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 free poor 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 Stevenson 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 Stevenson, 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 Stevenson 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, Stevenson, 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 Stevenson 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.
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. 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 how many 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. 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 Clem 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 Stevenson 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. 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 Clem 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 a.m.
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 Stevenson.
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 416 p.m., units from the Freeport Fire Department
were dispatched for a grass fire that was reported to be located at 607 E. Stevenson
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 Stevenson Street at
At 4.28 p.m., 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 Stevenson.
This was determined to be the main building of the complex.
At 5.06 p.m. 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 a.m. 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 a.m. and all units had cleared the scene by 4.30 a.m.
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 Stevenson 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 Stevenson 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 a.m. 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.