roughly 2.3 million gallons of water to achieve final extinguishment.
It's an estimate based upon calculations of what we know that the equipment there could flow.
During the course of this event, three firefighters sustained minor injuries.
All were assessed by on-scene EMS, and were determined not to require transport.
And that is our report on that fire.
Thank you.
And I'm guessing we're going to move on to the department head reports.
Finance?
Nothing, Your Honor.
Thank you.
Community Development.
Nothing tonight, Madam Mayor.
Thank you.
Public Works.
Nothing.
Fire.
Do you have more?
No.
Police?
Just real quick last year the council approved the purchase of new body-worn cameras and when I presented that memo I said that I was gonna apply for a grant so I applied for a federal small rural tribal grant and it was about a month ago or so we received about $25,000 towards that purchase so thank you for and Mr. Miller.
Thank you.
Okay.
Then we will move on to City Manager Report.
No report tonight.
I'm sorry, Kurt.
No.
And given the time, I'm going to pass on mine as well.
Alderman Stacy?
No.
Alderman Shadle?
Nothing to that.
Alderman Sander?
Alderman Sanders Yeah, I would like to make a comment since I didn't get a chance to make it earlier.
I just wanted to bring it to our attention.
I want counsel to know it as well because there was a violation with one of the ordinances had to do with our residency ordinances.
And the fact that it was a violation, and it took effect, it was played out anyway, and nobody is held accountable for the violation of this ordinance.
And I wanted to visit that to get clarity with that since it had been brought to our attention.
But I wanted the public to know that there was an ordinance violation and we need to adhere to that and take another look at it.
I don't know if we put it on the agenda for the next time, but the fact of the matter is, it is something that needs to be looked into.
That needs to be looked into and I think me addressing it now will give it will give everybody an opportunity to look into the matter because the resident see problem shouldn't never happen first of all because there was an ordinance in place and if that ordinance is in place we got to be held accountable for that ordinance and not violate that ordinance and that's what I wanted to bring to the Attention.
Alderman Sellers?
No, nothing.
Alderman Klemm?
I'd just like to publicly thank all the personnel that worked on putting out the fire on the east side.
As the Chief mentioned, you know, there was, as the Chief mentioned, there were about 125 people involved and, and Rob and I had a meeting next Tuesday in with the Chief, Chief Miller, and really got some good insight in everything.
But you know, the things that you forget on all this stuff is what the police department did, what Public Works did, what the street department did in closing these off, and to place off.
And like he mentioned, one of the big hazards were the people that were coming over to look at it.
And there's one example, and fortunately we don't have a lot of them here, but there's Here is one example of a large building that was built years ago that had everything in the world stored into it and everybody kind of forgets about it until somebody does a dumb move.
But thank you guys for all the work that you did.
We appreciate it.
Alderman Monroe?
Nothing to nightmare.
Alderman Simmons?
Yeah, I just want to second what Klemm said.
I was going to say that, too.
It was amazing watching all of y'all fight that fire and put it out.
So thank you for that.
And also, thank you for being here.
I want to say that too, it was amazing watching all y'all fight that fire and put it out so thank you for that and also thank you for clarifying why you didn't use the fire hydrants right there on Stephenson Street because that caused a lot of confusion so thank you for that.
Alderman Parker?
Nothing to thank your honor.
Public comment, is there anyone for public comment?
Good evening, city officials.
I was home sick, but I couldn't sit in front of YouTube and listen to what was going on down here.
One of the first things I'd like to talk about is this situation with residency.
Some of you know that I've been talking about residency in Freeport for years.
I have an issue with with individuals working here, getting paid by us, and taking their dollars someplace else.
Tax dollars, property taxes, so forth and so on.
But I also have another issue in talking to with anybody else that comes into this city should be living in the city and their tax dollars, property tax dollars, should be coming back within this community.
That's the one thing I want to talk about.
The other thing is on the east side, I was over there during that fire and yeah, they did a wonderful job, but nobody's talking about the hydrants that have been removed from over there.
I know of two that have been taken out.
We also know that there had to be additional waters brought in because hydrants weren't and the other side of town where the hydrants weren't working.
Are you going to put them on the other side of town where they've been taken out?
There's no fire hydrants in front of Bucky's shop anymore.
There's no fire hydrant in front of Taylor Park school anymore.
They've been removed.
As far as the situation with the As far as the situation with the private road, I want to make it very clear to everybody sitting in this audience and everybody that's listening to my voice.
That private road has been a private road forever.
But for 30 years, we thought it was a part of the city.
So we've been maintaining, we've been plowing, we've been doing all of this stuff for 30 years on a road that is not a part of our city, that is a private road.
And now we're being asked to contribute, not with our money, but with theirs.
The fact of the matter is, we couldn't ride down that road.
We couldn't drive our cars through there because it's a private road that we've been maintaining.
So let's tell the truth and shame the devil, because we've been maintaining that road for 30 plus years thinking it was ours and it isn't.
It appears to me that everything that happens in this town, no offense to Aaron, but Graham has their fingers in it.
Your time has expired.
Thank you.
Pardon me?
Nobody else is speaking.
Appreciate you.
Alright.
Is there any other public comment?
Yes.
Good evening.
I wanted to say thank you for the lights that were played.
Could you please state your name?
Could you please state your Altman, drove down Iroquois Street.
We have eight streetlights on the whole street of Iroquois.
Drove down Chicago in the four blacks and there are 60 streetlights.
And I can only assume why they're there, but we'll let that go.
Also, talking about driving vehicles, I have been to Lena Made Meats in Lena and saw the city trucks, public works truck up They're buying meat so that you guys can have a cookout.
Next, in your little pamphlet that you so gave out to the people, my renters, on the good side of town, but not on the east side of town.
They didn't get any of these little flyers, this little paper that you so sent out, but that's okay.
Because on here, you're tootin' your horn because you guys tore down 51 properties.
Right here in the paper.
But the worst problem is after I got thinking about this, then you comment that the city's gonna buy them on the tax sale.
It's all right here in black and white if you don't believe me.
The worst thing is you're gonna take taxpayers money to buy this stuff and then you're gonna put houses on it to compete against the taxpayers who have property here and who are landlords.
The second thing is why am I paying taxes on my electric and gas bill for the city?
What am I getting for that?
I don't see anything, no roads, no nothing.
And we're talking about the buses.
You guys get grant money for these buses, but what do you do with the money when you sell them?
No answer there either, I guess.
My other thing was, your opponent that ran against you, you said that he was funded by slumlords.
So in other words, you're calling anybody in here that's a landlord that funded him and voted for him a slob lord.
Please take a look at yourselves, because you guys own the Raleigh Building.
Wasn't it four or five years ago that we had to shut Liberty Street down because the bricks were falling?
I was told by one of Wayne's employees, any houses that have a hole or window is broke will be fast-tracked.
So why is the Raleigh building not fast-tracked, that you go up and down those alleys, there's thousands and thousands of broken windows, glass all over, and trees growing through it and the roof caving in.
But that Raleigh building sits there and that's more of a hazard than anything in this Freeport.
So, you know, I appreciate you calling the people of Slumlord.
That shows you how much you really care for the people of Freeport.
How are you doing?
I'm Mekia Sanders.
I just want to say thank you, James, for always sticking up for what you truly, truly believe in for the people.
And I don't like the fact that you guys took a lot of credit for Cecelia and Stacy fighting for those lights.
I mean, I seen the Chief on there, you took a little bit of credit, but nobody applauded Cecelia for bringing it and actually getting it done and standing on what she believed in as well.
Then I want to say something about that residency.
The part that bothers me is that people are here that don't care, don't know people, like he said.
And then the fact that you guys hired Wayne Duckman, for a matter of, I truly don't know where he is, you know, I ain't trying to offend him with that.
But he came here and he walked you right into a lawsuit.
Somebody is still going to pay me for what he did and use his poor judgment, disrespected the council, not brought the matter that spend city money on a property that he tore down.
Then he asked y'all to pay for it after the fact that it was already done.
And for that I mean I truly don't know why he leaving but You kno- I really don't know why he leaving, but, you know, all of a sudden you leaving now, but that's a great thing, because you really are tearing everybody up in Freeport, and Rob Boyer, I don't know why you just keep cooling them for that, you either, you spoke on it, y'all tearing people homes up, y'all tearing down the history of Freeport, everywhere, and don't care about nobody here, and then the fact that, let's speak on how y'all don't never follow y'all rules, I wouldn't want to live here either, y'all are a mess up here, more than half of you, Nobody knows what they doing, dude sitting next to you.
He don't never do his job until somebody calls him out and actually look him in the eye and tell him, hey, what's this mean, what's this mean?
Robert's rules have been violated on this council since I've been here, since I've been coming here.
You can't ask for a city ordinance to be followed if y'all ain't following them.
Are there any other public comments?
Hi, my name is Micaiah Stacy.
I just want to ask the council for a little bit more respect.
Just recently, when Akia was talking, I watched Joy Sellers pick up her phone and I watched Gregory Shadle, who has his phone in his hand right now, as I do, pick up his phone and scroll.
And I know a couple weeks ago, there was a comment made that I don't work for the and other people.
I'm just asking when we're talking, please listen.
I know you don't want to be here.
It's been, what, three and a half hours or whatever.
I've been up since 6 AM too.
I don't want to be here.
But in order for us to feel like we're being listened to and feel like we're respected, I ask that you give your undivided attention.
Thank you.
Engine.
Thank you.
Any other public comments?
And I will entertain a motion for adjournment.
So moved.
Second.
We have a motion by Alderman Seller, seconded by Alderman Shadle.
All those in favor?
Aye.
Have a good evening.