WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:28.880
were agreed upon. The RFQ and the draft agreement are two different documents. They do not coincide. In fact, there are contradictions between both. There are requirements listed in the RFQ that do not appear in the draft agreement and vice versa. It is essential that the agreement you approve truly reflects what is intended and what is best for Alberta's airport's future, not just what you were told in a memo.

00:00:30.000 --> 00:01:06.190
Thank you. Thank you for listening. Ashley Howman? Ashley Howman, I'm here tonight to speak on item number nine. I'm here tonight on behalf of one of my owners and myself. I would first like to note that neither myself nor my owner was notified of a possible change to an ordinance in regarding the short-term rental and noting that I am the registered agent for the rental registry. Please note that you would have had to go to the Planning Commission agenda to know that there was a public hearing

00:01:06.190 --> 00:01:11.570
to discuss the changes being presented to you this evening. With that said, when it comes to short-term

00:01:11.570 --> 00:01:17.310
rentals, often called vacation rentals, everyone seems to become a real estate expert, quick to say

00:01:17.310 --> 00:01:22.750
that they destabilize neighborhoods or create problems. In reality, vacation rentals also serve

00:01:22.750 --> 00:01:29.710
important purposes. Corporations need them to use to house their employees. Families use them to test

00:01:29.710 --> 00:01:35.130
neighborhoods before buying. Individuals who are displaced from their home due to certain circumstances,

00:01:35.130 --> 00:02:05.130
services, traveling employment, such as the traveling nurses that work for FHN. These homes are typically well maintained because owners depend on good reviews and constant bookings. I am in the real estate business and I have firsthand acknowledge of vacation rentals, complementing housing markets rather than harming them. I personally own several and have stayed at numerous short-term rentals. They provide flexibility for property owners, support local tourism, and offer families and employees

00:02:05.130 --> 00:02:11.530
more housing choices throughout a city. Many of the issues often raised with these rentals, noise, property

00:02:11.530 --> 00:02:17.450
maintenance, nuisance activities are already addressed by city ordinance. The city has tools to

00:02:17.450 --> 00:02:21.970
address problems with these properties without stripping the rights of responsible owners.

00:02:22.350 --> 00:02:28.430
Instead of the current proposed changes and rezoning to only allow in certain districts and removing those

00:02:28.430 --> 00:02:34.910
rights, the city could cap the number of vacation rentals permitted in R1 through R4 zoning or require

00:02:34.910 --> 00:03:04.890
special use permits for all zoning areas. This would prevent over concentrations, avoid clusters of rentals on the east side of town based on the current proposal change, and create a balanced approach that respects neighborhood character and provides property rights. Other cities like Galena have successfully started with a cap and extended those permits because they were going well. The city of Rockford requires special use permits for all areas for short-term rentals no matter the zoning. The village of Cherry Valley

00:03:04.890 --> 00:03:11.050
Valley with only 2,300 people has a short-term rental ordinance with no zoning restrictions with many

00:03:11.050 --> 00:03:17.350
successes. Many of these areas have asked for support and guidance in the ordinance. Freeport has some

00:03:17.350 --> 00:03:22.590
opportunity to balance regulation that works for everyone. To strengthen the ordinance further, the

00:03:22.590 --> 00:03:28.330
city could add guardrails, tie guest limits to the bedroom counter square footage, require a local

00:03:28.330 --> 00:03:34.810
property manager if the owner is not nearby, limit on-site vehicles, or revoke permits. This approach

00:03:34.810 --> 00:03:41.210
creates accountability without overreach ensuring vacation rentals remain residential friendly while

00:03:41.210 --> 00:04:02.360
protecting the rights of Freeport homeowners. Thank you. John Staben. Thank you. John Staben, 1070 North Canyon

00:04:02.360 --> 00:04:10.780
Drive. I'm here to speak on item 16, the airport manager agreement. Thank you for this time. I was

00:04:10.780 --> 00:04:16.740
the fifth person interested in the airport manager position. I have fought for Alberta's airport for

00:04:16.740 --> 00:04:44.580
for years. When I found out Ms. Jensen was going to be removed, I thought I might be able to help. I looked for a notice that an RFP for the airport position was available. I found none. On April 30th, I went to the City Hall and requested the RFP, request for a proposal. I received the RFQ, request for quotation, on August 13th, and was required to respond by September 1st.

00:04:44.580 --> 00:04:55.120
18 days to create an LLC, get the bonds and other requirements. Only possible if you had prior knowledge this was happening.

00:04:56.520 --> 00:05:10.360
I responded to Mr. Boyer declaring that the RFQ was not biddable. As you all know, last year in this chamber, it became known that arrangements were underway to fill this position with a friend of the city.

00:05:10.360 --> 00:05:38.640
just, they just needed to wait until Ms. Jensen's contract expired. The draft contract to tonight's agenda was presented on the web, as presented on the web, is nothing like the contract Mr. Boyer will sign. Please read the final contract before you approve this. Please. Remember, this is a one-year contract with 19 automatic renewals.

00:05:38.640 --> 00:06:07.780
this runs 20 years. I must compliment Mr. Boyer, this hurts. He has bragged for a year privately he was going to throw Angie Jensen off the airport. He has done just that. It wasn't pretty, it wasn't moral, and it certainly wasn't legal.

00:06:07.780 --> 00:06:45.760
in the next two years, the cost of operations at Albertus Airport will go up considerably due to lost hangar rent. I think the taxpayers should know this. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Cheryl Altman. My name is Cheryl Altman. I'm going to start with number 13 first for the solar savings program. I'd like to know, are the taxpayers the one that are paying for all these solar panels going up? And also, who's getting all the incentives?

00:06:45.780 --> 00:07:10.840
from all these solars going up. My next one is number five. They're renting to Pete Elber for $2,000. That's $166.66 a month. You tell me where anybody in this town can go rent a space for $166.66 a month, only if you're friends and family with the mayor.

00:07:10.840 --> 00:07:26.620
Mayor. Madam Clerk, could you please note for the record that Alderman Simmons joined at 622? 622?

00:07:27.140 --> 00:07:48.720
Correct. Thank you. So we'll move on to item number four, which is the consent agenda. The consent agenda is considered to be routine in nature, unless there's a member of the council would like to have something removed for further discussion. The consent agenda consists of approving to receive and place on file business, I'm sorry, building permit reports, police department reports, and fire department reports.

00:07:48.740 --> 00:08:18.720
Court, all dated August 2025. The proclamation for National Sea Tracks thinks train week September 15th through the 21st. Approval for the 2026 holiday schedule, city council schedule, and the committee of the whole schedule. Approval for the finance bills payable in total of $3,900,279.24 and payroll ending September 6th, 2025 in the total of $668,700.

00:08:18.740 --> 00:09:04.080
$177.79. Is there a motion to approve? So moved. Second. We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Johnson. Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Sanders. Here. On the consent agenda, do you approve? No. Plum. Aye. Johnson. Aye. Simmons. Parker. Aye. Stacy. And Shadle. Aye. The motion passes. Six to two. Five to two.

00:09:04.360 --> 00:09:36.730
thank you okay item number five is the second reading of ordinance 2025 53 could you please read this ordinance authorizing the city to enter into a fifth renewal to lease agreement with Pete Albert for 103 to 111 South Liberty Avenue thank you manager where I think your honor Pete Albert currently leases the first floor of the Raleigh metal clad building there are several floors in the building that are also available for rent if anyone

00:09:36.730 --> 00:09:59.470
is interested. They're welcome to come to the city and solicit their interest in that. As for right now, Mr. Elber is leasing it for $2,000 annually, and this is the fifth renewal staff request moving forward with this fifth lease renewal. Discussion?

00:09:59.470 --> 00:10:02.380
Discussion? Alderman Stacy?

00:10:03.460 --> 00:10:05.260
To my understanding,

00:10:06.340 --> 00:10:09.380
City Manager Boyer,

00:10:09.940 --> 00:10:11.220
Forgive me.

00:10:12.280 --> 00:10:16.440
You speak about other floors being able to be rented.

00:10:17.660 --> 00:10:21.520
However, how would one know that when it's not put out there?

00:10:22.520 --> 00:10:22.860
You

00:10:22.860 --> 00:10:27.180
spoke about

00:10:27.180 --> 00:10:30.040
$2,000 a year.

00:10:32.050 --> 00:10:33.150
It's a steal.

00:10:33.550 --> 00:10:56.390
But what you didn't speak about is how the taxes that's paid on that building is paid by the city because it's in the city's name. And so it's maybe a little over a hundred dollars for the whole year.

00:10:56.390 --> 00:11:05.310
But that's not accurate, Alderman Stacy. As it was discussed in the last meeting, the city is reimbursed for it.

00:11:05.310 --> 00:11:30.110
Yes, the city is reimbursed, but why get those French benefits? Why is it in the city's name? Why isn't because he's renting that floor? Why isn't the rental agreement drawn up and the taxes on him and not weeping the benefit of the city?

00:11:30.110 --> 00:11:59.690
because we're the tech we are we own it it's no different than manager where I just wanted to add there's a change to this lease it'll allow us to work out a sale price for the building between now and the next time this renews so it would actually it would actually do exactly what you're asking for so if he was able to purchase the building from the city which I believe the city is willing to you know liquidate at some point here soon that would put the tax burden on

00:11:59.690 --> 00:12:30.210
At what cost? We're not hearing. What are you wanting to sell? We're not quite there yet, and we have to renew the lease right now because we have a lease expiring, but in this version, we've made it available so we can open it up and sell the building if that meets council's approval. What I don't want is that it be sold for a dollar. Understood. I understand. So. There's no further discussion. Allerman Sanders? Yeah.

00:12:30.210 --> 00:13:00.090
Yeah, this ordinance that we're looking at is considered an authorized ordinance by the city of Freeport, the city. Who's authorizing this, and is it a real ordinance? Because I see it's doctored up here, an ordinance 2025-53. Is that a legit ordinance authorization from the city? And that means from the council.

00:13:00.210 --> 00:13:30.190
That means the council has to authorize that lease before you, Mr. Boyer, even consider, and it needs a revision, that ordinance and the leasing needs a revision for council to go back to justify whether or not the price or the annual cost of the leasing meets the value of all of the other city properties.

00:13:30.210 --> 00:14:01.560
and the thing about it is where is this ordinance at and where is it coming from and who's creating it and how is it being bypassed by the authorities of the city and we've got to remember it's this council that is the authority of this particular ordinance not the city manager and you can't call the shots on this particular leasing you know you just can't a lot of questions sir do you mind if I answer a few of them okay so where did it come from

00:14:01.560 --> 00:14:31.400
we've had that we've been renting that building to Pete Albers since 2021 then the rent at that time was a thousand then in 2022 the rent was increased to two thousand who was authorizing the city council city council yes okay so in the city council is authorized it for previous times for previous yes and we talked about it last meeting and we discussed this and I know we did and so let's review rules of Robert's rules when someone has the floor

00:14:31.400 --> 00:14:37.720
Chair, please allow them to speak. This back and forth doesn't happen. If you have specific questions, that's a phone call.

00:14:37.760 --> 00:14:43.500
Mayor, you cannot implement a robber's rule nor home rule.

00:14:43.800 --> 00:14:55.240
I am the chair of this. You need to just back yourself up away from the microphone before you're called out of order. Please stop talking. Please stop talking. You're the one who brought robber's rule.

00:14:55.240 --> 00:14:57.060
Attorney Zito, would you like to answer any of that?

00:14:57.540 --> 00:14:59.240
You don't want to implement it, Robert, Rules.

00:14:59.840 --> 00:15:11.500
So, to address some of your questions in addition to what Manager Boyer said, the ordinance, this is, this ordinance is before you tonight so that the council can vote on it.

00:15:11.600 --> 00:15:12.720
This is not a done deal.

00:15:12.900 --> 00:15:14.580
It's here tonight for you guys.

00:15:14.640 --> 00:15:20.380
The reason why we're talking about it is so that the council can vote on whether or not you want to approve the ordinance or not.

00:15:20.380 --> 00:15:24.600
Is it a legitimate, is it a legitimate ordinance is what I'm saying.

00:15:24.600 --> 00:15:54.220
It's legitimate in the sense that once you if you guys vote to approve it, then it will become a approved ordinance by the city council. As of right now, it's a it's pending your guys's vote. So it's not an ordinance. It'll be an enacted ordinance once you guys. Exactly. Or right. Or it doesn't approve. Then it's an ordinance. Exactly. Yeah. So we don't have an ordinance sitting on this agenda. You have a draft of an ordinance for you guys for you to approve or not approve.

00:15:54.220 --> 00:16:24.020
Has this been drafted? Has this ordinance been drafted? Yes, it's in the packet. Okay. It's a draft ordinance to be considered by the council tonight. If you guys vote to approve it, then it will become a approved ordinance. If you vote not to approve it, then it goes away. Okay. Okay. Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Sanders. No. Clem. Aye. Johnson. Aye. Simmons. Aye.

00:16:24.220 --> 00:17:02.770
Parker. Aye. Stacey. No. Shadle. Aye. I have five to two. For the lease of property, an ordinance has to pass by three-fourths, three-fourths vote of the corporate authorities, so three-fourths of nine, so because the corporate authorities are the council plus the mayor, you would need a vote of seven in order to pass, so this would not pass. Thank you, attorney. We'll move on to item number six, which is the second reading of ordinance 2025-57. Could you please read this?

00:17:02.770 --> 00:17:32.750
Um, am I in the wrong place? I'm on 54. Oh, I'm sorry. I said it wrong. Okay. You skipped ahead a little. 54. Ordinance establishing the Gladewood Special Service Area and accepting dedication of roadways and levy of taxes to offset the cost of special services. Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. So the city received a petition from a majority of property owners in the Gladewood Subdivision requesting the creation of a special

00:17:32.750 --> 00:18:02.490
Special Service Area following required notices and a public meeting held on May 28th. No valid objections were filed. The ordinance establishes the special service area, dedicates the subdivision roadway to the city, and outlines the framework for funding ongoing maintenance. The SSA ensures improvements to the subdivision's upper and lower entrances, including roadway base and asphalt upgrades, meeting engineering standards. The city will also

00:18:02.490 --> 00:18:32.410
create a sustainable mechanism for funding services to the benefit area without burdening existing taxpayers with the full cost of the needed improvements. The ordinance provides for an annual levy of $400 per taxable parcel across 16 parcels. The revenues will offset costs of roadway maintenance and improvements specific to Gladewood, ensuring equitable cost recovery. Staff recommends moving forward with the ordinance establishing the Gladewood SSA.

00:18:32.490 --> 00:18:39.330
or special service area. And then, Manager, Boyer, there's also the lined copy. Do you want to speak to that?

00:18:42.340 --> 00:18:49.600
Just a few comments. This would go for approximately 15 years. I know that was a, or it will go for 15 years.

00:18:49.600 --> 00:18:55.900
That was a question that came up before. It also identifies the lot numbers and parcel IDs.

00:18:57.120 --> 00:19:04.080
So what you have, Council, would be a motion to add that amendment to clarify, correct, to clarify that

00:19:04.080 --> 00:19:34.060
there's 15 years put into the agreement. Right. So from the version that was previously presented to you at the last council, there was inadvertently left out of the ordinance the time frame for which the SSA would be effective, which is 15 years. The petitioners actually when they petition for the SSA also agreed that it would be 15 years. So it was just inadvertently reference was left out of the the ordinance there. So what you have that was on your desk in the red line, the underlying language is the additional language that would

00:19:34.060 --> 00:19:56.000
would be proposed to be added into this. So if you guys are agreeable to that added language, just to clarify the fact that it's a 15-year assessment of this SSA tax, a motion and a second to add this underlying language in would be made, seconded. If that's approved, then you guys would move the second reading final vote on the ordinance as amended.

00:19:57.100 --> 00:19:58.000
So is there...

00:19:58.000 --> 00:20:04.060
it. So is there a motion to add the 15 years into the document? So moved. Second. Motion made by Alderman

00:20:04.060 --> 00:20:13.540
Shadle, seconded by Alderman Clemm. Discussion on the 15 year amended portion. Alderman Stacy? What do we do

00:20:13.540 --> 00:20:26.870
after the 15 years? Then it goes away. That assessment goes away. Alderman Sanders? Yeah. Who is

00:20:26.870 --> 00:20:49.840
just continually to, well, I want to call it the special maintenance upkeep and everything. Is it because the city is going to take on the responsibilities of this particular site area?

00:20:49.840 --> 00:21:19.360
Yes, just to kind of hit some of the highlights. It was platted that the road was a private street back in 19, I believe, 63. No one really knew that until we did some investigation as to the relation related to Gladewood Bridge and who was responsible there. Because it came to our attention, then we notified the residents of the area, affected area, that, you know, it was unclear.

00:21:19.360 --> 00:21:46.860
as to who is the ownership. I think there were some arguments one way or the other as far as why the city wasn't responsible today, but it was doing work in the past. This is essentially our negotiated settlement with the property owners in the area so that they're participating in the cost of the road that was never built to city specification and we're offsetting the cost to fix it so that it's not completely borne by the taxpayers. Did that answer your question?

00:21:46.860 --> 00:22:17.660
is that the taxpayers of that particular area yeah well in Gladewood the lots that are mentioned in the ordinance each one of them will be assessed $400 per year for 15 years so there's approximately 16 landowners oh okay all right um any other discussion on the amendment madam clerk could you please take the role on the amendment of adding the language of 15 years to the document Sanders yes Clem aye Johnson aye Simmons

00:22:18.620 --> 00:22:48.100
Parker? Aye. Stacey? Aye. And Shadle? Aye. The motion passes 7-0. So then now before you counsel would be the passage of the amended version. If there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the roll. I'm sorry, go ahead. So I guess my only problem with this is we add them and then they jump the line. Like we start on Gladewood when we've had roads that have been

00:22:48.100 --> 00:22:57.240
part of the city infrastructure and have been waiting to get done, and then this area gets to go first because we added them and haven't done it.

00:22:58.080 --> 00:23:05.080
It's a yes asterisk, okay? Right now the entrance and exit of the area is in really poor degraded shape.

00:23:05.440 --> 00:23:14.060
So in the sense that, yes, we're going to fix approximately 400 feet of that road so that the entry and exit is passable,

00:23:14.060 --> 00:23:44.060
but the rest of Gladewood will have to wait in the normal road program when council brings it to staff's attention that need to move forward so it doesn't this is not a reconstruct of the entire Gladewood Road this is simply the dealing with the issues at the front and the back entry and exit areas I guess my problem with that is most of our roadways the entry and exit areas need to be

00:23:44.060 --> 00:23:56.400
done, so that's my only thing with that, like, that's fine, but in time, in your turn, like, we should, that's, I don't see the fairity in that, letting them, we do it right away, just because.

00:23:56.400 --> 00:24:13.820
Well, and to answer that, these residents are paying an additional $400 a month for, I'm sorry, $400 a year for 15 years, so that we would be able to have the cost offset to make repairs to that area, so there is a

00:24:13.820 --> 00:24:42.740
give and a take there. Can I follow up with that? Olderman Sanders? Yeah, is that a collective annual 400 a year for the collective area for or individual? Individual. Individuals. Okay, good. All right. Olderman Stacy? Every home in this Glenwood area will be paying

00:24:42.740 --> 00:25:13.790
$400 every year. For 15 years. For 15 years. Yes. And they're in agreement with this. Yes, that's what took so long. The majority. Yes, there's going to be people who may not agree, but we have gone through the process, followed the legal procedures, and we are able to move forward with a special assessment based upon the participants. Yes. Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

00:25:13.790 --> 00:25:46.070
This is on final passage with the amendment, Sanders? Yes. Clem? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? Parker? Aye. Stacy? Aye. And Shadle? Aye. And the ordinance passes 7-0. Item number 7 is a second reading of ordinance 20-25-56. Could you please read this?

00:25:46.070 --> 00:25:52.850
ordinance amending chapters 1248 and 1250 of the zoning code of the city of Freeport concerning ground

00:25:52.850 --> 00:26:00.610
mounted solar arrays. Thank you, Director Duckman. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So the last time this was up,

00:26:00.610 --> 00:26:06.250
we're at second reading right now, and at the first reading, it was discussed a little more,

00:26:06.710 --> 00:26:13.450
maybe wanted a little more detail about the voting and what was discussed. So as stated in the first

00:26:13.450 --> 00:26:43.430
the first reading it the vote was five to zero to zero and at our planning commission and the people that were present were Ryan Walton, Matt Moyer, Andrea Schultz winner Dr. George Walker and Dustin Wilkinson so specifically that's who was present I know Director Stiekel had also mentioned had talked about this matter but he was not present Bill Green also

00:26:43.430 --> 00:27:13.190
also wasn't present. So just giving a little background here, there was, due to the fact that Mr. Steakle and Mr. Green were not present, they were, you know, as we stated earlier, two members who were, had strong opinions on this matter, they were not actually at the meeting. Truly, there was discussion, but it wasn't, I wouldn't call it lengthy. And, you know, with all that being said, this matter was discussed at the Planning Commission meeting.

00:27:13.430 --> 00:27:18.410
and staff is recommending moving this ordinance forward.

00:27:20.390 --> 00:27:31.330
Discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Hold it. Alderman Sanders? Hold it. Last meeting,

00:27:32.250 --> 00:27:43.290
were you making reference to not moving it forward? No. The first reading I recommended and it was

00:27:43.290 --> 00:27:51.470
voted to move it forward for second reading. Oh, it was? Yes. Okay, my thing is, okay, with that,

00:27:52.490 --> 00:28:07.020
who does all of the infrastructure or the construction of this solar mounting and who benefits from it?

00:28:07.020 --> 00:28:10.410
Well, I mean

00:28:10.410 --> 00:28:13.370
Is that not related?

00:28:13.970 --> 00:28:18.950
I would have to agree that really doesn't have anything to do with this ordinance of who does what.

00:28:21.480 --> 00:28:28.570
We have a question on the ordinance about can go in that direction.

00:28:30.730 --> 00:28:44.470
There's not. I think another way. I think what Mayor Miller is saying is that this ordinance has to do with somebody being allowed to put or install a solar panel.

00:28:44.830 --> 00:29:14.810
in their backyard. Yeah, I know that before I was rudely interrupted, I understand that. But my thing, it says here concerning, there's a concern there when I'm reading this about the mounting, the ground mounting, is the city of Freeport or the residents should be concerned about the mounting of this particular product or what are we talking about?

00:29:14.830 --> 00:29:44.810
Well, I think the idea here is that there was quite a bit, I would say in what was discussed in the first reading is that it tends to be a contentious topic when we're in residential neighborhoods. It tends to be people coming to the hearings more than most, and there's a negative opinion in residential neighborhoods generally that ground-mounted solar doesn't fit with the character of the neighborhood.

00:29:44.830 --> 00:29:47.170
And so, sorry, go ahead.

00:29:47.190 --> 00:29:55.910
Can you give me the characteristics of this ordinance and kind of define it for me so I can understand exactly how this ordinance.

00:29:55.910 --> 00:29:59.000
to understand exactly how did this ordinance came to be, came into existence.

00:30:00.000 --> 00:30:02.000
Director Stiegel, would you like to address that?

00:30:02.420 --> 00:30:02.580
Sure.

00:30:03.800 --> 00:30:12.080
I sit on the planning commission, and it was the direction of the commission members that they are not interested in having ground mount solar.

00:30:12.320 --> 00:30:21.340
Currently, our ordinance provides, if you wish to have roof mounted solar, that's fully acceptable, and you don't need city approval to do that.

00:30:21.340 --> 00:30:51.140
in order to put it on the ground which most of it's built through steel structures on the ground and it becomes a giant lawn ornament right that's that's the contention of the the planning commission is neighbors generally don't want to see these in their yard if they're not in favor of them because they're very large and obtrusive so it has nothing to do with the structure itself as in the way it's structurally built it's in the looks of the property right and these types of panels only benefit the actual user that

00:30:51.140 --> 00:31:18.300
installs them. Nothing goes back to the grid. It's for the house only. Oh, okay. Hold on a minute, Stacy? Currently, how many ground mount solar do we have? So I did a little bit of research on that. We had, and this is in the past two years, we've had an uptick in the amount of the solar projects.

00:31:18.300 --> 00:31:46.980
and the reason that there's an uptick is there's many of the private sector has truly pushed the installation of solar due to the fact that there's incentives to construct solar so they're essentially salespeople are I'm sure everyone in this room has had a salesperson trying to sell them solar so in the past year we've had Park Hills which was owning a board of appeals they recommended approval four to zero

00:31:48.300 --> 00:32:16.200
Planning Commission at that point recommended five to one. It passed City Council. Park Hills has had quite a few people complain after the fact. They don't like the way it looks. And I think, and moving on from there, we had 1405 South Benson, which was a large residential lot. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval five to zero. Planning Commission voted five to zero.

00:32:16.200 --> 00:32:44.400
So that ended up passing our city council. 1161 West Lincoln, Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval, 5-0 with one abstention. The planning commission voted against this and it ultimately failed council. So you're starting to see midway through this timeline that when they passed early on, people started to complain in the neighborhood and then our planning commission was listening.

00:32:44.400 --> 00:33:14.380
and then as these started to come on during time people saw them installed in the neighborhoods and they didn't like it so that the attitudes of our people have said our planning commission was listening and was saying okay we remember what happened at Park Hills Church we know that our community isn't happy about ground-mounted solar residential neighborhoods and you're starting to see it in the evidence because it let 1161 West Lincoln planning commission voted against it it failed city council then you look at

00:33:14.380 --> 00:33:41.720
Harmony Church, that was a highly contested ground-mounted solar project. That went through the Zoning Board of Appeals 5-0. Planning Commission was 0-6-1. So at this point, you're starting to see our Planning Commission is digging in its heels, not really seeing the connection to our community with ground-mounted solar. Ultimately, that did pass council, although it took several hearings before it was heard.

00:33:41.720 --> 00:34:03.140
So the point here is that to your point, our planning commission noticed that it's not really been, it was not well received in our community and they directed staff to draft an ordinance that would eliminate it zoning wise in residential neighborhoods.

00:34:04.600 --> 00:34:06.640
Director Duckman.

00:34:06.800 --> 00:34:07.120
Yes.

00:34:07.120 --> 00:34:34.860
I think giving all that information about how the zoning department feel is being said to sway the vote. My original question was in the past two years, how many have we approved?

00:34:34.860 --> 00:35:06.320
Um, we've approved three out of four. We have approved three out of the four. We're not approving any ground monitor tonight. We're trying to remove it. I understand. But it goes back, um, um, Madam Mayor, it goes back to us allowing some and now not

00:35:06.320 --> 00:35:16.920
and others. And how do you say yes to one and no to someone else? I guess you just say it, but.

00:35:17.400 --> 00:35:17.600
Darren.

00:35:18.920 --> 00:35:36.080
I'd love to answer that if I can. So this goes back to realistically the error of city manager Crowell who decided at that time with the council that we were a solar friendly city and we were experimenting with

00:35:36.080 --> 00:36:06.080
solar and trying to you know a lot of communities were looking at the facts of what solar was and wasn't and so as with any new process you learn things over time what works and what doesn't work and we did allow a handful of these projects to move forward and we've gotten feedback from community members more than like them we've had more feedback that people don't like them the biggest example is the one that's at Park Hills Church

00:36:06.080 --> 00:36:36.060
I don't want to say there's been issues with it throughout, but maintenance has been a problem, fencing has been a problem, it's obtrusive to the neighbors. Those are something that nobody could see happening until it started to happen. And we're also talking the difference between residential zoning and commercial zoning. So this application here is for residential home zoning. So it'd be if your next door neighbor came to the council and said, I want to fill my backyard full of an array, and you can see it from your neighbor.

00:36:36.080 --> 00:37:03.960
or House while it's their property. It's their property. Well, I'm glad you feel that way, but a lot of other people don't because it becomes their problem. And Wayne's exactly right. In dealing with a lot of solar companies over the last year, many of the solar companies are pushing the ground mount because it's cheaper for them to install than the roof mount and it's less work for them long term, even though it hides it better from the community.

00:37:03.960 --> 00:37:33.940
so while I do sit on the planning commission and I agree totally with their recommendation to get rid of this this wasn't pushed by me this was a completely unanimous vote by the planning commission and we directed council which is Mr. Cox that sits on that on that committee to draft this ordinance so we don't have to keep having these hearings and discussions about ground mount solar because we don't think that it fits the residential platform we're not talking about panels that are two by two

00:37:33.940 --> 00:38:02.060
We're talking about panels that are 10 by 8. It's a big difference. Yeah, it is. And so the panels they get primarily mounted on rooftops now are about a 2 by 2 square in bundles that they put on based on your usage. The ones that they put in backyards are actually a trapeze of steel that they get put on and most of the panels are 8 to 10 foot tall and probably 4 foot wide and the average house probably needs 4 to 6 of them to gain power.

00:38:02.060 --> 00:38:08.760
So we're talking about, you know, a mini RV of solar panels sitting in the backyard that everybody's got to steer at in their community

00:38:08.760 --> 00:38:13.480
But that's not what Harmony asked for. That's not what

00:38:13.480 --> 00:38:15.940
That is exactly what Harmony asked for

00:38:15.940 --> 00:38:18.440
That large

00:38:18.440 --> 00:38:19.380
Yes, ma'am

00:38:19.380 --> 00:38:20.980
And it was in the back

00:38:20.980 --> 00:38:30.880
It was by their garage near the trees of their property, but that is exactly what they asked for and that's what this council approved

00:38:30.880 --> 00:38:42.100
Yes, because what was the danger of it? Other than we might see it driving down, what's the road?

00:38:42.540 --> 00:38:43.180
Pearl City Road.

00:38:43.400 --> 00:38:43.860
Yes.

00:38:45.480 --> 00:38:51.440
The danger of it, in my opinion, is exactly what we're talking about here. That church is in a

00:38:51.440 --> 00:38:59.160
residentially zoned area that opens up to more residentially zoned people adding this. And so

00:38:59.160 --> 00:39:20.500
So, what the Planning Commission is recommending, and I'm not speaking for everyone, but I think based on the vote I can, we're recommending that this is not a path that Freeport should move forward, that it will not long-term benefit residential properties, and it'll become an eyesore, like an old car sitting in a yard. Over time, that's what these...

00:39:20.500 --> 00:39:22.020
Well, we get plenty of that.

00:39:22.020 --> 00:39:24.200
Mm-hmm. Yes.

00:39:24.200 --> 00:39:30.380
So, um, that's just a recommendation, what the council does with it is their will

00:39:30.380 --> 00:39:34.400
If there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the roll

00:39:34.400 --> 00:39:35.480
Sanders

00:39:35.480 --> 00:39:36.200
No

00:39:36.200 --> 00:39:38.480
Clem

00:39:38.480 --> 00:39:38.960
Aye

00:39:38.960 --> 00:39:39.920
Johnson

00:39:39.920 --> 00:39:40.440
Aye

00:39:40.440 --> 00:39:41.360
Simmons

00:39:41.360 --> 00:39:42.020
Aye

00:39:42.020 --> 00:39:42.720
Parker

00:39:42.720 --> 00:39:43.240
Aye

00:39:43.240 --> 00:39:43.920
Stacey

00:39:43.920 --> 00:39:44.880
No

00:39:44.880 --> 00:39:45.800
And Shadle

00:39:45.800 --> 00:39:46.120
Aye

00:39:46.120 --> 00:39:48.620
The motion passes, 5-2

00:39:48.620 --> 00:39:54.000
Item number 8 is

00:39:54.000 --> 00:39:57.570
Item number 8 is the first reading of Ordinance 2025-57. Could you please read this?

00:39:58.130 --> 00:40:02.690
Ordinance revising codified ordinances to create the position of Operations Superintendent.

00:40:03.090 --> 00:40:04.310
Thank you, Manager Boyer.

00:40:04.650 --> 00:40:12.470
Thank you, Your Honor. The Freeport Public Works team is requesting that Council create a job description for the department in a restructuring effort.

00:40:12.970 --> 00:40:17.750
At this time, we are requesting the creation of a new position, Public Works Operations Superintendent.

00:40:17.750 --> 00:40:47.750
Superintendent. This is not an additional position to the department but a promotional opportunity for a department leader to assume more management duties and responsibilities within the combined department leadership team. Due to a key employee leaving the City Public Works team, the department is looking to restructure important key roles and responsibilities, allowing better collaboration and uniting the overall team. Creating an operations superintendent role will enable the department leader to effectively manage the daily activities of the

00:40:47.750 --> 00:41:17.750
construction crew and be involved in the utility operations division. This change will facilitate more departmental collaboration. Strategic plan alignment aligns with teamwork integration and departments are especially important because they direct impact the efficiency, consistency, and overall performance of the division. This position change is an important first step in evaluating overall non-bargaining job duties to ensure a unified approach to the departments. This new job description is budgeted

00:41:17.750 --> 00:41:25.770
for through the public works budget and should not increase the overall payroll of the department.

00:41:27.230 --> 00:41:32.750
Staff recommends moving forward with this and there is a request due to the timeliness of this there is a

00:41:32.750 --> 00:41:40.300
request for suspension of the rules. Is there a motion to move this forward? So moved. Second motion made by

00:41:40.300 --> 00:41:44.900
Alderman Shadle seconded by Alderman Clem. Discussion on this Alderman Stacey?

00:41:44.900 --> 00:41:49.260
Alderman Stacy

00:41:49.260 --> 00:41:49.280
Alderman Stacy

00:41:49.280 --> 00:41:59.260
Does this have something to do with an open position in public works?

00:42:01.740 --> 00:42:16.580
It does have something to do with an open position in public works in the water utility. So recently the utility operation or the utility superintendent has moved on and we felt that this was a good opportunity to

00:42:16.580 --> 00:42:26.580
to consolidate the departments overall, and that's why staff is asking for a new person to oversee the Public Works Department.

00:42:27.200 --> 00:42:27.800
Alderman Sanders?

00:42:28.280 --> 00:42:31.540
Is that a salary-based position?

00:42:31.720 --> 00:42:32.220
Yes, sir.

00:42:32.600 --> 00:42:40.800
And we're going to replace it as a salary, or are we going to incorporate it within the city structure?

00:42:40.800 --> 00:43:10.540
So we'll incorporate it. It would basically mean the street superintendent position would remain, it would no longer be filled, and the utility superintendent wouldn't be filled, and then we would fill it with an operations superintendent whose overall responsibility covered both, and then we'll be bringing back an assistant for that individual to help cover weekends and times that they're unable to be there and also have a little bit more background in the operations

00:43:10.540 --> 00:43:12.860
and Regulatory End of the Water Utility.

00:43:13.220 --> 00:43:15.540
Okay, the assistance is not going to be of...

00:43:15.540 --> 00:43:17.200
Would you like your second time of speaking with me, Sanders?

00:43:17.880 --> 00:43:19.540
I thought I was in a conversation.

00:43:20.260 --> 00:43:22.580
No, Darren, did you want to have to...

00:43:22.580 --> 00:43:25.440
Yeah, I just want to give a point of clarity to Rob's statement there.

00:43:25.580 --> 00:43:31.820
So this is creating a job position that we currently don't have in the structure.

00:43:31.940 --> 00:43:32.680
That's what it's doing.

00:43:32.880 --> 00:43:34.080
It's not adding a role.

00:43:34.080 --> 00:43:39.420
It's giving a new role to an old position that we currently don't have.

00:43:39.420 --> 00:43:49.000
So this will allow us to change the job description of an individual and allow him to manage more areas than currently is aligned in his job duties, his or her job duties.

00:43:49.520 --> 00:44:05.040
So this provides us an opportunity to somewhat restructure and reorganize the department, which we started, again, many years under City Manager Crowe, and then we've been doing this little at a time as jobs have turned over.

00:44:05.040 --> 00:44:11.440
so we're not asking for an additional position, we're asking for merging a few positions together

00:44:11.440 --> 00:44:17.540
at this time to have one person oversee more areas and we don't currently have this role and that's why

00:44:17.540 --> 00:44:24.320
we're asking approval to create this role. Alderman Johnson. So would this be filled by someone inside

00:44:24.320 --> 00:44:31.500
already here or would this be something we would? We believe we have a, I'm sorry to interrupt, we believe

00:44:31.500 --> 00:44:34.120
I believe we have a qualified internal candidate for this position.

00:44:34.840 --> 00:44:34.900
Okay.

00:44:36.640 --> 00:44:37.340
Alderman Stacy?

00:44:37.560 --> 00:44:46.940
Will this position also be covering the position where the gentleman resigned from?

00:44:47.540 --> 00:44:48.160
That's correct.

00:44:48.160 --> 00:44:57.400
And so it's like in a roundabout way, I hear what you're saying and I hear what you're saying,

00:44:57.400 --> 00:45:26.640
but it's like we're ignoring the fact that a person you put in position has left the department and so that is an opening position or you're telling me it's not going to be an opening position because we're going to add those duties to someone else's duty so if we could have done that from the beginning why did we ever hire

00:45:27.400 --> 00:45:59.100
this gentleman because that's who you chose. That's who you wanted and we hired him. Well, you'll have to ask that individual. However, we're asking for counsel. I'm not going to speculate on the motivations or the needs of that. I mean, why did we need that position then if we don't need it now? Well, as I mentioned, it'll be the superintendent will oversee all of public works and we'll be asking for

00:45:59.100 --> 00:46:03.220
assistant to also come alongside to cover weekends.

00:46:03.600 --> 00:46:07.300
And the superintendent did not do that before?

00:46:08.220 --> 00:46:08.700
Correct.

00:46:09.220 --> 00:46:13.600
They did, but it was not a clearly defined role.

00:46:15.000 --> 00:46:20.100
And the way it's being explained tonight, it's not clearly defined.

00:46:20.740 --> 00:46:21.260
Okay.

00:46:22.660 --> 00:46:26.920
Well, the job description is provided, so I could give that to you if you'd like.

00:46:27.600 --> 00:46:28.680
No, I have it.

00:46:28.680 --> 00:47:01.660
Okay. Okay. If there's no further discussion, we'll move on. Oh, actually, it was a request for suspension of the rules if someone wants to make that motion. So moved. Second. We have a motion made by Alderman Clem, seconded by Alderman Shadle for suspension of the rules. It's not debatable. It's passed by two-thirds majority. Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll on the suspension only? Sanders. No. Clem. Aye. Johnson. Aye. Simmons. No. Parker. Aye. Stacey.

00:47:02.300 --> 00:47:32.120
No. And Shadle. Aye. The motion to suspend fails because it needs two-thirds and we only ended up with what four to three? American vote because half the council has voted in favor. Repeat that again. Don't we need six people attorney Zito? Correct. One, two, three. We only have four. One, two. We have four to three. Oh, I'm sorry. So, so you can, you can.

00:47:32.300 --> 00:47:36.560
You can call the mayor's vote, but I don't, depending on how you vote, I don't know if it makes a difference or not

00:47:36.560 --> 00:47:38.040
I object

00:47:38.040 --> 00:47:41.240
You can't object, this is an attorney ruling

00:47:41.240 --> 00:47:46.560
Wait a minute, it's not an attorney ruling, it's a council ruling, what are you talking about?

00:47:47.320 --> 00:47:50.420
Please don't interrupt, Alderman Sanders

00:47:50.420 --> 00:47:53.580
Well, you can't be saying things like that

00:47:53.580 --> 00:47:58.940
No, because right now you have one, two

00:47:58.940 --> 00:48:02.020
The best we'd have is five

00:48:02.020 --> 00:48:07.500
Right, so that still wouldn't pass. Okay, so the suspension fails. We'll move this on to the next

00:48:07.500 --> 00:48:15.680
regular scheduled meeting. Come on, Mayor. Item number nine is the first reading of Ordinance 20-25-58.

00:48:15.920 --> 00:48:21.860
Could you please read this? Ordinance amending Chapters 810 and 1250 concerning the licensing and zoning of

00:48:21.860 --> 00:48:28.940
vacation rentals. Director, Duckman. Thank you, Madam Mayor. The Community Economic Development Department

00:48:28.940 --> 00:48:35.060
Department has been directed to draft an amended ordinance. And the idea here is that

00:48:35.060 --> 00:48:46.140
vacation rentals, which is VRBO, Airbnb, it's getting a little less technical here to kind of give you a

00:48:46.140 --> 00:48:53.320
better idea of what we're talking about. Short-term rental in line with those popular products is

00:48:53.320 --> 00:48:58.920
essentially what currently happens here is you can own a single family house and you could put it

00:48:58.920 --> 00:49:24.540
on Airbnb with proper licensing and have a short-term rental weekend, etc. So, you know, it has been brought to our attention to, and we were directed to draft a new ordinance that essentially is removing vacation rentals from the R1 through R4 residential district.

00:49:24.540 --> 00:49:51.980
So again, to kind of break down what's going on here, R1 through R4, that is where you're allowed to have a single family home, not a duplex, not a four unit, that is your true one family residential neighborhoods. And what has been directed and what staff is proposing tonight is eliminating short term rentals in single family.

00:49:51.980 --> 00:49:55.260
short-term rentals in single-family housing. That's the simplest way to kind of boil it down.

00:49:56.200 --> 00:50:02.180
In a little background here, and also what would essentially happen is if you have a single-family

00:50:02.180 --> 00:50:13.120
home, we're proposing to eliminate the short-term vacation rentals. If you have a two-unit, duplex,

00:50:13.120 --> 00:50:43.100
six, three-unit, four-unit, et cetera, it would be a special-use permit, so that, I hope, gives a basic understanding of what's being proposed here. To go with a little bit of background, on August 14th, a public hearing was held by our Planning Commission, and the outcome of that meeting was that our Planning Commission heard public comment, we had one supporter and one objector present, and to be clear,

00:50:43.120 --> 00:50:55.340
clear the supporter for pro vacation rental would be Clerk Anderson. Do you remember being there just to confirm?

00:50:56.720 --> 00:51:03.260
I was the opposer. I'm sorry, you were opposing the, I'm getting the pros and negatives, but to be fair,

00:51:03.260 --> 00:51:10.920
you were pro, you were not pro, you were against. I'm against the ordinance, James, and I was present.

00:51:10.920 --> 00:51:40.900
Yes, just wanted to make that clear and that Alder person Clem was also at the hearing and he was for the ordinance which would outlaw the vacation rentals so I wanted to make that clear for some background so after that hearing was held by our planning commission they wanted to hear take some time and a motion was made to discuss at the next hearing which was September 11th of 2025 and all that being

00:51:40.900 --> 00:52:12.280
said the planning commission recommended approval of this uh text amendment pertaining to vacation rentals with what I had said earlier eliminating them from the single family residences and with that in mind staff is recommending recommending moving this ordinance forward is there a motion to move this order so moved second motion made by Alderman Clem seconded by Alderman Shadle discussion on the ordinance Alderman Clem sure uh the

00:52:12.280 --> 00:52:42.260
The real crux of this comes from everybody here believes in Airbnbs, everybody believes that it can be a positive thing for the community, there's no doubt about that, but it stems from, mostly stems from two incidents, an incident and where it was at basically, and I believe it was June 6th at one of these Airbnbs that this person, first of all, I'll go back to the point where I was here

00:52:42.280 --> 00:53:11.780
here when they originally discussed Airbnbs over a year ago, and nobody really brought up the thought of what was going to happen in that area, what could happen in that area, what could develop in that area. Nobody in that area would know who's going to be in that house, when they're going to be in that house, when it's rented, when it isn't going to be rented, and who's there. Also, this person that rents this house doesn't have all the capabilities in the world of finding that out of who calls them up and says,

00:53:11.780 --> 00:53:37.680
I want to rent your house for the evening. So this house here is in a neighborhood that's probably $250,000 to $300,000 houses. On a Friday night, all of a sudden, a whole bunch of cars started pulling up to the house. And keep in mind, as this person rents this Airbnb, they have their total family with little kids above this.

00:53:37.680 --> 00:53:45.640
They rent out just their basement only. They've developed a sidewalk and entrance into that basement.

00:53:46.040 --> 00:53:50.780
They've created a pool out there, and they've created an area where this could be used.

00:53:52.180 --> 00:53:59.880
Approximately, they got a phone call. I'm not sure what the time was. I'll confirm it with the chief, but 10 o'clock-ish area in there.

00:54:00.440 --> 00:54:06.520
One of the neighbors called. The owner also called. He had a whole bunch of people downstairs.

00:54:06.520 --> 00:54:29.740
There were cars out in the street, and come to find out the whole end of this deal was there were probably, I believe, 10 to 15 use under 20 years old left, and they confiscated, I'm going to say at least a dozen loaded weapons, okay?

00:54:29.740 --> 00:54:57.900
Now, I don't think this is a normal thing that should happen at your house on Friday night, especially if you live in a $200,000, $300,000 neighborhood. That's my concern. The people have come to me, okay, and said, look, if I buy a house in a residential area in single-family homes, I'm expecting it to be a single-family home. I'm not expecting a commercial thing to be rent out.

00:54:57.900 --> 00:55:27.880
the night before this happened there were 10 cars there okay what this person actually did is there's zero security involved in it they provided no security and instantly the police were called so we were their security for this whole thing to try and straighten it out and you've got people still that from the DNA all these weapons are going to be possibly traced to different people and to be arrested

00:55:27.900 --> 00:55:33.520
made off the deal. So that enlightened everybody there to say, hey, this is what we got in our

00:55:33.520 --> 00:55:40.400
neighborhood and we don't like it. So that's where my opinion and the opinion of all the people in that

00:55:40.400 --> 00:55:51.510
neighborhood come from. Any other discussion? Alderman Johnson. I'm not sure how many of these

00:55:51.510 --> 00:55:57.970
Airbnbs we have here in Freeport, but they are businesses. Three. Three is all we have? We have

00:55:57.970 --> 00:56:27.930
Okay, and they bring people in who spend money here, so that's part of the city. The other thing I'm thinking about, you do take a chance when you're a person that owns an Airbnb of who you rent to, but I know any of the vacation rentals that we've ever rented, there's a very long contract that you have to fill out with them that has a lot of stipulations on it, what you can do and what you can't do, how many cars you can park there, and a lot of things that

00:56:27.970 --> 00:56:56.190
regulate that that I think could be put in place for those that do have Airbnbs. So I don't know. And, you know, plus the fact that when you live in a home, you don't really know if that house beside you goes up for sale. You don't know who might come in there. You don't know if they might have guns. You don't know if they might be on drugs and, you know, that sort of thing. So there's, you know, you take chances every day.

00:56:56.190 --> 00:57:25.130
So I'm not sure that this would be friendly for the city of Freeport to say we don't want your Airbnb businesses in our residential areas. There's not very many R5 or R6 areas. I know west of west, there's a lot that are east of west. So I'm not sure how all that plays out for fairness for people that own those homes and maybe are looking to have a business here in Freeport.

00:57:25.130 --> 00:57:44.910
We could put a limit maybe on the number of Airbnbs we have. Also, I'm thinking, could we do like they have to have a special use permit every year or something like that instead of totally disregarding this altogether? Those are my thoughts.

00:57:44.910 --> 00:57:47.670
Alderman Simmons.

00:57:48.930 --> 00:57:50.890
I'm sorry, but that is laughable.

00:57:51.430 --> 00:57:58.770
So because it happened in this area and these houses are worth that much, we're going to ban it for single family houses.

00:57:58.990 --> 00:58:09.330
But in the areas that happen to be mostly apartments, we're going to allow it because these houses are $250,000, $300,000, which was repeated a couple of times.

00:58:09.330 --> 00:58:12.930
So it's not okay there, but it's okay in other neighborhoods.

00:58:12.930 --> 00:58:41.860
and to even feel safe making a statement as such is, wow. Director Duckman, I have a question. In this, would that be in effect immediately or is there, can you enlighten that there's three businesses that would be affected, how far out, that kind of thing?

00:58:41.860 --> 00:59:08.580
So essentially, the ordinance reads that this would, they would have to still, basically the current licenses for the three properties that we're speaking of, they would still have to reapply for the license. If they let it lapse on their own, they let it lapse on their own. But if they continued to reapply, it would sunset January 1st, 2029.

00:59:08.580 --> 00:59:40.280
and after such date all licenses would cease to be valid. So a little over three years. Correct. Any other discussion? I have my second statement. Sure. I would like to agree with Alderperson Johnson. We are trying to be a tourist town. We are trying to do things to draw people here. We only have two, I'm not sure if the other one is still open, legitimate hotels that you wouldn't mind staying in. So and myself I have a couple of kids

00:59:40.300 --> 00:59:46.720
So when we go, we use Airbnbs, I don't understand why you would want to stop that for the city of Freeport

00:59:46.720 --> 00:59:47.760
Like

00:59:47.760 --> 00:59:49.980
That just doesn't

00:59:49.980 --> 01:00:25.180
That just doesn't make sense. Anyone else? Yeah. Chairman Sanders? Yeah. Director Duckman, how long has this, do you know, if you know, that this ordinance has been in existence? Well, the current short-term vacation rental ordinance, I would say, has been, what, Clerk Anderson, five years? It was right around COVID, I think.

01:00:25.180 --> 01:00:54.840
we had bed and breakfast on the books for a very long time because that's an older model but we added the Airbnb pre-COVID I've been here eight years somewhere between five and eight years it's a newer concept correct so when we're talking short-term rentals the idea generally is that short-term rentals by the way it is a not just in the city of Freeport it's a it's a hot topic it causes quite a bit of conflict

01:00:55.180 --> 01:01:17.960
Um, you know, on one side of the coin, people believe that they're good for the community because they are adding tourism and it, um, it also allows property owners, um, to make some extra revenue on the other side, uh, not just in the city of Freeport, but there has been, you know, complaints with people use them for parties or use them for nefarious activities and it makes, uh, neighbors upset.

01:01:17.960 --> 01:01:34.920
So I think there's good discussion here. Staff was directed to draft this ordinance. It's through the Planning Commission. It's had two Planning Commission meetings, and I anticipate for the next two readings, if it gets that far, there's going to be plenty more heated discussion.

01:01:34.920 --> 01:01:36.120
Alderman Sanders?

01:01:36.120 --> 01:01:37.100
Yeah, just

01:01:37.100 --> 01:01:50.260
Elaborating on the concerning of neighborhood areas that has got a concern about the vacationing property

01:01:50.260 --> 01:02:02.740
and the zoning and the licensing and we have not set up any policies or anything like that guidelines

01:02:02.740 --> 01:02:32.740
for the people who does have concerns about the area of vacationing rentals and things like that. We have not set up guidelines for those kinds of things. What are the policy terms and conditions that helps the guide to let the community know or the citizens know in the community area that these are the guidelines that you have to abide by and what is permitted

01:02:32.740 --> 01:02:40.380
what is not permitted. Have we had that discussion or have you had that discussions with those residents

01:02:40.380 --> 01:02:47.720
that are already currently living in those areas? Yes, we had, let's see, we had two planning commission

01:02:47.720 --> 01:02:57.260
meetings, you know, that we talked about before. I took some notes on that. We had a meeting on August

01:02:57.260 --> 01:03:02.620
14th and as I stated before, Clerk Anderson and Alderperson Clem were in attendance there.

01:03:02.740 --> 01:03:12.380
notes I wrote down from that meeting was quite a bit of consideration and discussion and based on that from

01:03:12.380 --> 01:03:19.780
August 14th the meeting was moved to the next regularly scheduled meeting for more discussion so the second

01:03:19.780 --> 01:03:28.020
meeting would have been September 11th and you know again some of the issues that were one of the notes I

01:03:28.020 --> 01:03:55.120
wrote was that one supporter, Alderperson, Clemm, his concerns were for safety, illegal activities, and parking concerns, and, you know, as Clerk Anderson has stated, she's provided that, you know, she's obviously works in the licensing and can fill you in on all of the requirements for a license, but she also came in as a member of the public issuing her support of the, you know, of the matter.

01:03:55.120 --> 01:04:06.460
So, I mean, the reason I'm stating this is to answer your question, has the public been notified, well, yes, through two meetings before we've even gotten to this part of it, and we've had members of our-

01:04:06.460 --> 01:04:10.660
So does this ordinance have protocols to it? Does this ordinance have protocols?

01:04:11.060 --> 01:04:11.480
Yes.

01:04:11.640 --> 01:04:16.980
It does have protocols, and so that should spill everything out to the residents of those areas.

01:04:16.980 --> 01:04:24.820
The easiest thing to explain to somebody is no. If I have a single-family house, what is the protocol for having a vacation rental?

01:04:24.820 --> 01:04:54.660
That's easy. No, that's what you're voting for. You believe, and I'm not trying to be insulting, but I mean, that's literally what this says. You know, you cannot have, you know, I want to have an Airbnb in my single family house. If you vote for this, you're saying, no, you cannot. Or if you're in favor of it, you're saying, yes, you can do it. That's the heart of it. You know what I mean? There is no, I mean, once, if you vote for this ordinance, you're saying, we don't think it fits in our community. No.

01:04:54.820 --> 01:04:56.060
You can't do it.

01:04:56.660 --> 01:04:57.240
Alderman Parker?

01:04:57.820 --> 01:05:00.920
That's, go ahead, sorry, I'm sorry, go ahead.

01:05:01.160 --> 01:05:03.990
But you can't.

01:05:04.210 --> 01:05:15.490
Yeah, I'm sorry, and I, yes, I was asked to clarify that, okay, so I'm just, I always, I always try to talk and make things simple my best I can.

01:05:16.490 --> 01:05:22.630
Single, right now, what you would be voting on is single family house, no, you cannot have an Airbnb.

01:05:22.630 --> 01:05:49.230
B. If you have a duplex, you would have to go to a hearing and ask for permission or you'd have to have it voted on by council, which is that special use hearing. If you have a duplex, you would have to come. It wouldn't be allowed by right. You would still have to show up to a zoning board hearing, to a planning commission hearing, and to a city council hearing to be allowed to have a Airbnb or VRBO.

01:05:49.230 --> 01:06:18.850
And we're not voting on anything tonight. This is first reading. Okay. Alderman Parker. I wasn't going to say anything, but the way I understand this, I own a single family home, and if I happen to be a snowbird and want to go to Florida for the winter, and I have some friends that want to come in and rent my house, I can't do it under this ordinance. You know, it's my house. I didn't ask permission when I bought the thing. What defines short term? Less than 30 days. What if I go a month, two weeks? What defines short term? Less than 30 days. Less than 30? Okay.

01:06:19.230 --> 01:06:23.570
maybe I want to go visit my family out in California for two weeks or three weeks.

01:06:23.910 --> 01:06:28.510
Somebody said needs a place, yeah, come on in, can't do that, but I didn't get permission when

01:06:28.510 --> 01:06:36.450
I bought the place, so I'm just against it, so thank you. All right, then we will move on. I did want to

01:06:36.450 --> 01:06:46.350
just share, if nobody else, if nobody else mirrored my thoughts, so I just, I believe the Airbnb craze is

01:06:46.350 --> 01:07:17.900
is really popular. I think it's growing nationwide. I think it adds a lodging option. Personally, I've stayed in many in several states, single family homes, multi units. I've stayed by myself. I felt very safe. Currently, there are three license holders, but we've had more. And if you go on to an Airbnb website, as many as like maybe

01:07:17.900 --> 01:07:24.920
even seven will pop up. It's very difficult to find where these are located and you don't get an address

01:07:24.920 --> 01:07:32.820
until you make that reservation so you don't know the location. I have already sent out applications

01:07:32.820 --> 01:07:39.680
to, you know, I'll find an address, I'll find a homeowner and they will sometimes ignore the

01:07:39.680 --> 01:07:45.360
application. Our third one just got licensed this year because it's a new owner but I knew where it

01:07:45.360 --> 01:07:50.800
was for years. They just never turned the application back in. There's probably about three I don't know of.

01:07:51.860 --> 01:07:59.260
Three I know of that I don't know the address for. One of my concerns is if this passes, it will be very

01:07:59.260 --> 01:08:07.320
punitive to the people who have followed the rules. We have three people who have come in religiously and

01:08:07.320 --> 01:08:16.880
got licensed. Very easy to work with. But I don't see any enforcement or no gut to go out and find those

01:08:16.880 --> 01:08:23.840
ones who aren't licensed. So we're going to punish the ones who have been licensed by taking their license

01:08:23.840 --> 01:08:33.500
away. That doesn't make sense to me. I attended both planning commissions. I heard, you know, we don't want

01:08:33.500 --> 01:08:39.200
it in our neighborhood. I think that special use is the tool to solve that because you ask our neighbors.

01:08:39.680 --> 01:08:45.620
You could leave a special use, R1, single family. It could be special use all the way through. And then

01:08:45.620 --> 01:08:51.480
when somebody wants to get licensed, they get the special use. Can you ask your neighbors, do you want

01:08:51.480 --> 01:08:57.140
us here? They can say yes. They can say no. And that'll just take care of itself. It'll be in the neighborhoods

01:08:57.140 --> 01:09:06.780
that want it. It'll be in the neighborhoods that don't. We do have ordinances on the books, and I'm quite

01:09:06.780 --> 01:09:11.920
certain the number of cars are limited, because I remember that being a big discussion. We might have

01:09:11.920 --> 01:09:17.380
even limited it to one, but no more than two cars are allowed, and I suspect that's maybe why the owners

01:09:17.380 --> 01:09:23.160
maybe started calling, because they knew that was something they could call about, was too many

01:09:23.160 --> 01:09:47.900
cars in the driveway. And I just wanted to address, you know, this was a very unfortunate event. I don't want it to happen again. But I think this is kind of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I think we're knee-jerking too many rules over one bad incident. And I just wanted to add that there was concern about that in this particular incident, there were children living upstairs. And I

01:09:47.900 --> 01:10:00.340
children living upstairs. And I feel for that. I understand that. But also, this homeowner chose to get that license knowing he has two children, and I think that should be the homeowner's choice. My two cents.

01:10:00.920 --> 01:10:10.040
Appreciate it. All right. We will move on to item number 10, which is the adoption of Resolution 2025-109. Could you please read this?

01:10:10.040 --> 01:10:19.100
Resolution authorizing the payment of an invoice from Green Road Tire Recycling for Citywide Tire Recycling Collection event held on August 23rd.

01:10:19.100 --> 01:10:20.280
Thank you. Director Bridge.

01:10:21.700 --> 01:10:22.840
Thank you. Good evening.

01:10:24.780 --> 01:10:32.840
In August, the City of Freeport conducted a tire recycling event where residents could bring passenger car and semi-truck tires to be disposed of.

01:10:33.260 --> 01:10:37.600
The City utilized the services of Green Road Tire Recycling to dispose of the tires.

01:10:37.600 --> 01:10:44.220
This event was planned in coordination with other dumping events such as Refresh Freeport and the Electronic Recycling Event

01:10:44.220 --> 01:10:49.740
Guild's Freeport Disposal recommended Green Road to be the main collector of the tires

01:10:49.740 --> 01:10:57.200
At the event, they collected 7,029 passenger car tires and 118 semi-truck tires

01:10:57.200 --> 01:11:04.060
Hundreds of residents took advantage of the service and the city received positive feedback from residents and surrounding communities

01:11:04.060 --> 01:11:12.460
The full amount of the invoice, which is about $38,000, has been budgeted for and will be paid from the Health and Environment Fund

01:11:12.460 --> 01:11:21.540
Thank you. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Johnson

01:11:21.540 --> 01:11:30.210
Discussion on the resolution? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Sanders is temporarily absent

01:11:30.210 --> 01:11:36.790
Clem? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? Aye. Parker? Aye. Stacy? Aye. And Shadle? Aye.

01:11:36.810 --> 01:12:11.170
Aye. The resolution is adopted 6-0. And we move on to item number 11, which is the adoption of resolution 2025-111. Could you please read this? Resolution setting the date and hours for trick-or-treating in the city for 2025. Thank you, Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. In the past, trick-or-treating has been observed on Halloween, October 31st. For the past several years, the hours have been from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. This year, Halloween falls on a Friday. This year, the city is

01:12:11.170 --> 01:12:15.010
collaborating with the Freeport School District second graders and their civic responsibility

01:12:15.010 --> 01:12:19.650
unit for social studies. They will be touring city hall and the police station and have the opportunity

01:12:19.650 --> 01:12:26.370
to role play a city council meeting deliberating on the same resolution. Staff recommendation is to keep

01:12:26.370 --> 01:12:33.810
the trick-or-treating on Friday, October 31st from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. Staff requests the approval of this

01:12:33.810 --> 01:13:03.650
resolution. Is there a motion to adopt? Second. Motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Shadle. Discussion on the resolution? Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Sanders is absent. Clem? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? Aye. Parker? Aye. Stacey? Aye. And Shadle? Aye. The resolution is adopted 6-0. And item number 12 is the adoption of resolution 2025-112.

01:13:03.650 --> 01:13:33.630
Ralph, could you please read this? Resolution approving application for contract with FLOC safety for live video cameras, additional license plate reader cameras, and mobile trailer cameras. Thank you. Chief Shenberger. Thank you. So as I discussed last week, earlier in the year, I had some representatives from FLOC that came and did a presentation on the products that they offer and how they could help us as law enforcement officers. I've applied for several grants and

01:13:33.630 --> 01:14:03.630
looked for different funding throughout this year and fortunately I was able to secure some funding through Senator Durbin's office by utilizing lobbyists through Sound Thinking. There's a wish list of things that comes with that however we realize that if that funding falls through more than likely it's not going to happen and within the contract for FLOC there's a contingency if the appropriations

01:14:03.630 --> 01:14:33.630
for some reason don't pass then then we are we're not out or we don't have to pay that amount of money so um we also I also secured a organized crime retail theft grant from the attorney general's office for $9,000 so the plan basically is to leverage that money to start this project one month early that gives us into December and then utilize the appropriations dollars for the year of 20 uh 2026 and 2026

01:14:33.630 --> 01:15:01.930
Thank you, Chief. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Parker. Discussion on the resolution? Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Oh, Alderman Stacy, I'm sorry. So this is, you're asking for voting to approve this? Approve the resolution for the Chief to move forward on what he just made a comment on. Okay.

01:15:03.630 --> 01:15:18.020
I do have a question, but I don't know, do it come now or later? This is the one pertaining to the drones you were speaking of?

01:15:18.020 --> 01:15:36.060
No, this is for license plate reader cameras, some live video bundles with those, a trailer camera that is live video, and then a trailer camera that has a license plate reader camera in it, and also it's just like a speed wagon with a license plate reader camera in it.

01:15:36.120 --> 01:15:41.300
Can you tell me, like, what does it cost per year to operate this?

01:15:41.820 --> 01:16:06.080
Right, so, I mean, this is covered, this would be covered under appropriations dollars and grant money, but roughly, I know it's in the agreement, but the money that we're utilizing is $200,000 from appropriations, $69,000, and that's for the license plate reader cameras, or I'm sorry, $100,000 for two years for

01:16:06.080 --> 01:16:33.540
license plate reader cameras, $69,200 for two trailer cameras for two years, and then we're also using the $9,000 that we're getting from the Organized Crime Retail Theft Grant. So that's what it's going to cost for two years. However, all that money is not coming out of the city's funds. That's all money that's being appropriated to us and already given to us through grant.

01:16:33.540 --> 01:16:57.160
Okay. Any further? Alderman Sanders? Yeah. How have you had an opportunity to determine whether this is appropriate for this particular county or this city to determine if it doesn't violate anybody's rights or anything of that nature?

01:16:57.160 --> 01:17:23.760
So in order for us to even do a search, we have to have a reason, a law enforcement reason. So generally, you know, a crime's occurred or if there's a missing person or something like that. So we have to put a reason in and there are certain things you can't search for. And we also have to put a case number in there and all that data is collected by the state and it's audited. So we have to have a law enforcement reason to even access the cameras.

01:17:23.760 --> 01:17:53.120
Now the live video, that's something that I've talked to people in the community, they feel like, you know, we need more live video out there. It's very helpful, you know, as long as it's in the right place in the right time and capturing the right thing, you know, it's very helpful for us for certain things. So we do utilize license plate reader cameras right now. There's through Motorola or Vigilant, something that the city committed to, I think it was in 2021. So it's a different platform, but

01:17:53.760 --> 01:17:59.520
and Vigilant doesn't have the trailer cameras and the other two things that we're looking to get to.

01:18:00.360 --> 01:18:05.840
Flock is a smoother, easier to use, more modern platforms.

01:18:06.180 --> 01:18:08.060
It's something that wasn't available in 2021.

01:18:08.820 --> 01:18:11.640
It kind of really became popular about two years ago.

01:18:12.060 --> 01:18:13.900
A lot of agencies are going to that.

01:18:14.180 --> 01:18:16.180
So that's why I chose them.

01:18:16.700 --> 01:18:18.820
Would you like your second time, Alderman Sanders?

01:18:18.820 --> 01:18:18.980
Yeah.

01:18:19.280 --> 01:18:19.500
Okay.

01:18:20.880 --> 01:18:23.040
I'll be able to elaborate a little bit longer.

01:18:23.760 --> 01:18:25.780
I need to use my four minutes.

01:18:26.560 --> 01:18:27.960
You know, just to ask your question.

01:18:31.800 --> 01:18:37.240
All vehicles, police vehicles, will be designated with a plate reader.

01:18:37.760 --> 01:18:40.860
No, these are not mobile devices.

01:18:41.060 --> 01:18:42.280
These would be stationary.

01:18:43.120 --> 01:18:43.600
Stationary?

01:18:43.900 --> 01:18:45.260
Yeah, and they're solar-powered.

01:18:45.680 --> 01:18:47.460
And they're located throughout the city?

01:18:47.640 --> 01:18:48.460
They would be, yes.

01:18:48.680 --> 01:18:48.940
Okay.

01:18:49.320 --> 01:18:49.680
All right.

01:18:49.860 --> 01:18:50.280
Thank you.

01:18:51.320 --> 01:18:52.400
Alderman Stacy?

01:18:52.400 --> 01:19:16.320
You know, I hear you talk about more cameras, more, you know, we tried to get cameras, and it was shot down like fire, burning in the forest.

01:19:17.980 --> 01:19:19.400
It was not wanted.

01:19:19.400 --> 01:19:45.890
Now all of a sudden, now we want cameras. And so I don't know if this will pass or not, but since we want cameras, we could get them. And it was grants and money out there where we could have had cameras on every telephone.

01:19:45.890 --> 01:20:26.330
cameras on every telephone pole to help detour some of the crime here in our city. And we were denied that right. But now, with you bringing it to the council, they're all in. A little sad to me. Because... I don't know what rights were denied. Alderman Johnson? So did this grant just come out recently or it just came out recently? You could apply for it. So the, yeah, the

01:20:26.330 --> 01:20:56.310
Retail Theft Grant, it's an annual grant, it's one that you can reapply for every year, and that's for the $9,000, the appropriations, that's something totally different, that's being appropriated to us through Senator Durbin's office, so Darren's probably more knowledgeable about that type of money, this is the first time I've ever been able to secure funds that way, I've been able to get a lot of grants, but it's for two years, that one's for two years, the Attorney General's $9,000,

01:20:56.330 --> 01:20:59.250
That's just a one-year thing, but we can reapply for it.

01:21:00.110 --> 01:21:01.550
You want your second? Sure.

01:21:01.770 --> 01:21:14.410
And so just to clarify, this won't go forward unless we get the grant money, and we'll use the appropriations money for part of these things, but we won't get it all unless we get the grant money. Is that correct?

01:21:14.870 --> 01:21:23.750
Right. So, I mean, let's say the $9,000 is a for sure thing. I've already been awarded that. The appropriations, I mean, I'm just playing it safe.

01:21:23.750 --> 01:21:27.410
if, you know, I asked for a contingency in the contract and there is one in there.

01:21:27.530 --> 01:21:33.190
So if the appropriations fail, then we're left with $9,000, which gives us about two to three cameras.

01:21:33.610 --> 01:21:34.530
Okay, thank you.

01:21:37.090 --> 01:21:38.290
Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

01:21:40.360 --> 01:21:40.760
Sanders.

01:21:49.230 --> 01:21:49.570
Aye.

01:21:50.150 --> 01:21:50.470
Clem.

01:21:50.650 --> 01:21:50.870
Aye.

01:21:51.130 --> 01:21:51.570
Johnson.

01:21:51.830 --> 01:21:52.050
Aye.

01:21:52.330 --> 01:21:52.570
Simmons.

01:21:53.010 --> 01:21:53.310
Aye.

01:21:53.550 --> 01:21:53.870
Parker.

01:21:54.190 --> 01:21:54.430
Aye.

01:21:54.710 --> 01:21:55.110
Stacey.

01:21:55.550 --> 01:21:55.870
Aye.

01:21:56.110 --> 01:21:56.590
And Shadle.

01:21:56.730 --> 01:21:56.930
Aye.

01:21:57.230 --> 01:21:59.410
The resolution is adopted, six to zero.

01:22:06.690 --> 01:22:08.090
Seven, seven to zero.

01:22:11.130 --> 01:22:12.290
Did you say six, Madam Clerk?

01:22:12.530 --> 01:22:13.030
It's seven.

01:22:13.330 --> 01:22:20.370
Oh, yes, that's because we have everybody back on the floor now. 7 to 0. Thank you, Attorney Zito. Sorry.

01:22:21.210 --> 01:22:25.670
Item number 13 is the adoption of Resolution 2025-113. Could you please read this?

01:22:26.110 --> 01:22:35.510
Resolution endorsing community solar savings program through Illinois Shines, which is a state-administered incentive program to support the development of new solar projects.

01:22:35.850 --> 01:22:36.570
Manager Boyer.

01:22:37.010 --> 01:22:42.650
Thank you, Your Honor. The City of Freeport has been asked if we would like to participate in the Illinois Solar Energy Incentive Program.

01:22:43.330 --> 01:23:08.090
Solar developers are often required to offer subscription incentives. The city's largest accounts, 100kw and under, would be eligible to receive the monetary bill credits from the program incentive. These incentive programs work on a 20-year subscription timeline, and this program was reviewed by Mr. Mudge, who is here tonight on September 8th, 2025.

01:23:08.090 --> 01:23:38.030
This subscription program application will allow Freeport to participate and receive solar incentives from solar array projects that are being installed in the area. Freeport will not have any financial or live. I did not pass that out. I'm so sorry. Do you want me to get copies for everyone? You're just going to read it. I'm just going to I'll read it. I'm so sorry. That's okay. The city utility accounts are appealing to the program to the large and consistent use of electricity. Many

01:23:38.030 --> 01:24:07.990
Northwestern Illinois cities are joining this program and there is a brochure if someone is interested to see it but Mike did present at the last committee the whole so there were many questions asked at that time so there is no financial requirement except the provider will charge a subscription fee from the credit received staff will also incur work time to subscribe and provide detailed account information staff is recommending the city council to approve moving forward with

01:24:07.990 --> 01:24:36.530
the community solar with Illinois shine to receive solar credit incentives. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. A motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Clem. Discussion on the resolution? Alderman Simmons. So if I can persuade any of you, even since before my time on council, I cannot think of one person that has said, I'm glad that the city has done this program.

01:24:36.530 --> 01:24:43.590
and I would like to remind you all that last time we set up we signed up for this the company was not able to honor their contract

01:24:43.590 --> 01:24:52.570
so please just keep those things in mind when making your decision. Manager Boyer? I'd like to make one minor comment

01:24:52.570 --> 01:24:59.750
related to this the aggregation contract is what the city's done in the past this is something new and this is

01:24:59.750 --> 01:25:05.730
completely different from the aggregation contract this would allow the city to receive solar credits for

01:25:05.730 --> 01:25:08.330
worth of solar arrays that are already being built by other people.

01:25:10.680 --> 01:25:13.300
That's the next, it's the next item. Yep.

01:25:14.560 --> 01:25:15.560
Allerman Johnson?

01:25:16.340 --> 01:25:29.840
From what I understood the gentleman telling us is that the subscriptions that we do are to give money to have more solar farms or plots put up.

01:25:30.240 --> 01:25:36.720
So if we get electricity, he said, that's already used in all these other farms that are around.

01:25:36.720 --> 01:25:42.120
So this means they're going to be putting more solar farms around the city of Freeport, right?

01:25:43.420 --> 01:25:48.200
Well, we have Mr. Mudge here. Maybe he could be a little more specific. Mr. Mudge, would you want to address that?

01:25:55.080 --> 01:26:03.820
Thank you for the question. Basically, the state and the governor wants to promote clean, clean power.

01:26:04.520 --> 01:26:12.260
And the subscriptions, when you subscribe on, it's going to be for new fields that are being developed right now

01:26:12.260 --> 01:26:42.360
are being developed in 2026, and they need subscribers. Will it continue on past 26 or 27? We really don't. We really don't know. It all depends on the incentives and things like that. Where they will be built and where they'll be placed is where it's going to be economically beneficial to connect into the ComEd grid. So, I don't know if that's answering your specific question, Linda.

01:26:42.360 --> 01:27:11.100
Linda, Ms. Johnson, but wherever these are going to be built will be in approved locations through the Illinois Shines program, and that doesn't necessarily mean there's going to be a lot more here in Freeport or not, probably nothing in our city, but in most likely rural areas where the connection fees to come at are lower.

01:27:11.100 --> 01:27:44.830
Does that help? Go ahead. So chances are they would be in agriculture, farming areas, the new solar fields would possibly because it would be cheaper to put them up in those areas. Is that what you're saying? For example, a good solar project is like what's being built right here in the city of Freeport on the old landfill. That's a perfect use for land that cannot be really used for anything else.

01:27:45.770 --> 01:28:06.130
What? There's more incentives for solar companies to go into like brown areas and different things like that, you know, throughout and build them. Will it drew up more farmland? That's possible. But that's a farmer's choice or his opportunity.

01:28:06.130 --> 01:28:35.750
What we're looking at though for the specific city accounts is take advantage of the program that the state's created to promote solar and we can do this now. Everyone, I mentioned last time, everyone in combat area pays into the solar fund. So it's up to the council here whether or not you want to get some of that money that's being paid and leaving

01:28:35.750 --> 01:28:41.990
City of Freeport back in for public works accounts only.

01:28:43.710 --> 01:28:55.050
Any further discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

01:28:55.850 --> 01:28:57.110
Sanders? No.

01:28:58.510 --> 01:28:59.750
Clem? Aye.

01:29:00.570 --> 01:29:01.710
Johnson? No.

01:29:02.630 --> 01:29:03.670
Simmons? No.

01:29:04.150 --> 01:29:05.150
Parker? Aye.

01:29:05.710 --> 01:29:06.790
Stacey? No.

01:29:07.430 --> 01:29:08.290
And Shadle? Aye.

01:29:08.290 --> 01:29:14.690
I have three in favor, four against, and the resolution fails

01:29:14.690 --> 01:29:23.330
move on to item number 14 which is the adoption of resolution 2025 114 could you please read this

01:29:23.330 --> 01:29:31.050
resolution approving an electrical aggregation agreement uh with if if we agree on our low bidder that'll be

01:29:31.050 --> 01:29:36.490
that person for the retail supply of electric for residential and small business customers in the

01:29:36.490 --> 01:29:43.990
City of Freeport. Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. As we discussed at the Committee of the Whole last week, we received bid.

01:29:43.990 --> 01:29:50.660
last week, we received bids, I believe MC squared was a low bidder, and let's see, we've got it up on the screen here for you.

01:29:51.940 --> 01:29:53.500
That's what I forgot to pass out.

01:29:53.500 --> 01:30:07.360
So, with that being said, staff would recommend moving forward with MC squared for the low kilowatt provider at two years.

01:30:07.540 --> 01:30:08.720
At what rate are we talking about?

01:30:08.720 --> 01:30:43.490
at 9.89 cents per kilowatt hour. 9.89? Yes. Okay. Yes. Is that your conclusion? Yes. Staff recommends the two-year, but obviously it's at council's discretion. So moved. Second. Motion made by Alderman Clem, seconded by Alderman Shadle. Discussion on approving MC squared. Alderman Stacy. As Alderman Simmons stated,

01:30:45.630 --> 01:31:17.840
earlier that last year when we did this everybody was automatically changed if you didn't want the change you had to send in a paper acting out and then they couldn't even fulfill the need and so

01:31:17.840 --> 01:31:49.250
So, why are we back here again? And being that we're back here again, I hope this time, if people choose to take it, that they have a choice, and not that they're automatically changed, and then now they got to go and change back. So, I don't know how that works, but to change everybody to this MC2,

01:31:51.780 --> 01:31:53.880
I think it should be optional.

01:31:55.320 --> 01:32:00.020
If they want MC to, they can call you.

01:32:01.040 --> 01:32:05.920
But to switch everybody automatically, no.

01:32:07.160 --> 01:32:12.160
We were clearly shown last year, it did not work.

01:32:14.400 --> 01:32:20.190
And now we're all back with comment.

01:32:20.190 --> 01:32:21.770
Manager Boyer.

01:32:21.770 --> 01:32:24.490
Mr. Mudge, I don't know if you can provide some clarity

01:32:24.490 --> 01:32:54.310
on this, but we've done this for many different times. People have saved thousands of dollars on their overall power bill, but could you explain why last year was different than the past years and why it's different than this year and just based on those rates, how much do you think we'll end up saving based on ComEd's base rate right now? Sure. Last year, the council did agree and we had a signed agreement with Nordic Energy.

01:32:54.490 --> 01:33:23.270
However, their cost, not to their fault, but it was a pass-through charge, increased the charges where they could not honor that contract However, we decided to give it a rest and have everyone go back to ComEd. At that time, we did not know what the ComEd rate was going to be. Now, we know what the ComEd rate is. In actuality, this morning, I looked at the new ComEd rate tariffs that came out for September

01:33:23.270 --> 01:33:29.870
through May, and the com-ed rate now is at 10.6 cents.

01:33:31.030 --> 01:33:39.830
The MC squared rate, whether you do a one-year or two-year contract, that's what it'll be.

01:33:40.510 --> 01:33:45.910
Now, the bottom line is, the state set up the program where it would be an opt-out program.

01:33:45.910 --> 01:33:49.430
If you don't want to be in it, that is the customer's choice.

01:33:49.430 --> 01:34:19.410
but by not passing or adopting a contract customers do not have a choice at all. They're just on ComEd or on a supplier of their own and they have that choice. So what difference is the difference between the one or the two year contract make? If there's a penny difference and we have 3,000 customers

01:34:19.430 --> 01:34:29.550
customers in Freeport, then the average customer uses about 700, 730 kilowatt hours, ComEd customers.

01:34:30.470 --> 01:34:39.550
So that's saving each customer $7, $7.50 if they want it. If they don't, they can stay on ComEd right now.

01:34:39.550 --> 01:35:09.510
so comments rate is set so by passing this ordinance you're giving the customers a choice back that was really taken away from them when we all agreed we didn't know what the new comment rate was back in April or May when we had to replace that original contract but what's going to stop it from happening no he's

01:35:09.510 --> 01:35:21.830
called up to take questions. I have a question. What's going to stop it from happening again? We can't say that it is or isn't going to happen again. It's out of your hands, too.

01:35:22.890 --> 01:35:33.910
The regulated rate that was passed on to Nordic Energy has now set for the next two years. The suppliers know what their costs are. They will hold that rate.

01:35:33.910 --> 01:35:36.590
But you told us that last year about

01:35:36.590 --> 01:35:42.230
When we did this last year, we did not know what the federal

01:35:42.230 --> 01:35:52.050
pass-through costs were going to be. And in the past, in the past, it was known. It all has to do

01:35:52.050 --> 01:36:00.210
with the demand for power going up so, so, so much. But to me, I'm just simply saying,

01:36:00.210 --> 01:36:08.090
if you want to give your residents and your very small businesses a choice this is giving them back a choice

01:36:08.090 --> 01:36:21.700
for a rate that's better than ComEd. Alderman Shadle. You said the average homeowner would see a difference of

01:36:21.700 --> 01:36:31.720
roughly $7.50. What is the impact taking MC Squared's rate for the city contracts?

01:36:31.720 --> 01:37:01.700
if we look at 3,000 residents which is no which is low city oh the city not the residents this has nothing to do with the city no on this contract how much do we save as the city of Freeport the city does not save any money at all no on this is strictly for your residents no no no not the city residents I'm talking the city water department the city sewer department our billing the city of Freeport billings all right

01:37:01.700 --> 01:37:11.240
All right, I'll answer that. Our contract, the section contract right now ends December of 2026 for the city water accounts is like at the rate of 5.61 cents.

01:37:13.260 --> 01:37:14.720
And that's the public work.

01:37:14.720 --> 01:37:15.580
Attorney Zito can answer.

01:37:16.660 --> 01:37:28.440
If I'm understanding your question, it'll, electric aggregation, this particular contract is strictly for residential and small, small businesses.

01:37:28.440 --> 01:37:33.960
We have a separate contract for the city accounts like our wastewater treatment plant and et cetera.

01:37:34.040 --> 01:37:38.320
So that's a separate contract that we have each year for the city accounts.

01:37:41.290 --> 01:37:41.790
Alderman Parker?

01:37:42.110 --> 01:37:43.190
Just a quick question.

01:37:44.570 --> 01:37:46.110
We approve this tonight.

01:37:46.450 --> 01:37:49.870
Do the people in the city have to do this or they can ignore it and stay with comment?

01:37:51.170 --> 01:37:53.550
People have two choices to opt out.

01:37:53.730 --> 01:37:59.910
Once they'll get a letter under city letterhead from MC Squared, if that's chosen,

01:37:59.910 --> 01:38:05.450
to say, here's what your rate will be starting in December.

01:38:06.050 --> 01:38:10.090
If you don't want to be part of this program, let us know.

01:38:11.030 --> 01:38:13.670
Secondly, a ComEd switch letter comes out.

01:38:14.010 --> 01:38:16.510
Well, it was the state the same thing in case somebody misses it.

01:38:16.510 --> 01:38:19.490
This is state statute how that's supposed to work.

01:38:19.870 --> 01:38:21.430
ComEd will send out a switch letter.

01:38:22.290 --> 01:38:26.010
And again, if you do not want to be part of the program, you can opt out.

01:38:26.010 --> 01:38:55.890
anyone else that's in would be automatically in the program but what what one thought that I had I wanted to mention what's the value of this to the city of Freeport if it's seven dollars a month times three thousand residents that's twenty one thousand dollars a month that stays in the city might not seem like a lot but every to me every dollar counts you have to opt out or you can just ignore it and not respond at all if you ignore it you

01:38:55.890 --> 01:39:24.570
you will be switched. And that's the state statute. It's like it's always been, Alderman Parker, if you want out, you have to opt out, otherwise you're in. Alderman Sanders. Yeah, I know exactly what you're doing, sir, with this Nordic thing and trying to get it proposed to the city of Freeport or the residents of Freeport. The thing that I found out, and it's like you said,

01:39:24.570 --> 01:39:42.010
they had issues managing how they want to implement their program but they fail. They initially failed their program because I was part of that program and they had so much difficulty.

01:39:42.010 --> 01:40:09.840
and they had so much difficulties with it. In order for you to opt out of it, you have to not only go back to ComEd, but you have to go through another agency so they can enforce it. They have to enforce it. There's another agency that enforces it that keeps companies like Nordic and ComEd to impose upon residents to opt them in

01:40:10.000 --> 01:40:26.160
when they don't want to be in there. If they don't acknowledge it to, I forgot the name of the company, but there's another agency that they have to acknowledge it with them so they can inform ComEd.

01:40:26.300 --> 01:40:39.080
It's almost like another liaison that's working on behalf of these suppliers. And I ended up getting out of that program with Nordic,

01:40:39.080 --> 01:41:05.140
Even though I did have to go through the procedures to get another agency to have ComEd to recognize that I want to be with another supplier, now you're back here again trying to say that it's the state law. If it's the state law, then why am I with another supplier? If it was, and Nordic was having all these issues, why is Nordic coming back in to the picture?

01:41:05.460 --> 01:41:06.200
Nordic is not.

01:41:06.200 --> 01:41:09.580
M.C. M.C. Square? Is it M.C. Square?

01:41:09.720 --> 01:41:14.380
Oh, okay. They just changed the name is what they did, huh?

01:41:14.580 --> 01:41:14.760
No.

01:41:15.640 --> 01:41:37.560
Oh, okay. But anyway, it's not something that I think, like one of the aldermen says that if he doesn't comply or acknowledge to a certain agency, then they automatically back into whatever this is that you're talking about.

01:41:37.580 --> 01:42:06.060
I don't think that should be something that the citizens of Preport should be considering. If they have suppliers already in existence right now that they're using other than ComEd, that they should continue to use their supplier until they get one better. And that should be their option and not the other suppliers or ComEd.

01:42:07.580 --> 01:42:37.560
enforcement or the state's enforcement as far as I'm concerned. But anyway, I know there's another agency in play that all residents have to acknowledge that they do or do not want to be part of this program. So I'm just saying that's just my observation on these matters and I think we should take these into consideration that what you're proposing, I don't know what really, does it have a clown mask?

01:42:37.580 --> 01:42:38.880
on it or whatever, I don't know.

01:42:39.520 --> 01:42:40.040
Alderman Johnson?

01:42:41.140 --> 01:42:42.740
Customers do have three choices.

01:42:43.140 --> 01:42:43.700
Three now.

01:42:44.080 --> 01:42:45.360
There are three choices.

01:42:46.000 --> 01:42:48.560
One, stay in ComEd.

01:42:49.240 --> 01:42:58.240
Two, they could go back, or they could go under the city program of Pc Squared and appreciate

01:42:58.240 --> 01:43:01.200
a better rate and save a few dollars on the rental bill.

01:43:01.600 --> 01:43:07.520
Three, you can go out like you probably did and choose your own supplier at your own

01:43:07.520 --> 01:43:32.960
Risk. So that's the three choices that all customers have. And I think that you, I don't say you owe it to it, but you should think about giving your residents all three options so that they can make their choice. It's their choice. Once it leaves here, it's back to them and their choice.

01:43:32.960 --> 01:43:56.220
Alderman Johnson So the majority of the residents in the city of Freeport are just on ComEd right now. And according to this paper, it says that from September 25 to May 26, it's 10.229 cents per kilowatt hour. Now you're saying it's 10.6 right now?

01:43:56.220 --> 01:44:15.400
It's 10.6 because it's the current. It goes from September through May on the new rate. On the new rate of 10.6. Right. Right. The 10.2, that was like for the four summer months and blended to the winter, but now it's 10.6.

01:44:15.400 --> 01:44:39.820
So if we choose this contract, MC2, we choose the two-year contract, we would be locked in at 9.89 cents per kilowatt hour for those two years, which is less than what we're paying now with ComEd, which is the current rate is 10.6, which could change at the end of May, or in May 26, it could go up a lot higher than that.

01:44:39.820 --> 01:45:12.880
but if we choose this for two years it would be 9.89 cents per kilowatt hour for those two years, correct? That is correct. Thank you. Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Sanders? No. Clem? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? No. Parker? Aye. Stacy? No. Shadle? Aye. The resolution is adopted five to two. No.

01:45:12.920 --> 01:45:46.400
That's not right. Four to three. So it's because half the council has voted, you would need to call the mayor's vote. Say it again, sir. So when you have half of the council, four, vote in favor of an item, then you can call the mayor. That's one of the situations where the mayor is entitled to vote. I heard you say that. Okay. I'm going to hold you to that. Okay. Okay. I'm going to hold you right there. Okay. This is a nonsense discussion. Mayor,

01:45:46.400 --> 01:45:48.280
Mayor, what say you?

01:45:48.520 --> 01:45:48.960
Aye.

01:45:49.520 --> 01:45:50.900
I'm asking him a question.

01:45:51.940 --> 01:45:53.160
You're talking nonsense.

01:45:53.200 --> 01:45:55.460
The resolution is adopted 5-3.

01:45:55.460 --> 01:45:58.520
Item number 15 is the adoption of Resolution 2025-115.

01:45:58.920 --> 01:46:01.120
Could you please read this for the record?

01:46:01.760 --> 01:46:03.100
That's the legal move, and I'm glad.

01:46:03.100 --> 01:46:12.740
Resolution authorizing memorandum of understanding with AFSCME for street or forestry foreman temporary assignment as acting street superintendent.

01:46:12.900 --> 01:46:13.500
That pass.

01:46:14.760 --> 01:46:15.480
Manager Boyer.

01:46:15.480 --> 01:46:45.200
Thank you, Your Honor. The city superintendent has a significant amount of personal time off due to his years of service. Additionally, his management and leadership responsibilities require him to be on call a significant amount of the time due to the nature of his current public works role. To ensure our staff is fully supported and has adequate time off and receives appropriate rest and downtime, staff is requesting that a memorandum of understanding be approved by the city council to allow for additional

01:46:45.200 --> 01:47:15.200
annual hourly pay for appointed foreman who takes on added responsibilities thereby covering this time off. This MOU pay will be for approved and assigned coverage only. The MOU approval will allow our superintendent to take appropriate time off ensuring that the quality of their time off by knowing that they have some experienced staff who can handle the calls. It was also allowed for scheduling formal coverage with the foreman in advance of their PTO

01:47:15.200 --> 01:47:44.900
or weekend off. This increase in pay for the foreman will only be for the added responsibility as actual work time assigned during approved time off by the superintendent. This arrangement is similar to the MOU that was proposed for the water main break assignments in the utility. The MOU will provide $5 an hour increase in the appointed foreman hourly pay as approved only on an hours of coverage that are physically worked and logged in the absence of the superintendent during time off.

01:47:45.200 --> 01:48:15.200
and recommendation to move forward with this $5 an hour increase to the foreman to cover for the street the street superintendent's time off. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. The motion made by Alderman Shadle seconded by Alderman Clem. Discussion on the on the resolution? Alderman Stacy? I don't understand how we can continue to move forward with

01:48:15.200 --> 01:48:50.650
increases when we're still waiting on a contract that's been not in action for three or four months. The S&P Union continue to wait for a contract, and we continue to want to make increases everywhere but with them. Manager Boyer. What do you mean by three or four months?

01:48:50.650 --> 01:49:20.390
you tell me no I don't know I don't know what you meant by that was their contract up when did their contract in their contract is still in place and we're negotiating yes it's in place now until I believe you said something to the however but when did it in and and you were not prepared to move forward with it but you're prepared you're prepared to move forward with increases where you want increases let's be fair

01:49:20.390 --> 01:49:40.000
across the board. They deserve a fair contract. Let's make it happen. This is providing additional wages to a street superintendent to cover in between time. We've already discussed it with the union. It is acceptable to the

01:49:40.000 --> 01:49:42.640
It is acceptable, but to the unions moving forward.

01:49:42.820 --> 01:49:53.740
So this is basically so that we can give our street superintendent time off and make sure that he can sign his duties during the time that he has the weekend off.

01:49:53.780 --> 01:49:59.780
And what about our 911 people working 12-hour days?

01:49:59.780 --> 01:50:04.280
I know it has nothing to do with it because we don't want to discuss that.

01:50:04.300 --> 01:50:05.600
It's a different topic.

01:50:05.600 --> 01:50:10.320
And it's a topic that will never make the agenda because you're not going to put it on

01:50:10.320 --> 01:50:15.040
Ask me negotiations is not going to be on the council floor

01:50:15.040 --> 01:50:16.460
No, it will not

01:50:16.460 --> 01:50:19.200
But I'm just saying get them a contract

01:50:19.200 --> 01:50:22.260
Let's stay on task here

01:50:22.260 --> 01:50:23.540
Is there any questions

01:50:23.540 --> 01:50:25.160
Yep, let's stay on task

01:50:25.160 --> 01:50:28.020
Please stop being disruptive

01:50:28.020 --> 01:50:30.660
But you're disruptive to me

01:50:30.660 --> 01:50:32.500
If there's no further discussion

01:50:32.500 --> 01:50:34.480
Madam Clerk, please take the roll

01:50:34.480 --> 01:50:35.020
Sanders

01:50:35.020 --> 01:50:36.500
No

01:50:36.500 --> 01:51:05.960
Clemm? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? Aye. Parker? Aye. Stacy? No. Shadle? Aye. The motion, the adoption, the resolution is adopted 5 to 2. I'm sorry. Item number 16 is the adoption of resolution 2025-116. Could you please read this? Resolution approving an airport management agreement with Freeport Aviation for Albertus Airport. Thank you. Manager Boyer? Thank you, Your Honor.

01:51:05.960 --> 01:51:35.940
the city issued a request for quote or RFQ for the fixed base operator airport manager contract for Albertus Airport on August 11th, 2025. Initial meetings were held with four prospective applicants and three applicants submitted applications by the September 2nd deadline. The applications were opened on September 4th at City Hall and reviewed opening by myself.

01:51:35.960 --> 01:52:05.920
Ralph, the Mayor, Alderman Sellers, the Public Works Director, Darren Steakle, City Clerk, Dovie Anderson, and Attorney Steve Cox were present. I am pleased to notify that all three applications received were excellent, and all of them represented well-qualified applicants. The lowest of the three responsible applicants was Jeff Monica, Freeport, Illinois, at $157,500 per year. I am recommending the City Council authorize

01:52:05.920 --> 01:52:12.580
the negotiation and execution of an operator contract in the form set forth in the RFQ with Jeff Modica

01:52:12.580 --> 01:52:24.240
and according to the term set forth in his response to the RFQ. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second.

01:52:25.460 --> 01:52:32.580
We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Clem. Discussion on the resolution? Alderman Johnson?

01:52:33.280 --> 01:52:38.740
I'm just looking on the contract and it says that the operator, airport operator, shall keep regular

01:52:38.740 --> 01:53:10.620
posted business hours 8 to 6 Monday through Friday, 8 to 5 Saturday and Sunday 8 to noon. Now does that mean that the operator will be there in person all of those hours or can they just be reached by phone or how do they cover all of those hours? If I could answer that I believe they can have a designee available during those hours. Thank you. Alderman Stacy? Yes.

01:53:12.300 --> 01:53:32.980
Who's going to run the airport when this person is at his other job? And what terms was this negotiated under? And is the contract for a year or 19 years?

01:53:34.420 --> 01:53:40.160
I'll try to answer that. The operator is responsible to cover the hours that were specified in the agreement.

01:53:40.160 --> 01:53:45.360
So whether it's them sitting there or they have their alternate there

01:53:45.360 --> 01:53:50.560
What do that mean, an alternate? We've never had an alternate before

01:53:50.560 --> 01:53:53.020
Could you please allow him to finish the question?

01:53:53.020 --> 01:53:55.220
I'm just asking, what is an alternate?

01:53:58.000 --> 01:54:00.860
Would you like me to finish the questions or go back to the alternate?

01:54:01.360 --> 01:54:02.500
Finish the question

01:54:02.500 --> 01:54:09.000
Okay, so that I understand, would you please remind me of the last question?

01:54:09.000 --> 01:54:35.040
Yeah, it is automatically renewed each year unless either the operator or the city is interested to open the contract and renegotiate it, in which it will be a new request for quote will be sent out in a similar fashion as this last one. So it would be available for anyone to provide a quote for.

01:54:35.040 --> 01:54:40.560
Okay, you said something about the hours stated, unless what?

01:54:41.200 --> 01:54:47.080
No, I was trying to answer your question about the 19 years, 1 to 19 years.

01:54:47.200 --> 01:54:52.120
So if the operator's happy and the city is happy, it will auto-renew each year.

01:54:52.540 --> 01:54:57.120
I said who is going to run the airport when he is at his other job.

01:54:57.120 --> 01:55:04.860
And you said something about it will be ran at the hours stated by him or an alternate.

01:55:05.040 --> 01:55:35.020
Right. So what's an alternate? We've never had an alternate before. That's incorrect. We have someone, it is, if there is an employee of the operator that can carry the office hours. But the employee of the operator is not who got interviewed for the position. You know, I just think it's sad that this lady that spoke to us tonight for 28 years,

01:55:35.040 --> 01:56:05.040
for 28 years, you know this is her life, this is her livelihood. For 28 years she has ran that airport and there is nobody in miles that can touch her. They're not equipped. They don't know what they're doing because they haven't done it. And shame on you to take and not even consider her for this

01:56:05.040 --> 01:56:36.180
Manager, Boyer, I will say that the current operator has been operating the airport for five years and this was an open process that accepted three qualified statements or quotes. The quotes were opened with a panel who reviewed them all and the lowest quote was the one that was recommended for council to move forward with.

01:56:38.300 --> 01:56:39.260
Alderman Sanders?

01:56:39.980 --> 01:57:06.360
Yeah, this resolution that is bringing, is being brought into our focus at this time, who is the person, who's drafting this authorization of this resolution, and how do we even come to the decision of establishing whether or not we should move forward with this resolution in terms of who introduced this resolution?

01:57:06.360 --> 01:57:19.240
I mean, who gives the authorization to move on an issue of this magnitude when it comes to contracts and things like that?

01:57:19.240 --> 01:57:27.740
I thought this was something that the council should be creating this type of resolution.

01:57:27.740 --> 01:57:37.620
It's not, it shouldn't be the city manager who's creating this resolution of hiring and firing someone that's dealing with the contract.

01:57:37.620 --> 01:57:57.100
I mean, just automatically spell out, had not spelled out the terms and things of this nature far as renewal and there's someone currently working there already and I feel that if council has not

01:57:57.100 --> 01:58:26.360
intervened in terms of the drafting of this resolution. I think this thing should be dismissed, thrown in the garbage until we come up with the right protocol on how we're going to conduct contracts with any management organization and system that we should be totally informed about it. And I feel that that is where we're at right now.

01:58:27.100 --> 01:58:35.520
We're not in a position to be doing resolution with the improper authorization of this particular resolution.

01:58:35.780 --> 01:58:51.880
And I feel that everyone here in council should really take a good look at this and see what is causing friction within the city and eliminating a manager,

01:58:51.880 --> 01:59:04.020
or a superintendent out at the airport eliminating that job and opening it up for others to come in and look at that job without any scrutiny.

01:59:04.020 --> 01:59:18.020
I don't feel we should be conducting this type of thing, and I think council has the last say-so when it comes to the resolution of authorizing any memorandum.

01:59:18.020 --> 01:59:38.020
and I'm just saying that should be the procedure unless you show me something else in writing that does not give the counsel the authorization to dismiss something that we have not even considered.

01:59:38.020 --> 02:00:05.480
and I think this is something that we have not even considered to authorize for a contract. So I think the council, not no administrative heads or city manager or mayor or attorney Zito or anyone like that injecting or imposing anything on this particular resolution matter. And I think this should come directly from the intelligent minds that sits here in our council to look at the overall picture.

02:00:06.000 --> 02:00:28.260
of what we might be voting for unless we should be dismissing this and coming back to it at another time so we can make sure that what we're accepting here is properly set right or we got the proper provisions to allow such an authorization to go through.

02:00:28.260 --> 02:00:32.500
I don't even think we should be even entertaining this matter at this time

02:00:32.500 --> 02:00:40.520
So let us re-evaluate ourselves and look at this thing real hard, real strong

02:00:40.520 --> 02:00:41.080
I think

02:00:41.080 --> 02:00:43.140
Your four minutes has expired, Alderman Sanders

02:00:43.140 --> 02:00:46.380
Can I adopt another minute?

02:00:46.600 --> 02:00:46.880
No

02:00:46.880 --> 02:00:50.020
And no one's fired

02:00:50.020 --> 02:00:53.160
This is, every contract has an end date

02:00:53.160 --> 02:00:53.800
Are you making a comment, Mayor?

02:00:53.980 --> 02:00:54.780
I can

02:00:54.780 --> 02:00:55.660
You can?

02:00:56.240 --> 02:00:57.480
Would you please stop interrupting?

02:00:58.260 --> 02:01:31.160
a con when every contract has an end date. This is just an end date where Alderman Sanders. I'm sorry. Please stop. I'm sorry. Attorney Zito. Just for clarification, this contract is being presented to you, the council to vote on. You can vote yes or no on it. You guys have the final say on whether or not to approve who the city manager is recommending. It's just a recommendation that the council has the final say on it.

02:01:31.520 --> 02:01:33.580
and that's what's before you guys tonight.

02:01:35.890 --> 02:01:42.550
And if you read the memo, it says that all three were qualified, the chosen with lowest amount.

02:01:42.690 --> 02:01:43.190
We're gonna see.

02:01:43.970 --> 02:01:44.950
Well, I want my second.

02:01:44.950 --> 02:01:46.650
So unless there's any further discussion.

02:01:46.890 --> 02:01:47.690
I want my second.

02:01:47.950 --> 02:01:48.910
You would like your second?

02:01:49.290 --> 02:01:50.330
Yeah, I like my second.

02:01:50.390 --> 02:01:51.370
Okay, go ahead.

02:01:51.370 --> 02:02:02.190
Yeah, yeah, Attorney Zito, you failed to mention the fact that the person that put this on this

02:02:02.190 --> 02:02:33.480
agenda was not authorized to do so. You fail to acknowledge that. Yeah, go ahead. The city manager has the authority to place items on the agenda. Well, we didn't see that in the memo. There was no memo drafted on that matter. Because we have to go through the same protocol. That is an authority that the city manager has. I mean, all these other items are on the agenda that the city manager put on the agenda. Is there any other discussion on the resolution? Whether it's the right protocol or not?

02:02:33.500 --> 02:03:05.050
is one. You should probably have a better understanding. Yeah. If there's nothing further, Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll? Sanders. No. Clem. Aye. Johnson. Aye. Simmons. No. Parker. No. Stacy. No. Shadle. Aye. We have three in favor for against the motion or the resolution is not adopted. It fails. Please withhold

02:03:05.770 --> 02:03:24.170
Such inappropriate tonight. It boggles my mind. Let's try to remain professional. Item number 17 is approval of a bid. Could you please read this? We had a bid opening on September 10th, 2025. Sewer lining for 2025. Manager Boyer.

02:03:24.170 --> 02:03:55.590
The City of Freeport has nearly 130 miles of sanitary sewer. During the annual project evaluation, cure-in-place lining locations are identified for rehab of the sanitary sewer piping that has cracks and defects, inflow and infiltration, or sags or settlement. Our IEPA mandatory CMOM, that's the Sewer Capacity Management Plan, requires specified that the Freeport addresses annual sewer rehabilitations for

02:03:55.590 --> 02:04:25.570
for our collection system, mainline piping for environmental concerns. Sewer lining is considered an industrial and industry accepted method of sewer main pipe rehabilitation and is more economical than open cut excavation methods. Sewer lining is over 10 times cheaper to install and industry standards estimate over 60 years of sustainable, useful life after installation. On September 10th, 2025, Ferrick Graham and city staff had a public bid for

02:04:25.570 --> 02:04:33.950
for 10,813 linear feet of sanitary sewer lining. These sewer areas are identified as areas of street replacement.

02:04:34.570 --> 02:04:40.830
The city has four reputable bidders that specialize in sewer lining and submitted bids. National power

02:04:40.830 --> 02:04:49.750
routing was the low bidder at $419,763 under the engineering estimate, I might add. With approval,

02:04:49.750 --> 02:05:22.340
the installation should complete be completed by February 2026 and staff has budgeted this in the sewer budget staff recommends moving forward with that national power riding with the lowest responsive bid is there a motion to approve so move we have a second the motion made by Alderman Shadle seconded by Alderman Clem discussion on the bid Alderman Sanders is there anybody else wants to

02:05:22.340 --> 02:05:52.320
Alderman Sanders. Oh, okay. Manager Boyer, we had this conversation before, I believe, and we talked on some of the things that would take place to make sure that the residents are aware of the construction work that is going to take place. Will any of this interfere with their service as these guys begin to do

02:05:52.320 --> 02:06:03.360
their project lining program and everything. Would anything disrupt their service in the process of you guys taking care of those linings?

02:06:03.540 --> 02:06:05.480
It should not. It should not.

02:06:05.480 --> 02:06:19.600
And you guys are doing what we call a video taping of each line before we do an installation that we can make sure that this is the appropriate thing to be doing for this particular area.

02:06:19.600 --> 02:06:43.840
I don't know how extensive our televising program is, and so I couldn't, I really can't make an observation to determine what it is that is going on in that field, but I suspect you guys would keep us informed about the conditions of these lines and why we are investing into these projects.

02:06:45.260 --> 02:06:46.320
Yes, that's correct.

02:06:49.700 --> 02:06:50.820
Any further discussion?

02:06:50.820 --> 02:07:20.180
Madam Clerk please take the roll. Sanders. Oh yes. Plum. Aye. Johnson. Aye. Simmons. Aye. Parker. Aye. Stacey. Aye. And Shadle. Aye. The motion passes 6-7 to 0. Item number 18. Would you please read this discussion. Discussion regarding awarding contracts to a dissolved business entity. Alderman Simmons.

02:07:33.650 --> 02:07:35.690
I'll try to get through this as quickly as possible.

02:07:35.850 --> 02:08:00.290
Pursuant to my responsibilities as a duty, duly elected all the person I am formally requesting that the following matter be placed on the agenda, which was just read by City Clerk Anderson, considering consideration and discussion regarding the city procurement practices in relation to the awarding of contracts to a business entity that was involuntarily dissolved by the Illinois Secretary of State in June 2025.

02:08:00.290 --> 02:08:25.010
It has come to my attention that a business whose corporate status was involuntarily dissolved under 805 ILCS 512.40 of the Illinois Business Corporation Act continues to be awarded bids and contracts for city projects as dissolution terminates the legal standing of the corporation except for limited purposes of winding up its affairs.

02:08:25.010 --> 02:08:31.010
The situation may present compliance concerns with both state law and municipal procurement ordinances.

02:08:31.630 --> 02:08:54.230
My requested council action is to direct staff to review current city contracts and pending bids involved in the dissolved entity, seek a legal opinion from the city attorney regarding the validity of contracts awarded to entities without good corporate standing, and discuss whether policy or procedural updates are necessary to ensure future compliance with applicable laws

02:08:54.230 --> 02:09:01.030
and Protection of Taxpayer Funds. I respectfully request that this, oh, we don't need to do that, it's already on here. Thank you, though.

02:09:06.150 --> 02:09:28.590
I would just like to read 805-ILCS-5-1240 of the Illinois Business Corporation Act outlines the procedure for the administrative dissolution of a corporation by the Secretary of State.

02:09:28.610 --> 02:09:39.170
for failing to correct a default such as failure to maintain a rate of

02:09:39.170 --> 02:10:08.240
to maintain a registered office or file required document. The secretary first sends a notice of delinquency to the corporation. If the default is not corrected within 90 days for most defaults, 30 days for certain others, the secretary issues a certificate

02:10:08.260 --> 02:10:39.440
King, Justine, Dessertificate of Dissolution, formally dissolving the corporation. And that's what has happened here with Albert and Son Earthworks LLC, and if you go back in August the 18th meeting, they were awarded these demos and it was created and introduced in some way that comes to the

02:10:39.540 --> 02:10:55.260
However, I believe it was June the 13th, 2025, they were already in an involuntary dissolved situation.

02:10:55.260 --> 02:11:00.000
They're not even listed as a company currently.

02:11:03.350 --> 02:11:12.110
And 90 days before that would have taken it three more months back.

02:11:12.110 --> 02:11:25.300
So we're probably looking at them not having a license or being affiliated in the state as a company back into March.

02:11:27.160 --> 02:11:36.920
However, we just gave them jobs totally almost a quarter million, and they're not even registered in good standing.

02:11:36.920 --> 02:12:06.510
How does that happen? You know, we send out for these bids. And we're supposed to trust what you're bringing us. And time and time again, we're finding that we can't trust what you're bringing us. Because this should not be. This should not be coming to us if you're not in good standing.

02:12:06.510 --> 02:12:31.010
You knew back in March that your license were suspended. April, May, June. July, August is when you were granted these. And whoever chose this, I know it was the lower bid, but who's looking at the people that's bidding for these jobs?

02:12:31.010 --> 02:12:41.260
and why didn't you know that they were not adequately a business with the state?

02:12:43.930 --> 02:12:46.590
All of that is false. Go ahead, Director.

02:12:46.590 --> 02:12:51.910
No, see, this is what I talk about. You're telling me don't be disrespectful to you, but this is the third time.

02:12:51.910 --> 02:12:54.170
And you are putting out information that is not true.

02:12:54.270 --> 02:12:56.450
This is the third time you have.

02:12:56.450 --> 02:12:57.850
You are putting out information that is not true.

02:12:57.890 --> 02:13:01.430
No, it's not. I have it all right here. Please.

02:13:01.430 --> 02:13:04.130
Director Duckman, would you like to address those?

02:13:04.350 --> 02:13:05.470
No, I understand.

02:13:05.690 --> 02:13:08.130
I think that it's certainly something.

02:13:08.210 --> 02:13:09.370
I can see that you're upset.

02:13:09.610 --> 02:13:10.670
I understand.

02:13:10.810 --> 02:13:11.630
I'm not trying to talk.

02:13:11.750 --> 02:13:12.050
Go ahead.

02:13:12.130 --> 02:13:12.510
I'm sorry.

02:13:12.590 --> 02:13:13.710
No, I'm just saying.

02:13:14.310 --> 02:13:17.730
She's telling me I'm rude and I'm interrupted and don't.

02:13:17.730 --> 02:13:21.010
But then she had fronted me three times tonight.

02:13:21.570 --> 02:13:22.210
All right.

02:13:24.770 --> 02:13:25.630
Go ahead, Wayne.

02:13:25.950 --> 02:13:29.430
I was just going to say, let's start with what we're talking about here.

02:13:29.510 --> 02:13:33.130
And I'll start with a simple explanation as I can.

02:13:33.250 --> 02:14:03.230
and then I'll get into more of the details of the contract, etc. What we're talking about here is when you have a company, corporation, the state of Illinois requires you to file the fee. I do it every year. I have a company and I believe it's right around $72 for a corporation. You file some paperwork. It's usually about a page and every year you're required to file as a corporation in the state of Illinois.

02:14:03.250 --> 02:14:29.450
That's a rule. So what we're talking about here is that Albert and Son, it has to do with when they filed their paperwork. I have been in contact with Albert and Son on this matter. They have filed their paperwork. I've seen the receipts. I have them. I mean, I have no reason to be dishonest about that. They have filed their paperwork.

02:14:29.450 --> 02:14:35.430
paperwork. My understanding is they filed their paperwork late, which is probably why it's showing

02:14:35.430 --> 02:14:42.890
up as an involuntary dissolved organization. So if you file, I believe the deadline is August 1st.

02:14:43.430 --> 02:14:48.950
Again, there's different types of corporations. When I filed my corporation, the state of Illinois,

02:14:49.050 --> 02:14:54.710
the deadline was August 1st. So if you don't file on August 2nd, you're going to be involuntarily

02:14:54.710 --> 02:14:59.250
dissolved by the state of Illinois. The state of Illinois will let you file your paperwork late.

02:14:59.450 --> 02:15:08.310
but until you do file that paperwork late you're involuntarily dissolved. Now going back to how does

02:15:08.310 --> 02:15:15.390
the city of Freeport protect itself from this type of you know inaction whether it be with malice or not

02:15:15.390 --> 02:15:21.430
whether they intended to how do we protect ourselves you know there is a clause in our contract that says

02:15:21.430 --> 02:15:28.330
we require all contractors to follow all state and federal laws that's when they bid on the project

02:15:28.330 --> 02:15:35.010
they know it's not just city of free port ordinances it's state and federal laws obviously staff does

02:15:35.010 --> 02:15:43.430
everything they can to understand and to find any you know misuse of if somebody doesn't follow state or

02:15:43.430 --> 02:15:49.930
federal law they're obviously long there's many rules but when we know about it we will address it which is

02:15:49.930 --> 02:15:56.810
why I had been in contact with Albert and son to figure out what's the issue here the remedy is when staff

02:15:56.810 --> 02:16:03.170
becomes aware of an issue. They have the right to bring it back to council to terminate the contract.

02:16:03.290 --> 02:16:09.410
We are now aware of the issue. Albert and Son has filed the paperwork. They've showed me the receipts.

02:16:09.530 --> 02:16:16.670
I've seen the receipts. And now the next step would be council can either say there was an issue,

02:16:16.830 --> 02:16:22.510
they fixed it, or council can say, you know what, that's not good enough for us. We're going to move

02:16:22.510 --> 02:16:28.750
to terminate the contract. And there's really, I mean, those are your options. To be fair, I mean,

02:16:28.770 --> 02:16:34.210
if that's, if you think that filing this paperwork is egregious of enough to where they need to have

02:16:34.210 --> 02:16:39.410
these contracts revoked, I think you talk to counsel and see if that's something you want to talk about.

02:16:39.750 --> 02:16:45.770
If you're like, no, you know what, they made a mistake. They, you know, they were honest. They

02:16:45.770 --> 02:16:50.490
showed that they filed their paperwork late. We think that they've remedied the situation. Let's

02:16:50.490 --> 02:16:56.230
move this forward. I mean, that's a decision that you, I believe you should make. I mean, if we want to talk

02:16:56.230 --> 02:17:00.590
about it more, I answer more questions about it, that's fair. I mean, I'm here to answer them.

02:17:03.030 --> 02:17:03.670
Alderman Sanders.

02:17:05.050 --> 02:17:22.880
Thank you. Director Duckman, I understand the incompliance of the contract, but the fact that it

02:17:22.880 --> 02:17:56.030
No matter what came first, the horse or the cart. And the thing is, if the company or corporation was not in good standing with the state of Illinois, you cannot award or consider awarding any business entity, now let me finish, any business or entity with any acknowledgement of a potential contract.

02:17:56.050 --> 02:18:25.590
they're off the table. They're not part of the bidding, whatever, receiving of the awards and the contracts and things like that. If there's others in line and one falls off that didn't come into compliance, then the others move up, other corporations move into that slot until, like you say,

02:18:25.590 --> 02:18:53.190
they came in and got their company back on status and everything. But we're talking about time, date, and when the state of Illinois gave them that status to do so. But until then, that contract is still in play, or contracts or awards are still in play.

02:18:53.190 --> 02:19:23.170
I don't know who the players are, but the fact of the matter is the one that didn't come into compliance just can't jump back into the first line. They just can't do that. Just because they fell off, they can't be the first who receives an award, contract award. They can't do that. That's not the proper way it should be done. I don't know who else's application was on file.

02:19:23.190 --> 02:19:33.130
But we need to know that. We need to know if there was other considerations that could have been awarded those contracts and things of that nature.

02:19:33.130 --> 02:20:01.980
and things of that nature. So until we understand the timing and the dates of those contracts or the awarding, then there shouldn't be any awards out if there was only one person receiving the award or one company receiving the award. There shouldn't be any. We shouldn't even be entertaining it. As a matter of fact, it should have came back to the council so the council could reevaluate it and say whether or not

02:20:01.980 --> 02:20:24.640
we want to move forward or not. We can't just blanket, take it and say, well, we're going to wait until you come into compliance, make sure your status come into compliance. We can't do that. We have to be able to have that discussion while it's out there before someone has to correct their mistakes.

02:20:24.640 --> 02:20:54.640
I understand your point completely I'm hearing you clearly what I'm saying is is you need to make a vote now and make a motion to say I motion that the council revoke the contract and move to the next person because the contract has been awarded and then you have to make that motion what's that wait a minute wait a minute this is wrong I mean if you if that's what you want to do go ahead you you can't vote on anything you can't vote tonight tonight's a discussion only if there if something's put on in a

02:20:54.640 --> 02:20:59.660
future council meeting for action. That's fine. But no vote can happen tonight. I understand.

02:20:59.880 --> 02:21:05.720
And I apologize for misspeaking. But my point, what I'm trying to say here is they are currently in

02:21:05.720 --> 02:21:10.380
compliance. I have the receipts of them being in compliance. So we're talking about this and we're

02:21:10.380 --> 02:21:17.340
talking about that. When our contract awards say that we require a person entering into the contract

02:21:17.340 --> 02:21:23.700
to follow federal, state, all laws. And when we know as staff that a law has been broken, that they are

02:21:23.700 --> 02:21:29.560
not in compliance with the law, and we know about it, we're talking about it right now, so if there's

02:21:29.560 --> 02:21:35.040
something, but we also know that a remedy was made, they filed their paperwork, I have the receipts,

02:21:35.400 --> 02:21:41.320
they're now in compliance. This is not about an awarding and a bid, Alderman. We're not awarding

02:21:41.320 --> 02:21:55.450
a bid. Alderman Simmons, did you have something? So, because as of June 2025, that on the state website,

02:21:55.450 --> 02:22:15.090
that had not been resolved. So I would like to know when. Also, the bids we awarded, we used grant funding, knowing that they were, or if not knowingly, they were not compliant. Will that affect our future grants or put us from being able to get grants because we aren't doing what we're supposed to do?

02:22:15.090 --> 02:22:38.970
No, and I would say no, and I would confidently say no. Anytime grant managers, when you're working in a grant, they will always have comments, questions, we need you to file a certain way, we notice that you're missing this compliance here. Anytime that you find an issue and you work to remedy the issue, they're not going to penalize you for that.

02:22:38.970 --> 02:23:07.990
it's the same with the state of Illinois you missed your compliance date to register as a corporation they'll still take your money and let you register as a corporation you know they'll still you know they will people make mistakes they don't see it and then you look at it and you say well how do we remedy this situation are they willing to get into compliance or do they want to or are they fighting the compliance you know they they they are aware of the issue we brought it up to them they showed us that they're filed

02:23:08.970 --> 02:23:41.860
I mean that's the facts of the situation if there's a remedy that wants to be investigated or discussed with our legal counsel what remedies and options we have I maybe ask that question what's I'm sorry I I became aware of this probably early part of late last week is probably my guess is when I became aware of the that's when I became aware that they weren't in compliance with this that's when I found out

02:23:41.980 --> 02:23:56.260
Yes, I have it on my phone. If you give me a minute, I'll try to find it. But I do have, it says receipts, filed the paperwork, paid the receipt. I have it. I have it in my phone.

02:23:56.260 --> 02:24:11.660
Without using my second time, attorney Zito, do you have anything to say to that? Because I know in most cases when you use grant funding, you are audited and they come and they look at those things with a fine tooth comb. Do you have anything to add to that?

02:24:11.660 --> 02:24:40.720
I don't know the specifics as whether or not this would create a problem for our grants. I suppose that is a question ultimately for the grant administrators to say, hey, do you guys think this would cause a problem that at the time of the award, they technically were not in good standing with the Secretary of State's office. They have now remedied it. What say you grant administrator? Does that create a problem? I can't speak for the grant people. We would have to ask them that to know for certain.

02:24:40.720 --> 02:24:43.980
Alderman Clem

02:24:43.980 --> 02:24:51.700
Just a question for Darren or Director Duckman. Was a bid bond issued on this, Jim?

02:24:51.900 --> 02:25:06.320
Yes, there's a bid bond in this. It's actually a check. They have a bid bond. When contractors bid, they have the options stated clearly. They can either do a check, cashier's check, or a bond. And this one is a check.

02:25:07.160 --> 02:25:10.300
So dollars and cents, regardless of what happens, we're covered.

02:25:10.900 --> 02:25:11.980
Yeah. Yes.

02:25:15.870 --> 02:25:21.930
Okay, then we will move on to item number 19, which is reports of department heads, finance.

02:25:22.350 --> 02:25:23.170
Nothing, Your Honor.

02:25:23.710 --> 02:25:24.490
Community development.

02:25:25.770 --> 02:25:26.950
Nothing tonight, Madam Mayor.

02:25:27.910 --> 02:25:28.550
Public works.

02:25:30.550 --> 02:25:32.290
Two things quickly.

02:25:33.770 --> 02:25:43.030
We've had a significant amount of calls recently about sewer laterals or sewer services at homes that have root issues.

02:25:43.030 --> 02:26:13.010
Just a point of clarification for residents. Sewer laterals or sewer services are owned by the homeowner from the house to the main. Those issues, while you can call the city and ask for assistance, those are financially borne by the residents themselves as part of our codes and ordinances. So that's one point I wanted to make. The second point I'd like to make tonight, and I've hinted on this a handful of times, but recently we've seen an uptick from

02:26:13.030 --> 02:26:41.350
really abusive behavior to our public works staff and our people that answer the phones and I'm making it a point of clarification that we're not going to tolerate it at the public works department. We will pull up lightly and all calls that are made that are abusive. Our staff does not get paid to be abused. I realize people are having situations that they're upset about. That doesn't mean we get to scream, cuss and yell and take it out on the city employees.

02:26:41.350 --> 02:27:10.890
we're here to help solve problems and moving forward we will politely end all calls that are not done in a professional manner with our department. Fire. Nothing from fire this evening. I just have two things first off on our on the Freeport Police Department Facebook page there is a flyer about the Civilian Police Academy so we do have openings we're looking for more people so if anyone's interested

02:27:10.890 --> 02:27:18.290
you can visit our Facebook page. We're taking people until September 26th and planning on starting on

02:27:18.290 --> 02:27:26.650
October 2nd. So all the information is on there. There's a flyer. Secondly, back in 2024, the Stevens

02:27:26.650 --> 02:27:35.310
County ETSB voted to switch report management systems. So currently the Freeport Police Department,

02:27:35.310 --> 02:28:05.290
Stevens County Sheriff's Department and FHIR. We utilize a system called CIS. We've been with CIS probably since 2012, I'm guessing. Since 2012, CIS hasn't evolved at all. It's just kind of remained stuck in the same form as what it was. And so we felt that there was a need for a change. So ETSB voted to switch to Central Square. This is a huge project. It's going to go live tomorrow at 8 o'clock.

02:28:05.310 --> 02:28:35.290
Park. There has been training, obviously, but we're going to flip the switch tomorrow at 8 a.m., so please be patient because that's going to affect the way calls are generated. It's going to affect the way that we write reports. It's also going to things that we've had available in certain parts of this program may not be available in Central Square. We'll figure that out. We'll work out the kinks on that. I know one of the things that's really popular is our

02:28:35.310 --> 02:29:05.230
Police activity blotter that's posted, I believe that's like an algorithm or something correct, that's not anything we control, but it was something that IT helped start. As far as Central Square, we have to determine if that's even possible right now. I mean, tomorrow is going to be just the basics on how to operate it, and then from there we will dig deeper in there and find out exactly, you know, all the stuff that it has. It definitely has a lot of different options and opportunities for us, but we're going to have to learn it

02:29:05.230 --> 02:29:08.490
before we were able to showcase all that stuff.

02:29:09.190 --> 02:29:09.670
Library?

02:29:12.070 --> 02:29:12.770
Thank you.

02:29:13.370 --> 02:29:22.310
I just wanted to make sure everybody here knows that the Sculpture Walk is having our big opening events this week.

02:29:22.630 --> 02:29:31.470
On Friday, there is a ribbon cutting at 12 p.m., which will be down by the gateway area of the Arts Plaza.

02:29:31.470 --> 02:30:00.500
area of the Arts Plaza. And then the reception for the sculpture walk is from 5 to 7 p.m. at the library. It is open to the public and you will be able to meet and greet with some of the artists of the sculptures. IT? Airport? City Manager? Yes, Madam Mayor, I have two items. The project that's going on at the intersection of Stevenson and Park Boulevard has had an expected

02:30:00.500 --> 02:30:30.480
completed completion date of Friday, September 19th. Due to a gas main issue, this project will be worked on through the next week. The gas main in the intersection is at risk of being disrupted, and the gas company has been notified, and their efforts are currently the final step before paving can take place. We understand the inconvenience this is causing to the community, and we are excited to open this area up with upgraded infrastructure as soon as possible. Thank you, and I appreciate your patience and understanding.

02:30:30.500 --> 02:31:00.140
standing on that. In addition, for the better part of this summer, our new and excellent animal control officer has been under attack by groups on social media that have gone even as far as making threats to the officer, those involved in their daily tasks. I find it necessary to stand up for all employees of the city and specifically our animal control officer who is doing an outstanding job in ensuring that the laws are followed, the job gets done,

02:31:00.140 --> 02:31:32.350
and most importantly these animals are taken care of. To everyone making these misinformed and hateful posts understand that these employees are members of our community who show up to work every day in order to serve the city in their capacity. We appreciate the community's input but threats and hateful speech should not be aimed at our workers. Thank you. I have nothing new. Alderman Sanders? No. Alderman Parker?

02:31:32.510 --> 02:31:35.890
Sorry, Alderman Clem, my apologies.

02:31:36.210 --> 02:31:37.190
Nothing, Madam Mayor.

02:31:37.670 --> 02:31:38.310
Alderman Johnson?

02:31:39.510 --> 02:31:55.070
Yes, we have a neighborhood watch meeting this Thursday at 6.30 at 3.002 Farmdale Lane, and also this Saturday is the block party at Frankenstate from 1 to 4 and Church in the Streets from 1 to 2.30 on Sunday at Frankenstate.

02:31:56.030 --> 02:31:56.870
Alderman Simmons?

02:31:58.410 --> 02:32:00.030
No, I don't have anything. Thank you.

02:32:00.450 --> 02:32:00.970
Alderman Parker?

02:32:00.970 --> 02:32:35.620
Yes, the Civilian Police Academy the Chief talked about is an excellent program and I highly recommend anybody can take it. Then the others, we have a neighborhood watch meeting next Monday night. Thank you. Alderman Stacy. Fifth Board has a neighborhood watch meeting tomorrow at six o'clock at the church on Carroll. Alderman Shadle. Nothing tonight. Public comments. My name is Cheryl Altman.

02:32:35.620 --> 02:33:06.930
and so Wayne you admitted that you knew Albers didn't have the right states filed out with states but that you allowed them to tear down buildings and also you Darren or Rob should have been out there they did not follow EPA regulations at all I've got pictures of it with dust flying everywhere no fences surrounding stuff and that's on my property

02:33:06.930 --> 02:33:38.380
Sir, they didn't follow it anymore because we've got pictures of this. Also, you tore down my house, Wayne, you think you got a big win. Now that I found out tonight, you don't. Also, you took my driveway, my back lot, and my steps. Why? That driveway was not part of the building. And Rob, I've been on you for three weeks to get me the paperwork of all this. And you sit there like, and Mayor Miller, you don't like it when people come up

02:33:38.380 --> 02:34:07.880
here and talk about elders. It irritates you. It irritates you because, you know, they get things wrong and I sure hope they pay for it soon because people are waking up and they have not followed it and thank God that this lady will be able to hopefully keep her job because people voted for that. They're wrong to kick her out when she's done a great job and devoted her life to that. It's wrong. You want to get somebody in there that's crooked just like the rest of most you city people.

02:34:08.380 --> 02:34:50.250
that's why you wanted her out. Any other public comments? Hi, Sue Cook, Winchester Drive, and I noticed that we go for the lowest bid. I know you look to save the buck because that's what everybody does. They always go for the lowest bid, and we're a distressed city, and I hate that label, distressed city, Freeport isn't distressed.

02:34:50.250 --> 02:35:13.410
So maybe, sometimes, going for maybe not the lowest bid, maybe the next. Maybe looking at everybody's qualifications and saying, yeah, they came with a low bid and they have all the qualifications we need, but this person really knows the area. So I'm very happy that it didn't go through.

02:35:13.410 --> 02:35:43.210
Also, for the people that are on oxygen, when we're talking about this, ComEd or MC Squared, if they're on oxygen with ComEd or if they're on a ventilator or if they're on any kind of home oxygen equipment or home medical equipment and the power goes out, you are on a list that immediately your area is worked on right away because some of these people, they cannot go.

02:35:43.210 --> 02:36:08.770
They have generators, but the generators don't go that long. So ComEd immediately works on your property so that the oxygen comes back up and the ventilators come back on. And I know this is about disability rights and I know this is about the ADA and maybe that group should have been pulled in, but I don't know, Mr. Mudge, what would happen with MC squared. Because everybody, like I started out saying everybody likes to save a buck.

02:36:08.770 --> 02:36:37.190
If MC Squared really does save the dollars, do they also have this list to be able to lift the people that are on oxygen, are on ventilators, are on home medical equipment, whether it's IV drips or whatever? Do they have that? That's something to look into. Maybe not the lowest bid. And if possible, allow us to have the choice without having to opt out.

02:36:37.190 --> 02:36:40.890
because sometimes opting out isn't really opting out.

02:36:41.010 --> 02:36:43.070
You have to jump hurdles to opt out.

02:36:44.490 --> 02:36:45.250
Thank you.

02:36:46.390 --> 02:36:47.910
Any other public comments?

02:36:48.630 --> 02:36:48.990
Sir.

02:36:52.680 --> 02:36:58.180
Just for the record, ComEd is sort of a delivery company for all power.

02:36:59.040 --> 02:37:00.900
They control the list and everything.

02:37:01.640 --> 02:37:02.700
That doesn't go away.

02:37:03.060 --> 02:37:07.860
So if the power goes out, ComEd will send a message to whatever,

02:37:07.860 --> 02:37:13.920
Any other public comments?

02:37:34.060 --> 02:38:07.280
Mayor Miller, councilmen and women, and you, my constituents, I take my position seriously, and yeah, sometimes I too fall short and get upset because right is right and wrong is right.

02:38:07.300 --> 02:38:47.120
Brown. So I stand before you tonight apologizing for my shortcomings. I'm only human. For future reference, Director Duckman, I just think it's only right that everybody be in good standings, their bids on jobs, and maybe that's something that can be added.

02:38:48.180 --> 02:38:59.380
to the ordinance or to the process or to the whatever that they have to show that they are in right standing.

02:38:59.860 --> 02:39:16.880
I'm not trying to take nobody's lifehood away. Right is right and wrong is wrong. And we have to come correct.

02:39:18.220 --> 02:39:28.120
We all have to come correct. It's not this can work for you and not for me. We're in this together.

02:39:28.580 --> 02:39:58.560
Thank you.

02:39:58.560 --> 02:40:40.100
continue to look down upon us your people oh God continue to lead us and guide us order our steps according to your word for it's your word that cannot return void give us understanding give her a greater knowledge and understanding of what we need to do for this year's city for we stand in victory

02:40:40.100 --> 02:41:09.760
we walk by faith and not by sight we thank you for being in control in Jesus name we pray amen any other public comments this evening I'll entertain a motion for adjournment so move second we have a we have a motion made by Shadle seconded by Alderman Parker all those in favor aye have a good evening