Good evening. Pastor Justin, could you please give the invocation? Good evening, Madam Mayor, Council. Thank you for your work, for your planning, and your hard work for all of us here in the city. Would you please allow me to pray for you tonight? Lord, you alone are the source of all wisdom. As you are the only wise God, it is your purpose that prevails. You have given us the capacity for knowledge and understanding and for wisdom.

as you've created us. And so it is the glory of these men and women who serve in these places of authority and leadership to seek out wisdom, to seek your wisdom. And indeed, we confess that we have no wisdom except from your hand. So, Lord, as these leaders have desires for themselves and plans for for this city and for all of us as citizens. Help them make wise plans, just plans. May they not be plans that bring harm or that waste the resources that you give us. Help each one to do their part to carry out good plans with care and persistence, even when it's difficult, even when they are frustrated and weary, even when they meet opposition. Help them to do their work and manage their lives with integrity and honor, with humility and love. And as they do all this, may they find joy in their work that you've given them to do. And Lord, you have made us for joy and for wisdom. May we seek it in you alone. We pray in the name of Christ, your son. Amen. Thank you. Now, Madam Clerk, we'll call this meeting to order.

Could you please call the roll? Mayor Miller. Here. Alderpersons-Klemm. Here. Johnson.

Here. Simmons is absent and Parker is absent. Stacy? Here. Shadle? Here. Sanders? Here. And Sellers? Here. I would entertain a motion to allow Alderman Parker to attend remotely. So moved. Second. Second. We have a motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle. Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll on that? Stacy? Yes.

Shadle, Aye, Sanders, on remote attendance by Don Parker, Oh, Sellers, Aye, Clem, Aye, Johnson, Aye, so I have five in favor and one not, the motion does pass though. If you could all please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance led by Alderman, oh wait, do you need to call a roll again for Alderman Parker, are you good?

Call role, Attorney Zito, or just Oh, yes, Alderman Person Parker, can you hear us?

You have one minute.

Thank you.

Alderman Parker, could you lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance, please?

Yes, I pledge allegiance To the flag of the United States of America And to the republic for which it stands One nation under God Pledge of Allegiance on the flag of the United States of America.

Item number one is the approval of the agenda. However, we're going to add one right after the certificate of recognition and public comment to be a recognition from John Cabello for the Illinois State Division of American Water Works Association Gold Level.

if that would be approved. Is there such a motion to approve the agenda? So moved. Second. Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers. Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll? Parker. Aye. Stacey. Aye. Shadle. Aye. Sanders. Aye. Sellers. Aye. Clem. Aye.

and Johnson. Aye. The motion passes seven to zero. Item number two is approve of the minutes from the regular meeting on June 16th, 2025 and July 7th, 2025. Is there a motion to approve? I got cut off or no.

Second. Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers. Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll. Parker? Aye. Stacey? No. Shadle? Aye. Sanders? No. Sellers? Aye. Plum? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Motion passes, 5 to 2. I'm the first one they call tonight. And then item number three is certificate of recognition, Chief Shenberger? Yes. First one they call you. Thanks for everybody for being here tonight. So at the beginning of the year, for the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police requested any submissions for awards. They have a variety of awards. I submitted awards for three different officers. One of them got an honorable mention. However, Detective Holden, he received, he just received the nomination for a certificate of recognition. And as far as efforts for combating gun violence in the city of Preport, and that was for the year of 2024.

You know last year he was up here, we recognized him for seizing his 100th illegally possessed gun, but this was a award that was given to him just to recognize his effort for the 2020 award. So I'll just summarize what I wrote that led to him receiving this award, which is a really prestigious award, not too many given out, but it's throughout the entire state.

Detective Justice Holden has been a police officer with the pre-court police department for seven years.

In 2021, Detective Holden served in a gang unit where he displayed a passion for utilizing technological resources and confidential sources of information to develop cases involving legally possessed firearms and narcotics.

Detective Holden has a vast knowledge of a local hybrid gang and other individuals who plague our city with incidents of gun violence.

In 2023, Detective Holden became the department's first gun detective, and his main role was to proactively target those who engaged in crimes related to gun violence.

In 2024, Detective Holden was responsible for seizing a total of 26 firearms during criminal investigations.

The list of firearms included four shotguns, three rifles, and 19 handguns.

Detective Holden was recognized in 2024 for seizing his 100-fully-fully-possessed firearms.

Detective Bolton has a great working relationship with the state's attorney's office and has arrests and in successful prosecution of the defendants.

Detective Bolton sincerely cares about the community he serves and plays a major role in fulfilling the department's mission to provide a safe living and working environment to the citizens of the board.

So just a few weeks ago, I was notified that he won this board and it's very fitting for him.

As you can see, the way he's dressed today, it's his day off, however, he came in, had some information, and took care of some business out there today, so I sincerely appreciate that.

Thank you. Madam Clerk, could you please make note that 608 Alderman Simmons is now present?

and then the next item would be just wanted to acknowledge John Cabello with his letter that he sent to the city today and read that on it for into the record dear city of Freeport officials I'm extending my heartfelt congratulations to the city of Freeport I'm being recognized by the Illinois section American Water Works Association as a gold level water ambassador community this achievement is a testament to your commitment to sustainability efficiency and the well-being of our community, providing safe, clean, and real Community. Providing safe, clean, and reliable water is a responsibility of utmost importance, and your team's dedication ensures that residents and businesses alike can rely on an exceptional standard of service. Your hard work, innovation, and unwavering commitment to environmental stewardship has not gone unnoticed. This well-deserved recognition reflects the significant impact of your efforts.

The entire community takes pride in this milestone, and I sincerely appreciate the dedication of each member of the City of Freeport's team. May this achievement inspire continued success, innovation, and excellence in the vital work that you do. Once again, congratulations on this remarkable accomplishment. Best regards, John M. Cabello, Assistant Minority Leader, State Representative of the 90th District.

Awesome. Next will be public comment and we just have one signed in. David Artman. Thank you. I don't know how I follow that police officer. That's awesome. That's very cool. I just wanted to be a face for you guys tonight. Item number 11 tonight that you'll be voting on has to do with a sign for my business on my garage. I've had my business for seven years. I love my business. I love this city.

the sign is what helps people be able to find which garage in a residential neighborhood they need to bring their dog to so I just hope that you guys can help me make sure that we're in compliance we came with an agreement at the meeting last Thursday of what size we can make it just a little bit bigger to be able to see from the street so thank you guys all so much for everything you do thank you okay item number five is the consent agenda the consent agenda is considered to be routine in nature and acted as one motion unless a member of council would like to have something removed.

The consent agenda consists of approving to receive in place on file the board and commission minutes from the library board of trustees, April 9th, May 14th, and June 11th, the liquor commission from May 8th, June 11th, 23rd, and 26th, as well as the fire department and police department reports for June 2025, the financial and cash and investment reports for May 2025, the semi-annual report from the Liquor Commission to the City Manager January to June 2025, the finance bills payable in the total of $4,356,129.25 and the approval of payroll for pay period ending July 12, 2025 in the total of $678,388.40. Is there a motion to approve?

So moved.

Second.

We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers, any discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Parker, Stacy, Shadle, Aye, Sanders, No, Sellers, Aye, Clem, Aye, Johnson, Aye, and Simmons. Aye. The motion passes, 7-1.

Item number six is a second reading of ordinance 2025-42 could you please read this ordinance authorizing the city manager to execute Albertus Airport airplane hangar leases administratively Alderman Clem and Shadle I just want to reiterate that we spoke about last meeting at the first reading that we have gone through and drafted a new lease that's a standard for all the hangers and we have an ordinance in place for the amount that the leases are to be rented for so I feel like there's really no reason to bring them to us when there's standards set for city manager to follow as far as price and a written lease that this would be a lot more more efficient if he would just sign the leases on behalf of the city and we could not clutter up our agenda with these items.

Alderman Clem?

Alderman Shadle covered it pretty good, but basically they've come to us and it's been who owns what and who owns this one and who's going to get that one.

and like Alderman Shadle said it's all based off of square footage now and price per square foot and goes through two or three people before it gets to us so there's really no sense to us to do it it goes through public works it goes through the airport manager and it goes through the city manager so I don't believe there's any reason to come to us and when I was on the council before for 18 years we never did it so any discussion Alderman Stacy.

I just want to incinerate that I want to make sure I understand that if at any time changes are made to the agreed contract, whether it be wording, locks, doors, roof, floors, water, electric, et cetera, all changes will be first brought back to the council for approval.

before any changes to the approved contract can be made.

Are you asking me?

Yes.

Yes.

The answer is yes.

Any other discussion?

Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Parker.

Parker.

I'll come back to him.

Stacy.

Yes.

Shadle.

Aye.

Sanders.

Aye.

Sellers.

Aye.

Plum.

Aye.

Johnson.

Aye.

Simmons.

Aye.

Aye. And one last time, Alderperson Parker, how do you vote? I can't hear, I am so sorry, thank you. It passes 8 to 0.

Aye. Item number 7, second reading of ordinance 2025-43, could you please read this?

Ordinance amending part 8, business regulation and tax code title for taxation to add chapter 897 for the purpose of implementing a 1% municipal grocery retailer's occupation tax, and a municipal grocery service occupation tax. Thank you, Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. As previously discussed, the state has decided to forego distributing the grocery tax, however, has provided for opportunities for communities to reinstate that under their own municipal authority. Currently, we receive between $750,000 and $800,000 per year. And following up on a previous request, how many communities in Illinois have already passed this local grocery tax, and that would be 371 communities in Illinois have already passed it.

So staff recommends moving forward with the 1% grocery tax. Thank you. Discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Parker?

Parker? Aye.

Stacy? Absolutely not.

Shadle? Aye.

Sanders? No.

Sellers, Aye, Plum, Aye, Johnson, Aye, and Simmons, No, the ordinance passes, 5-3, item number 8 is the first reading of ordinance 20-25-44, could you please read this?

Ordinance amending chapter 460, section 460.16, written permits required for overweight vehicles of the city of Freeport's code of ordinances.

Thank you. Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. As discussed at the committee of the whole meeting, the last committee of the whole meeting, the issue of overweight and oversized permitting was discussed. Staff is requesting some changes to section 460.11. That section title is overweight and oversized vehicles. We want to create the overweight and oversized city of Freeport permit form permitting required inside city limits no matter what roads are being used. Also adding 625 ILCS 5-15301 for reference and that's to create an oversized and overweight fee schedule including $150 for individual one-time permits, $1,200 for annual permits and a $500 penalty for non-compliance with the permits and staff recommends moving forward with ordinance changes for for 460.11.

for 460.11. Is there a motion to move this forward? So moved. Second. Motion made by Alderman Clem, seconded by Alderman Shadle. Discussion? Alderman Stacy? I would like to know that this will affect all involved and not some and that everybody will be treated equal. Darren?

Yes, everybody that trucks within the city limits will be treated the same. There are exemptions which are stated in the section 625. So buses are exempt, garbage trucks are exempt, towing within the city limits would be exempt. But, you know, like excavator contractors, those type of things, trucking would be exempt if they're underweight. So this is for trucks that are severely overweight, over 80,000 pounds.

So, regular trucking companies that are running legal loads within the cities, this would not pertain to.

Alderman Sanders.

Yeah, I'd like to see us insert some kind of guardrails for this type of procedures and making sure that the ordinances are followed up and monitored and the proceeds that are recouped or established from this and what department head is going to do.

going to be covering these areas and monitoring everything to make sure that, like you guys are just talking about, being fair and some exempt because of and the fairness of the weight and who gets, you know, a pathway to come through the city in whatever case that might be.

Yeah, I'll answer that. It's all within the ordinance, and it's all outlined in that state statute, Illinois 625, so it's fair to all people. I did research with other communities. The way our permit process will work is permits will be reviewed. The public works administrator will issue invoices, collect those fees, and our permit fees always go back to the general fund. That's where all those fees are returned to.

it does not come back to any department in general. Our right away permits are the same way. So who's going to be monitoring the whole process? So there's three people involved in the process. The person that issues the permit, the person that issues the invoice, and then in the finance department, I think Caitlin cross references to make sure that all the invoices that are sent out are paid. And with overweight, oversized permits, they can't move the load without it. Okay. Thank you. Stacy? Who will be like stopping these trucks. So it'll be public works and or the police. So as I explained at the last meeting that we discussed this, I believe it was the cow. The reason we found out some of this was happening is there was an accident with an overload and overweight permittee. So we were called in to help by the police. And then we asked them for their paperwork and realized that they were severely overweight and found out the state was actually sending them on City Roads. Now those permits tell these people that they have to get local permits in order to run them but they didn't and so we've kind of been monitoring that traffic. So we get, I mean, I wouldn't say this is going to apply a ton to trucks that come through but if anybody ever sees we get a lot of generators through here, a lot of windmill companies and we're going to send a notice out to them that we now have an overweight and oversized permit fee. Most of these companies will be doing it

annually in the memo. The permits are made per vehicle license plate. So you only get, you know, for the $1,200, you'll only get one truck that you can move for that annual fee. So if you have two trucks, you'll have to get two. So each company will have to make a decision based on how much they're moving through Freeport. Very good. Very good. Oh, I should say too, because I see this question coming. Farmers are exempt as well. There's no further discussion.

moving on to item number nine, which is the first reading. Well, hold it. I noticed you said farmers are exempt, but we know farmers carry large capacities and overweighted. That's a problem right there. Per the Illinois State Statute, 625, farmers are exempt during field seasons. Oh, okay. Got you. First reading of ordinance 2025-45. Could you please read this?

ordinance amending the zoning classification of property commonly known as 226 East Stevenson Street from B12, General Retail Business, to B21, Limited Service Business. Thank you, Director Duckman. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So I'll start off with just a, I guess, a picture here. Everybody probably recognizes this is the Smith Building. And essentially what we have going on here, I put an arrow right here. This is where a proposed yoga studio is going to be, I'm sorry, it's a Pilates and bar studio, not yoga, it's Pilates and bar, but essentially there's a Pilates studio that's going to go into this location here, and this is the Smith Building, and the actual physical address here is 2-6 East Stevenson, and so in order to do so in this space they have to the way our ordinances are currently written they have to go from a B1 zoning district to a B2 zoning district and that's why they're here for the zoning reclassification so this was brought to staff and we brought it to the Zoning Board of Appeals on July 10th and it was recommended for approval by a vote of four to zero but no abstentions zero abstentions and on July 10th it also was recommended by our planning commission by a vote of seven to zero with zero abstentions staff is recommending a suspension of the rules on this and also moving it forward is there a motion to move this forward so moved second motion made by Alderman Shadle seconded by Alderman Clem discussion on the ordinance I just have on the ordinance

I just want to know why would they why do they want a suspension of the rules they want to get their business started and get going and I mean certainly if you didn't think it prudent they could do that but I think that's their main thought there and I would just say that there's um there's no pub there's no comment from the public otherwise there's no complaints or negative comments either how many other standards are they meeting the standards yes they met the standards for a special use and for what they're asking for here, yes. Okay, because I was on, I'm curious about the suspension as well. Sure. And if there's anything that is trying to be omitted from the policy and the practice, I just wanted to see if that was giving us clarity. Understood. Understood. Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. I think with this one and the other ones tonight, this is all about trying to be business friendly, so trying to be responsive to businesses instead of taking as much time as possible to pass it, these are pretty small and narrow, and I think we could probably make an informed decision pretty easily, but I just wanted to point out that it's basically so we could be business friendly. Yeah, well, well, that's what the council want, business friendly, and we, and far as you're making that remark or that comment, we don't have to be educated to see what is going on, we can see what's happening, and we can survive

what you're coming with and what you're talking about. And so we know how valuable that businesses are to come to the city of Freeport. We know that. And so we're not trying to impede upon it. We're just trying to understand and making sure everything is above board and there's clarity with it. That's all it is. So all of the expletives, I mean, it's not really, you know, but anyway.

Okay, Alderman Johnson Can you tell me how many exercise facilities there are in the city of Freeport already?

I do not know the exact number, but I know that there's multiple in the area and I know there's another in the downtown. I know there's another, you know, dojo. There's at least one dojo down the street already operating. There's another one that's operating today and that's they're going to do another special use. So there's at least at least three in that area. This would be the third in that area.

And to be honest with you, I think that everybody here would want more if we know that public health is a big concern, not just for our area, the region, and our country. So I think the more health studios, the more that people see a need in our community and that they can support it, I think it's a good thing. It's a positive. Thank you. If there's no further discussion, I'll entertain a motion to suspend the rules.

entertain a motion to suspend the rules. So moved. Second. A motion made by Alderman Clem, seconded by Alderman Shadle for suspension of the rules. Suspension of the rules is non-debatable and must pass by two-thirds majority. Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll on the suspension? Parker. Tell him to get off that. Tell him to put his beard down. Parker. Aye. Stacey. Aye.

Shadle, Aye, Sanders, Aye, Sellers, Aye, Clem, Aye, Johnson, Aye, and Simmons, Aye, the suspension passes 8-0.

So then before you now is for the final passage of this ordinance is there any further discussion?

Madam Clerk please take the roll.

Parker, Aye, Stacey, Aye, Shadle, Aye, Sanders, Aye, Sellers, Aye. Clem. Aye. Johnson. No. Ann Simmons. Aye. The ordinance passes 7 to 1.

Fleller. Clem. Item number 10 is the first reading of ordinance 20-25-46. Could you please read this?

Ordinance amending the zoning classification of property commonly known as 105 through 107 West Main Street from B12 general retail business to B21 limited business. Thank you, Madam Mayor. And Director, Suttman, if you wouldn't mind scrolling or I might be able to scroll a little bit here at least to the map to give people an idea of where we're at here. Okay. Okay, similar situation here. This is a request for a zoning map amendment from B1 to B2.

and again this is a I had referenced this earlier this is for a dojo for a martial arts studio the only difference here is what has brought us to this point is this studio is already operating and the community had contacted us and said it asked the person starting this business if they had gotten their proper permits from the city they came to us and we informed them that they would need to be go through this zoning process So right now, yes, they currently are in violation and we are, council has the ultimate decision on whether to let them continue to run their business or ultimately not. So full disclosure there, that's why we are at this point. This is Main Street here. This is the hotel here. Gives you an idea. And earlier I had a nice picture. If we scroll up, you can kind of see the storefront for the actual building that it would be going into.

So, this is, official address is 105, 107 West Main Street This is a situation where there are petitioners requesting to go from a B1 to B2 business district And on July 10th, we had a zoning board of appeals And they recommended approval by a vote of 4-0 with zero abstentions Again, on July 10th, there was a planning commission meeting was recommended by a vote of seven to zero, zero abstentions. Staff is recommending in line with our Zoning Board of Appeals and Planning Commission, we're recommending approval of this zoning map amendments and also suspensions of the rules with the understanding that they are already operating.

Is there a motion to move this ordinance forward? So moved.

We have a motion made by Alderman Clem, seconded by Alderman Shadle. Discussion on this ordinance? Alderman Sellers?

Yes, I'd like to know because that building was a yoga studio at one time, so why is it, um, they have to go through all this now?

My guess is they probably, my guess is they probably got, I mean, for lack of a better word, they got away with it.

I think that their neighbors told the current person you need to get permitting so the person running the dojo or you know martial arts studio had came to us and said you know hey before I open I probably should have come here and get the proper certificate of occupancy zoning regulations so that for lack of a better understand you know back of lack of a better word they kind of got away with it they were running it when they shouldn't have now we caught them Alderman Sanders yeah So, wow, I'm listening to you say that, man. It's like how many other occupants around here staging businesses that we're not aware of and whether or not are you guys, your staff is considering to let this advance, to let this go through with the proper paperwork certification?

applications and permits. I mean, that's why we're here. We knew the business was operating, started before it should. It's been, I believe, operating since probably May. It's been a couple months. They admitted they were, you know, they asked for forgiveness instead of permission, and they, you know, they admitted they started early and told us to work with them, and, you know, this is part of the process.

they have to be approved for their zoning in order to operate here. So we're holding them to what they're responsible for. Very good. Very good. Appreciate that. Alderman Stacy? Is there a fee for them being in violation? Yes. Their fee is $200. That's $200 for a special use permit or for the zoning map amendment.

I'm double checking that fee. I mean for them being in violation because they would have to pay the $200 zoning difference anyway, correct? We can instill, you know, I could certainly investigate adding another violation. Typically in these situations, we give somebody a warning and if they, if they, you know, we contact them and we say, hey, you're in violation. And then if they, they usually have a timeline. I think we gave Mr. Garvin's, who runs the studio, I believe we gave him 30 days.

You know, when he came to us, we said, hey, you've got to get this moving. You've got to show some progress, or else we'll move on with the actual violation. Ultimately, the city wants compliance.

We're not trying to, and this goes for anybody operating a business, it's usually the same process.

We issue a violation and say you've got 30 days to come into compliance, and if they, you know, that 30 days lapses, then we would follow up with fines. So I don't think it's prudent, but I think I think the property owner came to us, worked with us, knew they were in violation, and I think then they paid the fees to get to do this map amendment, so they're working with us to get into compliance. I don't see a reason to add additional fines in this situation.

Of course they're going to work with you because they want their business there.

I wish the citizens worked with me more or as much as you think they do. Many of them, and I know other people in this staff will tell you, they just not as many as you think will respond to you when you tell them to turn in paperwork, do an application. Many of them will just wait until the fines come.

What's going to stop the next person for doing the same thing and then ask for forgiveness?

Well, then it would be the same process, 30-day notice to come to us, do your proper paperwork, and then after those 30 days would lapse, then we would issue a violation, they would come to an admin hearing, and the hearing officer would ultimately make a decision Because they exceeded their 30 days This person has been working with us the entire time.

I would say, you know, I think anybody wants somebody to work faster, but they've been cooperating with the city.

This person has been cooperating with the city.

Olewin Sellers?

I think I really think that they thought because that was a yoga studio at one time, I think they thought that it was just proper and they could just go in and do it until the neighbor, members said something, so I think that's what their problem was. I think they just didn't know, have the knowledge of knowing that they couldn't just go in and do that type of business there.

I agree that they were probably confused, and the staff is trying to, you know, this is evidence that we're trying to work with them, they're working with us, and we're trying to move towards a positive outcome here.

Madam Mayor.

Mayor. Alderman Klemm. Motion to suspend the rules. Second. We have a motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Shadle for suspension of the rules. Again, suspension of the rules is non-debatable. Must pass by two-thirds majority. Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll on the suspension?

take the roll on the suspension. Parker. Is he waiting for the echo? Aye. Stacey. Aye. Shadle. Aye. Sanders. Aye. Sellers. Aye. Plum. Aye. Johnson. No. And Simmons. Aye. The motion passes for suspension seven to one. So then before you counsel is the final passage of ordinance 2025 46. Any further discussion. Please take the roll. Parker? Aye. Stacey? Shadle? Aye. Sanders? Aye. Sellers? Aye. Clem? Aye. Johnson? No. And Simmons? No. The ordinance passes 6-2. And item number 11 is the first reading of ordinance 2025-47. Could you please read this? Ordinance granting a variance from the requirements of section 1240.0668 regarding signs associated with home occupations to exceed one square foot in area in residential districts for 1625 South Locust Avenue. Thank you, Director Duckman. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

So as promised in public comment, we are now at the request of a variation and what you have before you here, this is a home occupation business where somebody lives in their home and they're allowed to who run what is known as a home occupation business when they live in the residence. This is a dog grooming business and this is the size of the sign that they have on their garage. The reason they're in for a variation is that they're allowed a one square foot sign and this sign is larger. This sign is going to be 56 inches 12 it's it would be a it would be a six foot by two foot sign so that would be a 12 square foot wow so that's what you can see there on this garage and as such we this sign was brought this matter was brought to our attention and staff had talked with the property owner we had one call about this which has initiated this process for the request for a variation. When the property owner was notified of the situation, we spoke to them and told them that if they wanted to keep the sign, they would need to receive a variation to do so. Otherwise, if this does not pass today, the person operating this home occupation business would have to remove this sign.

so that's essentially in a nutshell what we are talking about today and so this to get to it on July 10th the zoning board of appeals recommended approval by a vote of four to zero with zero abstentions and also on July 10th our planning commission recommended approval by a vote of seven to zero with zero abstentions at the hearing we did not receive any comment positive or negative no one made comment about it in the neighborhood. So we did not receive any public comment on it. The only public comment we had was one phone call regarding this matter. So that being said, staff is recommending approval of this variation. It has also been requested to suspend the rules to allow them to continue to keep their sign up. Is there a motion to move this forward? So moved. Second. We have a motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle. Discussion on the ordinance? Madam Mayor. Alderman Clem? Motion to suspend the rules? Second. We have a motion made by Alderman Clem, seconded by Alderman Shadle for suspension of the rules. Again, two-thirds majority and non-debatable. Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll on the suspension? Parker. Stacey.

Shadle, Aye, Sanders, Aye, Sellers, Aye, Clemm, Aye, Johnson, Aye, and Simmons, Aye, the suspension passes seven to zero.

So then before you is before the final passage of this ordinance, if there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Stacey, Aye, Shadle, Aye, Sanders, Aye, Sellers, Aye, Clemm, Aye, Johnson, Aye, and Simmons, Aye, Also, Alderperson Parker, are you prepared to vote?

We have plenty.

The motion passes 7 to 0.

Item number 12 is the first reading of Ordinance 20-25-48.

Could you please read this?

Ordinance amending Chapter 1252 of the Zoning Code of the City of Freeport concerning physical culture centers.

Director Duckman.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

So what's a little background here? Obviously, there has been an uptick in the number of what are known as physical culture centers, which is essentially a gym, a yoga studio, Pilates studio, martial arts studio. We've seen an uptick, as evidenced today in our prior items, business owners are wanting to open up what are known as physical culture centers or gyms.

and trying to prevent property owners to have to change zoning from B1 to B2, staff worked together to kind of basically come up with a plan to allow the land use of someone operating a gym and essentially in a B1 district as opposed to, you know, just limiting it to the B2, which causes staff to have to bring in zoning changes zoning map amendments every time somebody would want to open a gym in the B1 zoning district a couple notes here even when you change zoning it doesn't change the fact that the business is subject to an inspection for certificate of occupancy to make sure they have the proper bathrooms proper access the buildings up to code essentially what this is allowing it's it's staff making observations that our B1 zoning district is limiting a use that fits in the B1 zoning district and is popular. Not every gym is going to have 100 exercise bicycles and free weights, etc. It's not always going to be an LA gym or something along those lines. Some gyms are going to be simply a Pilates studio where five people show up or it might just be a dojo with 10 people. And if it sets your mind at ease, anytime you have a business, whether it be a gym, a restaurant, any business, our inspector and fire marshal look at it and set occupancy limits regardless of the zoning.

so this matter was brought to the planning commission on July 10th and it was unanimously passed unanimously with a vote of seven to zero and with that being the case staff is recommending moving this forward. Is there a motion to move this forward? So moved. Second. We have a motion made by Alderman Sellers seconded by Alderman Shadle. Discussion Alderman Sanders. Yeah.

Yeah. Mr. Duckman, did they explain to you what kind of facility that this was going to be doing and what is the nature of it? And not only the nature of it, I know you're calling it a gym. Why is it being redefined to some other terminology or some other language? And is it something that's available to the direct public at large?

Yes, so I think maybe it was maybe I was a little confused. Maybe I just should have been a little more clear and I apologize for that. So this is staff is saying in general, we have we have the B1 zoning district, and then we have the B2 zoning district. And then if you're in the B1, you're going to have less intense uses than the B2 zoning district. And what staff got together and we're talking about was that currently the way it's structured in our rules, is that if you're going to run a gym exercise facility as a business owner you need to be in the B2 zoning district and we've had just had two other businesses come in and try to open businesses in the B1 that fit nicely in the community and they unfortunately had to ask for zoning changes.

And when that happens, staff gets together and says, you know, it might be prudent for us to change our rules to better fit our community and the needs of our community.

better fit our community and the needs of our community. So essentially what we're saying is what this is talking about is not a specific gym in particular. Yeah, because I don't want it to be a gated gym. No, no, no, not at all. There's nobody, right, there's nobody in here that's actually, we're saying we're changing our rules to allow a gym to be opened up by right in the B1 zoning district as opposed to the B2. Okay, so what's the difference, the B1 and the B2? Is it more space. It's about more spacing. It's not okay. Yes. And also typically you're going to look when a community is looking at zoning, they have their zoning map every year and there's different areas where they're going to have different intensities of zoning. And the idea is that you do not want a factory to be in your residential zoning district. You don't want maybe a body shop with a lot of equipment in your, you know, your, I would say your small Main Street downtown. You know, you want certain businesses that fit into the community. And the idea is that land uses fit certain places, certain geographic regions. And so I think what we're, I think essentially if I had to sum this up, our B1 zoning district is common throughout the city. We have several pockets of B1 zoning districts. And what staff is saying is, especially in our downtown which has B1 zoning in many places it would make sense to see that a gym could come in and not have to get a zoning change every time they wanted to open a dojo or a small gym or a small workout facility. Okay okay thanks. Alderman Sellers? Yeah just want to know with the with the wording of physical culture centers does that culture does that mean? I think sometimes

Well, I would say probably all the time. Zoning is too academic for its own good. They can't just say gym. They have to come up with a fancy word for it. So it's a physical, you know, I'm going to the physical culture center today. Oh, okay. You know, I have to get my swole on, I guess, or something. Hold on with Stacy. So they're wanting to remain a B1.

There is no specific person. Staff was trying to be proactive in not requiring every gym to come in and ask for a zoning change.

So, but how do we pick and choose? So now this yoga one that started in May that didn't rather ask for forgiveness, now they're being forced to go to a B2.

and pay the $200. But what if they come back and say, well, why couldn't we just remain to be one like they are? I get it. And we actually contacted our legal counsel on that. And we said, hey, this is what's going on. We feel like people are having a little bit of an extra burden. And their advice to us was, you have to go with what happens at the time of their application. So the rule at the time is that that they have to rechange their zoning. I think staff is looking at that and saying we could see that coming up in the future and we don't think it's prudent for every yoga studio or martial arts studio that would have to pay for a zoning change. We're trying to fix, staff's trying to fix what we see as an issue.

This is what I speak about when I say treating everybody the same. Understood. That's an issue. How some can remain and how some cannot. Understood. Alderman Johnson. Does this only apply to physical culture centers or it doesn't apply to anything else just to that specific entity? Specifically physical culture centers.

We're trying to add that into B1 to save people in the future from having to pay the 200 to rezone every time.

We think that staff believes, and we, you know, in the planning commission we talked about, we believe that you could run a small athletics facility in a B1, especially since our building and fire code could limit the amount of people or what you could actually do in there.

Yeah, that's what I wanted to hear.

Hold on, Stacey.

You just said what I wanted to hear.

But the one that we just spoke about prior to this, they were running their business, so they could have operated at a B-1 level.

You're correct, and I brought that to, sorry, go ahead. I'll just say quickly, I brought it to that matter to counsel, our legal counsel, and they said we can make the change, but anybody who started in the process is going to have to go through this before. If staff is making the change to help people in the future, just because I make the change, it doesn't help the people that are already started in the process. We're making it difficult harder than what it is. That's why it has to be the same across the board. So then the ones that had to go to B2, they could stop paying that $200 and remain B1. Or the one that you're saying is a B1 and don't Don't necessarily have to be a B-2 to run a small gym. Well, like you said, we have to follow the ordinance where it is today, and these ones that are before you that were just passed are according to the ordinance as it stands, but he wants to make a better change for in the future, so that's what this is about, a change for in the future to make it better for business. It's not aimed at anyone, it's just trying to be better business friendly.

Okay, okay, so this one that we're speaking of, the physical culture center, according to the ordinance, it has to be a B2 right now. Am I correct? Yes. So why are we even? Attorney Zito. So currently, you're right. As it's written right now, the code says to be a physical culture center, you have to be in a B2.

Do, right? And so what staff is noticing is that that's causing a lot of businesses that are in a B1 to say, hey, I got to come in for a zoning map amendment every single time, right? And that's happened twice just on this agenda. It may have happened last year a couple of times. It may happen five years ago there. I think what staff then, and this happens from time to time, a community will realize, you know what? We've gotten a lot of these zoning map amendments for gyms to have to switch switch from B2 to B1. Maybe it makes more sense to change the rule to say go forward gyms are allowed in a B1 also so that anyone who is in a B1 in the future go forward doesn't have to jump through the hoop. Now does it help the people from five years ago who had to get the zoning map amendment change then or a year ago or two years ago that did it? It doesn't help them. That was the rule in the past and it wasn't perceived to be an issue until you start to get a volume of it and that causes you to say, a community to say, hey, maybe it doesn't make sense to only allow Jim's in a B2. Maybe we should consider allowing them in a B1 also. And that's what this ordinance now, this text amendment ordinance, is trying to rectify that situation there. Okay, Attorney Zito. So if something is changed or written up to say some can be at B1 and some can be at B2, what's going to determine the difference? The size of the facility, the number of exercise, the pounds, footage, what? So zoning is determined by our map.

So you're asking what determines B2 or B1? It depends on the location? Yes. So we have a zoning map that we pass an ordinance for every year. And when you buy, it should be disclosed to you, you know, when you're buying property, you know, your agent or whoever you're buying from should say, you know, or it's it's public knowledge too. You can call the city and ask, what is the zoning on my property? And there's a map and it'll show you what the zoning is. So it doesn't, you could have a one acre, 500 acre, half acre lot. It's not really the size. It's determined by the location on a map. What is the address of this?

Number 12. This item doesn't have an address. Okay. See, that's the thing. This item doesn't have an addressed. Yeah, go ahead. Right. So this is a text amendment. This is saying we're going to change what the standard is that will now apply citywide there. So again, this isn't about a particular applicant. This is not about a particular property. This is saying we as a council are deciding whether or not in a B1 zoning district, is it appropriate to allow for gyms there? We allow them in the B2. Now we're just saying across the board, should gyms be allowed in a B1 also, not any particular person, not any particular location or anything. We're just saying, should gyms be allowed in B1 also?

Okay. Item number 13 is the first reading of ordinance 20-25-49. Could you please read this?

Ordinance amending chapter 1252 of the zoning code of the city of Freeport concerning service of alcoholic liquors.

Director.

Director Duckman.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

So again, staff was working on reviewing some of our ordinances, and we came upon the fact that when you're operating a bring-your-own liquor, we call it a BYOB liquor license, the way that our ordinance is currently written is it says that you are required to get a Special Use when you sell alcohol, not serve alcohol. So what staff worked with council to say is to make everything fair and equal, and when it comes to liquor licenses, is that any establishment that serves, not necessarily serves and sells, but any location that determines they're going to serve alcohol, which would include your BYOB liquor license, they're going to have to do a special use permit so that is essentially what that is why we brought this to the planning commission to vote on and this went to our planning commission on July 10th and it was recommended for approval by a vote of seven to zero with zero abstentions and with that being the case staff is recommending recommends moving this forward is there a motion to move this forward so I'll move We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Johnson to move this ordinance

forward. Is there any discussion? Alderman Stacy? If I'm not mistaken, we went through this last year and there was a person who had a BYOB liquor license and would have these gatherings, but But then she was being treated differently, and something extra was being added to her license.

I'm not aware of that. What I am aware of is that there was a change to the incoming, the price of a liquor license was going up, I believe, for new BYOB licenses, correct, Ms. Clerk Anderson?

Anderson, I don't, and then I believe that if somebody was already existing that the price was not going up for that, the renewal?

We did change the fee structure.

The issuance fee was raised, which would not have applied to an existing BYOB, and we went more to a tiered level based on the number of events in the previous year.

that's what so last year I know that that to clerk Anderson's point we were talking about the licensing fees which is separate than the zoning ordinance our zoning ordinance essentially would be if somebody wants to even if you buy let's say if I had a a package liquor store and I sold it to I sold it to Darren Darren would have to go get a Special Use Permit, even if it was one day in transaction, it was still open one day it was Mr. Duckman's, one day it was Mr. Steekel's, it's required to get a special use permit for that as well as a license. So there's two processes there. What this ordinance is, what this text amendment is looking to do is to say, well, if I have a BYOB establishment and then Mr. Steekel wants to start a new BYOB establishment, he is also going to have to go through a special use permit and a licensing liquor licensing application the same way that a same way that a restaurant would if you vote no on this so let's say you're saying this is too restrictive I don't think the public should have a chance to weigh in on a establishment allowing people to bring their own alcohol that's essentially what a special use permit does is it allows the public to come in and say okay Mr. Duckman's moving in buying this building and he needs a special use permit to have alcohol to bring it. The way the ordinance is currently written is I would just have to get a liquor license. The way that this is proposing is to say in addition to or prior to that liquor license being approved I would have to go up and ask up for a petition for a special use permit.

so that's what we're voting on today okay so I have a question yes the ones that currently just have the BYOB would they then be required no I don't as well I guess Miss Anderson wants to yeah I believe they all went through the process we thought we had it buttoned up in the liquor codes and the meeting hall okay codes and they refer to each other but I believe I believe it's just one of the zoning areas that meeting halls are allowed as a permitted use and it wasn't clear. It said, as you mentioned before, it said we pointed out sell alcohol and this is really just a pretty simple addition to say serve and it's not going to change anybody that had or in the future will have a BYOB. It just really clarifies it in zoning what we were trying to accomplish through liquor code. Attorney Zito? I was just going to ask, because I think this is where Alderman Stacey was going, is that procedurally right now, we require BYOB to go through zoning as well as to get a liquor license, right, from a practical standpoint. Yes, and they have. And they have been. The language,

Right, the language in the code was written, though only said they had to do the liquor license part. So this is just housekeeping, cleaning up the language to match what in practice. They've had to do both processes in real practice, get zoning and get their liquor license. But the code, the written language only said you got to get the liquor license. So this is just catching up the code to match what's happening in practice. You got to get both zoning and liquor license.

If there's no further discussion, we'll move on to item number 14, which is the first reading of Ordinance 2025-50. Could you please read this?

Ordinance approving special use permit application at 2600 West Pearl City Road submitted by Harmony UMC to examine the special use of an R3-1 family residence zone property to allow for solar energy systems which utilize ground-mounted PV arrays per section 1250.01B20 and may I just add that this item is being reconsidered it's already gone through the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Planning Commission and at the May 19th council meeting the matter died for a lack of a motion in the first place Alderman Shadle I would refer to Director Duckman I believe he's got some more information on this I just kind of wanted to put it back up to give it its day to have a voice Director Duckman sure and I I appreciate that, Alderperson, Shadle. So I guess we'll just get back. Since this never hit the floor originally, it's good to kind of just give a refresher for what's actually happening at this location. So you see the church here. And this is already installed. This is actually their outbuilding shed, essentially. And you can see what's highlighted in yellow here is the existing panels that they are allowed to install by right because it's on a structure. So one simple way to remember this is in our residential zoning districts you're allowed to build by right which means you do

not need to come to council and ask permission you're allowed by right to put solar panels on structures like a roof of a shed or a house or a church. What brings to council is the fact that the person is asking in a residential zoning district to put the panels in their back and they're actually it's called ground mounted which is saying you're going to see like in a solar field or solar farm like you're used to seeing they're just mounted on poles and you can kind of just instead instead of being mounted on a roof so they're saying here they're going to do 120 feet from the property line they're going to have this set of solar panels here which would be screened from their neighbors by these existing trees.

This side of the road would be screened from the public and really most of it would be screened from people driving down this direction. There was a plan where they actually wanted to put solar panels all in this area. They wanted to put solar panels in these areas. They essentially wanted to cover pretty much much of their grass they wanted.

Much of their yard they wanted to cover with solar panels. I believe that they received, I think the neighbors kind of told them that that was not going to be liked or appreciated. And then they came up with this plan where they still want to add a small section here. A little more background on this since this did not go to council, you know, just never made it to council before.

This was heard on the May 1st, on May 1st by our Zoning Board of Appeals and it was recommended by a vote of five to zero with zero abstentions. There was, um, Director, um, Stiekel did, was one of the negative comments, one of the people to speak and therefore as a Planning Commission member did abstain from the voting.

and then also on May 8th the planning commission did not recommend approval by a vote of zero to six with one abstention it's worth noting that the actual hearing portion comes from the zoning board of appeals not the planning commission the planning commission looks at this type of petition and makes it a you know makes a recommendation but that the true hearing portion comes from our zoning board of appeals so that being said the zoning board of appeals did recommend approval. The planning commission did not by a vote of zero to six.

And then as stated earlier, Darren or director Stiegel abstained. We also had at our planning commission, we had another member of the public speak out against it. I would say probably par for the course or in line that oftentimes when we have residential, we have ground mounted solar and residential, it tends to be a polarizing decision. Solar is polarizing in this community, I would say, in general, so I'm doing my best to give both sides of the story here. I think that an argument certainly could be made that the scope of their work is small, and that in this situation, you can see what they're asking for this small area.

I think it makes sense in this situation to allow them to do it with the restriction that they follow the plan as attached.

I don't.

So move.

A second.

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

Discussion.

Okay.

Alderman Stacey?

did I don't know why it's here I thought you said by law they don't have to come to us for where they're wanting to put it now I'll I'll make I'll restate that may try to be a little more clear see this see this white outline here yes and there's a chat see the shadow yes that is a shed or an outbuilding see that it's casting a shadow because there's an actual building existing if you if you have your an existing structure if they wanted to cover their entire roof with solar panels they could yes that's allowed this there's no zoning special use for that once you decide that you would like to put on the ground in residential zoning districts if you want to put solar panels on the ground not on your roof not on your shed you want to put them on the ground you have to go to the zoning board of appeal planning commission and council has to approve your plan of where you want to put the solar panels on the ground. You're not deciding on these existing panels. You're making a decision on this small area of panels right in here. Alderman Johnson. So would harm come to anyone by putting those panels there? Would it harm anyone? I think that that's an object. I think that's an opinion. I think that two people,

specifically said that they feel like it would harm them. That's their opinion. They're right. I think the harm was mostly, I think when, excuse me, I think when in this particular situation and also generally when I hear people, there are pretty much every time solar comes to residential like this, I can almost guarantee there's going to be complaints and they usually, they are usually not always, but there's a correlation to people do not like the aesthetics. They do not like to drive by and see a yard or they don't like the way solar looks.

This is pretty well hidden. I think that, yes, in my opinion, I see, in my opinion, it's far, it's 383 feet from the road.

It's 120 feet from the property line and there's trees. So yes, in my opinion, it's fairly well disguised and it's pretty small.

It creates a small footprint on a very large lot. Thank you. Yes. Alderman Sanders. Yeah, what kind of environmental effect would this cause? More UV rays or any other kind of radiation coming into those local area to Power Up Solar because it's dependent upon the environment to sustain any kind of solar panels or whatever.

It is bringing a certain effect to that area because of that.

But you think that the concern of those people in the community of that area is concerned about anything of that nature?

I think that the people who belong to this church are hoping to get as much sun as they can because then their electricity bill goes down.

I mean, the reason they want these solar panels there is so that they can cut their electricity bill.

you know and I they certainly have the ability to pass the permitting process we you know we're not reinventing the wheel in terms of construction right I mean we've all driven and seen solar panels built this is more of a on making a decision on it is this fit for the community is this going to be is the community going to be affected every time they drive by there and go gosh look at that you know it was a beautiful church and now I've got to drive by and look at these solar panels or Epson. Essentially, that's part of it. In terms of physical health, I'm not aware of physical health concerns of a solar panel being 383 feet from a road. I don't see it. Okay. Darren? If it's okay, I'd like to clarify my abstention and my comments at the Planning Commission. So I'm not opposed to this site having solar or any other site.

I'm personally opposed to any ground-mounted solar, whether it would be here or anywhere else in town because of obvious things that I've stated before. So it has nothing to do with Harmony Church or this particular location. It's just, I don't think the expansion of these types of facilities in Freeport are generally good for properties, especially ones that are zoned residential, which this one is.

so my objection is kind of blanketed for Freeport, not at this project.

Board of Trustees Meeting, Stacey.

I find it a little strange that the Planning Commission did not recommend this.

I've seen that before, too, Alder Person, Stacey.

You know, as I said before, it truly is polarizing.

anytime we're talking about bringing solar into a residential community a residential area there tends to be I would say it's a fifth that the community is split almost in half on whether they like it or dislike it and to Mr. Stiekel's credit he has been pretty much online with not you know he's had the same opinion he's been steady in his approach but I know there was one on Lincoln Boulevard we did where it was a small and I'm fairly certain that the Planning Commission was against it, but the Zoning Board of Appeals was for it.

So I've seen that before where the Zoning Board of Appeals recommends it and then the Planning Commission does not.

To my knowledge, we have allowed this twice in a yard, in a backyard.

Howard. That sounds, that sounds correct. I can think of two situations where we allowed it. I can think of two and one of them was a church as well. The other one was a church as well. And so now how can we say yes, yes, and now no? Well, it's that's actually a pretty easy explanation. So this is what's called a special use permit. Okay, so when you have a special use permit, and you're looking at land uses, what can I do with my property? You have what you can do by right, what you can't do, and then you have special use. And the reason you have what you can do by right. So if you're in a residential zoning district, by right, you can build a house.

By right, you can build a house. That is, you do not have to come to council in a residential zoning district to say, I want to build a house. If you want to build a factory in a residential zoning district, my job is really easy. My favorite word to say, no, then it's over. I don't have to deal with anything else then. You want to build a factory next to your neighbor who has a house? No. It's never going to happen.

and but in this situation there's the there's the areas where there's uses where our zoning code contemplates having a hearing to determine if that use fits for a specific parcel and a special use by its very definition design allows the zoning board of appeals allows planning commission and allows city council to look at specific properties and say on this property it works on that property that I voted on last week it didn't work and that's a hundred percent that's what you're tasked with you are tasked to look at each in a special use permit you are tasked with making that decision of does this use fit on this specific property if they don't get the backyard are they willing to go on the roof hi I I'm I don't want to speak for them them. They'd have to make that decision on their own. I would guess they would definitely look at that on their own if they want to put it on the roof, but I'm not sure if they would do it or not. I don't know.

Alderman Sellers? Yes, I think the reason why we kind of passed it last time was because the 474 feet, they kind of wanted it right there, and that was like in everybody's view and the neighbors and with with us just doing Pearl City Road, it was going to look bad. So I think that was some of the decline of the last vote. That's why they made it smaller and moved it back to the back to try to hide. Yes, I can see that. Yes, I would agree with that. Okay, we'll move on to item number 15, which is the adoption of Resolution 2025-76. Could you please read this?

Resolution Ratifying Emergency Construction Debris Hauling by Fisher Excavating Thank you, Manager Boyer, can you please flip the lights Thank you, Your Honor The City of Freeport does generate a certain amount of construction debris during all water, sewer, and storm, and street repairs The waste is commingled with gravel, concrete, asphalt, and dirt and is stockpiled due to the emergency nature of most of that work. The utility construction crew essentially ran out of room at their disposal area by the Brick Street construction shed, and city staff requested a time and material agreement to move the co-mingled construction debris from Brick Street construction garage, including any specialized disposal. Currently, the city has had over 18 months of stored construction material, waste construction material, and construction crews are out of room as emergencies arise for more debris storage. So Fisher excavating hauled over 2,700 cubic yards.

That's 230 loads of waste debris. A few dump locations will accept commingled waste for fill without full separation of solid material, and this is very costly to perform. City staff moved forward with a tiny material agreement with Fisher for the debris removal as staff was out of any holding area for any more for solid construction waste. Without the recent construction water main breaks, action was required, so this resulted in about $21,000 worth of hauling needed to be done, and staff is asking for ratification of this resolution. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. A motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Clem. Discussion on the resolution? Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Kurt, do we have Alderperson Parker? Yes. Parker, Stacy? Aye. Shadle? Aye. Sanders? Aye. We're on Sanders. Can I open it up for discussion? No. I just wondered. I didn't ask you, though, but I'm just wondering. I'm answering it. So we're on a vote. So it's a yay or nay. I can say, I can talk to the attorney. Can I ask?

It's a yay or a nay.

Yeah, I know.

But anyway, I'm going to abstain from that one.

Sellers?

Aye.

Clem?

Aye.

Johnson?

Aye.

And Simmons?

It passes 6-1-1.

And item number 16 is the adoption of resolution 2025-77.

could you please read this resolution ratifying emergency water main repairs by Fisher excavating on Galena Avenue near the Lincoln Mall entrance thank you manager where I think your honor if you'll recall last year we had a water main break that was discovered on Galena Avenue was very cold and we were doing all our best to just keep it melted but this was near the McDonald's interest entrance in the IDOT roadway in Galena the break was significant was running into the storm inlet underground and then started surfacing out on the road pavement. Fisher was called in to assist city staff due to the difficult location in concrete under the base of the road. Fisher's crew assisted in completing the Galena water main repairs due to the area's constraints and the need to maintain water service to the local businesses while navigating the busy roadway. It was a very difficult dig to find the leak. City crews, utility crews and street crews assisted as much as possible.

and they're handling a traffic control and staff is requesting ratifications agreement to pay Fishers $11,330 for the emergency water main repair. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. The motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Clem. Discussion on the resolution? Alderman Sanders? Yes, Manager Boyer, I guess Darren as well, he was on that job as well.

Did we clean up the after effects, the aftermath? We cleaned it up. We did the, we checked the storms in the sewer to make sure no debris filtered out into those areas? Yes. Okay, thank you. Alderman Stacy. Sister, what you and I spoke about last week? I don't think so. With the, that affected the Barbara and the dog? No, that's Warren.

this was the one that was in the center of Galena by McDonald's over the winter months our city crew is not equipped to do this so to give you an explanation Galena Avenue is full concrete under the asphalt which means full depth so you actually have to have equipment that's capable of cutting over a foot of concrete which we don't have it needs to be hired out and with the location and the busyness of Galena Avenue this was a very very difficult spot to fix and we actually tried and attempted and we couldn't get it done on our own we had to chase the leak all the way across the road we even brought in a special locate service to try to help us find the leak sometimes they don't come up immediately where they are especially under concrete so this was one of the more difficult breaks that we've had overall and the bill would have been at least three times this had our city crews not helped so that excuse me Alderman Sanders So they were, our city crew was on the job as well?

Yeah, per the memo, they did all the traffic control and they did some of the hauling and we just used fissures for the specialized cutting and removal of the concrete.

Yeah, I recall us having to contract something of that nature for water leak.

Yeah, we've invested, I would say, with city manager direction, we've invested probably $20,000, $25,000 in traffic control over the last couple years, so we're trying to do all of that work possible to save those dollars All right, okay, thank you If there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the roll Parker, Stacy, Shadle, Aye Sanders, Aye Sellers, Aye Plum, Aye Johnson, Aye Aye. And Simmons is absent at the moment. The resolution is adopted, 7 to 0. Item number 17 is adoption of resolution 202578. Could you please read this?

read this. Resolution ratifying emergency dispatch center air conditioning system repairs by Nelson Carlson mechanical contractors. Thank you, manager, Boyer. Thank you, your honor. The city of Freeport's police department 911 dispatch center has experienced reoccurring issues with the mini split system. So similar to what we have here in the conference rooms and in city hall, I can attest they are somewhat problematic. The unit's been leaking down the wall for months with numerous electrical devices in the room. The 911 centers in the middle of the building and requires this unit to run 24-7 due to the large amount of computer equipment operated in the area.

The existing unit was 12 years old and parts were obsolete. The police leadership team called Public Works Consultant and informed him of the issue with the unit. We had service calls to evaluate the issue.

Parts were no longer available through multiple efforts and the city had Nelson Carlson replace the unit with a new carrier model that has parts in full serviceability. Many of the many split models to Day are throwaway units which are undesirable for the city due to their heavy utilization and the ETSB leadership team informed the police department that they would approve paying for the unit based on the estimate. So the staff is requesting approval through the city council on this emergency repair. It will be paid for through ETSB funds. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. Motion made by Alderman Clem, seconded by Alderman Sellers. Discussion on the resolution. Alderman Sanders. Would there be advisory for options at this junction when it comes to whether to repair or to purchase or rental or whatever the case may be? I don't know how that works.

As I understand it, in this particular case, there's really not a lot of options for having enough cooling capacity into the 911 dispatch center, so that's why the mini-split is an attractive option.

This one was fairly old, and like many of them around City Hall now, we're starting to have problems with them, so I think we're probably going to have a few of these coming up, but because it's so mission critical to keep the 911 dispatch center up and operating properly, it was necessary to move forward with this. Did you also say the city also? Yes, I mean many of the mini splits in the city are a similar make and model. Is that right? Yes. Olderman Sellers? Now I was wondering, this wasn't the one where comment was? We'll get to that one. Yeah, we're getting to that one. Okay. Olderman Stacy? Okay, that's what I was just thinking. Two weeks ago, didn't we discuss all this money being put into and Banks for Gatina, overloading, is this the same thing? No, this is separate. Chief, did you want to answer that? Yeah, I mean, unfortunately, it seems like the mini split went out around the same time as the AC, and then, just to clarify, so we get ETSB funding every year from the 911 ETSB that covers some salaries in the dispatch center, but also repairs like this, so this isn't coming out of the general fund at all, this is just from the money we get from the ETSB to spend on equipment in the dispatch center. Any other discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Parker? Aye. Stacey? Aye. Shadle? Aye. Sanders? Aye. Sellers? Aye. Clemm? Aye. Johnson? Aye. And Simmons? Aye. The resolution is adopted, 8-0.

item number 18 is the adoption of resolution 2025 79 could you please read this resolution ratifying emergency taxiway light repairs at the albertus airport by William Charles electric thank you manager boyer thank you your honor the taxiway lighting system at albertus recently failed it was having problems last year and they were in the process of repairing it and then locating parts and it took took quite a while to get it back up and running appropriately. So this created safety hazards and required emergency repair to ensure the safe nighttime operations and regulatory compliance. The current system is aging and scheduled for future replacement, but immediate action was necessary. The airport operator coordinated emergency repairs with William Charles Electric. The attached invoice outlines cost incurred, including labor, service vehicle use and materials. Repairs were delayed due to the need for custom manufactured parts as the components for our existing system are being phased out in favor of LED technology.

While a full lighting upgrade is part of our long-term capital plan, deferring this repair was not feasible to maintain safety during the outage.

Remaining lights were operated overnight that were on 24-7, increasing our utility bill out there.

The total invoice amount is $15,523.31, and this will be paid from the airport operating budget, and a budget adjustment may be necessary, meaning we'll might have to move some funds within the airport budget to cover the difference, so staff requests ratifying the payment of William Charles for $15,523.31 for the emergency lighting repairs.

Is there a motion to adopt?

So moved.

Second.

The motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers, discussion on the adoption, Alderman Stacy Okay, so you said that there may be some funds that would have to be moved Within the airport budget, yes Any other discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll Parker I'll speak for him Aye Stacey Shadle Aye Sanders Aye Sellers Aye Clem, Aye, Johnson, Aye, and Simmons, Aye, the resolution is adopted 8-0. Item number 19 is the adoption of resolution 2025-81. Could you please read this? Resolution approving redevelopment agreement with Garrett and Siobhan Miller at 310 East Jackson Street. Director Duckman? Thank you, Madam Mayor, and I I have the wrong thing up on the screen. This is the Pilates studio. But while that is brought up, okay, here it is. So bear with me. Okay, so this is a map here. We have Liberty Avenue, and we have Jackson Street, and NICOR is over here.

This building, so a little background here, Merritt Crane Rentals is what the company that has purchased this property and are looking to redevelop it and expand it and to essentially improve the area, but also expand their business, bring it here into Freeport.

So the highlights of this expansion are the dark black box here is a 3,200 square foot storage facility for their heavy equipment. Now what they're also planning to do is this area here is a parking area that is in poor condition. So in addition to this 3,200 square foot storage facility, that would be it's more of an addition because it attaches to the existing building. They're also talking about increasing or improving repaving this parking area with a value of $50,000 also improving some of the drainage in the area as well. So that would be $50,000 in improvements. The storage facility would be $100,000 in improvements. So they're talking, they're proposing to build $150,000 in improvements on the site.

they came to us with this proposal and if we scroll up we can kind of show what the building would look like if you keep go back one that's essentially this building here is the existing building and then this area here is all the expansion that they're looking to do so it's somewhat well a sort of a smaller project it's still fairly large and somewhat exciting for the area to have some new business business and new life brought to the area. So they contacted the city with their plans, and they talked about working in their TIF district and what they would be eligible for in terms of financing and city staff reviewed their proposal and what city staff looked at and is proposing as part of this redevelopment agreement is once the developer builds this addition, which is $100,000, staff is proposing that they be paid 3% of that upfront, or not upfront, after completion.

not up front, after completion, which is $3,500. Then additionally, once they create, once they finish their paving, as I talked about earlier, once they fix the parking lot, which is $50,000, again, they would receive $1,500, which is another 3% of that project.

project. Now, in addition to these smaller payments, they would also be eligible for tax increment that would come from this project. And to kind of talk about that, it's anticipated that once this building is constructed, their tax assessment is going to increase.

and with that tax, when that tax assessment increases, the amount of taxes that they pay is also going to increase and so this is in line with any and all redevelopment agreements that have come here in my time and the ones that I've reviewed in the past and it's pretty much a textbook redevelopment agreement where any of the increment above their tax base, their TIF, their tax base value and especially resulting from this development here they would receive back on an annual basis of 75 percent of that increase that tax increment or increased tax revenue would go back to that developer and that would go for the lifetime of this TIF district. This TIF district ends in 2029 so they would essentially receive four four years of payments.

It's also important to note that what's being proposed by staff is that this would cap total compensation for this development to the developer would not exceed $50,000. I don't foresee that happening. I don't foresee them getting close to that in four years because they're spending $150,000 and remember they would have to have hit a significant amount of tax increase to hit that.

four years back. However, in line with prior agreements, we do limit the amount of, excuse me, we limit the amount of compensation in our TIF districts. In line with others, this is one-third of the total value that they're proposing to put into this development.

So the redevelopment agreement here for Merrick Crane Rental is supported in our budget where we have a total of this annually, we have $50,000 earmarked for new redevelopment agreements in the year of 2025.

So we've budgeted for situations like this where we can work with developers on projects.

and with that bearing that in mind staff is recommending approval of this resolution is there a motion to adopt so move second motion made by Alderman Sellers seconded by Alderman Shadle discussion on the resolution I have a question Alderman Simmons Mr. Duckman I hear the improvements question is what jobs will they be providing because it sounds like they're just going to be storing stuff there or like how is that going to work I I don't have the exact number of jobs, but I do know that he said he's going to have staff members bringing the equipment in and out quite frequently. So I don't anticipate this bringing more than three jobs on to be honest, but I would have to consult with him to get an exact number. But to your point, I don't I don't anticipate this being a more than three to five job creation.

Alderman Stacy.

Yes.

the area you were talking about the parking lot them blacktopping it okay yes you spoke about what was the word you used stormwater improvements drains or something yes drainage yes stormwater drainage is the same and so that falls on the city uh no not on their own private property okay so I think sorry and I guess when you have a parking lot Parking lot in poor condition, we always think about potholes, like messes up our tires, but also, you know, when you look at a parking lot in the rain, if it's bad, you see all the little duck ponds in there, and that, you know, this is a, this, this parking lot's in pretty bad shape, so the idea is that they would increase, they would be fixing their parking lot to increase the site drainage.

Okay, so if the TIF district is extended, will their cutoff still be 2029?

Their cutoff will still be $50,000. That will not change because it says for the life of the district, but they essentially could make more money, not more than 50, but if they, in four years, let's say they were to make just say $10,000 total in payments.

Well, if it gets extended another 12 years, which is per ordinance, per statute, what you can extend a TIF district is 12 years. If this was to be brought to our legislature for that, then they could receive more years of payments. However, they would still be capped at the $50,000, no matter what.

Okay, so I just want to remind the council that when you have the floor and you ask your question, try to pull those thoughts together, because then when the floor goes over to whether it's Director Duckman or Siegel or management or whoever, then they have the floor. So technically, you don't just get it back. So that would be a second. So instead of, you know, speaking twice on a, wait a minute, instead of speaking twice, instead of speaking twice to a subject, You know, you've actually been had the floor like four or five times. I just want to remind you of how that works. So if you can compile your thoughts, it's helpful to the process. Okay, I understand that. So Alderman Shadle, I believe you had your hand up next. Thank you. I just want to go back a little bit more on the possible job creations. This is an existing building that was started 20 some years ago by Brooke Wagner.

and he's since retired sold the business to Mr. Miller and Mr. Miller wants to grow the business he's already purchased one exceptionally large crane over and above the one that Mr. Wagner used to run alone they're a union shop they're substantial wages paid to these crane operators. I don't know his full vision for the future, but it was more than just the one crane that he's already added. He was talking one to two more. So at least there's going to be two to three jobs there, but they're significant jobs.

And I appreciate that, Alder Person, Shadle, for you saying, and I think it's difficult in a contracting business, too, to estimate, well, are the, you know, but I would imagine two to three, I mean, he's told me he's extraordinarily busy, business is good for him, I think it's nice that, to bring his business here, I mean, if you've, if you've driven by the site, it could use a facelift, you know, it's, it's going to be nice for the area, and I think in to your point I mean two to three jobs is my estimate I that's two or three jobs we didn't have and a site that's you know kind of an average condition closer to poor condition it to have it re to have the property tax dollars increased and improve the area I think it's a win for many people Alderman Sanders yeah I have I have a possible to maybe two quest two or three questions I want to refer to I understand that you talked about a drainage system, a property altering its property development and creating drainage systems. That does affect the water process, and are we going to increase their water bill, or are they receiving water at this time?

We're not going to increase their water bill.

No, I'm just saying because if you're going to redevelop that parking lot or that area for runoff, drainage for the parking lot, then that does come into play.

It allows a flow to come back into the city drainage system and with the changing of the development of that property.

And not only that, the frontal place of that to beautify and to upgrade, to bring better structure to that area, then I don't know if we have a plan for road conditions, sidewalk conditions, any of those kinds of things that's going to be part of the plan when it comes to changing the structure of that area.

area when it comes to that business. I just wanted to know that because I just wanted to know that because we're talking whether or not the taxpayer is going to be affect, you know, is that placed earmarked or does have a benchmark for redevelopment in front of this property when it comes to road condition? I don't know if we put roads in there yet, new roads in there. And so if we're talking about all of these kinds of things, we have to have the monies to even work with that.

because that's not part of the plan. If it's not in the plan, then I'd like to know that as well. How much the taxpayers got to have or what the kind of increase that needs to be done for this property when it comes to drainage? Well, a couple things here. Rest assured that state law requires that whatever runoff was going off the site as of today, whatever site improvements you make, it has to be equal to that post-improvement.

So, and the way you assure that is the civil engineering industry almost exists entirely on that principle.

I'm not saying entirely, but they spend 8, 10, 12 hours a day reviewing projects to make sure that the water that was running off the site before does not equal or is equal to lesser than equal to the runoff post development. So that will be reviewed when they have their parking lot design. It is illegal to change to just dump water right into your neighbors. You know, you can't just do that. Exactly. Maybe I could just also fill in a little detail. Essentially, you have sheet flow coming off the parking lot there now, and all we'll do is be tying it into that corner of Jackson and Liberty so that it'll flow straight into the large box culvert that runs to, yeah.

Yeah, and that right there would change the increase of their portion of water bill, wouldn't it?

No, it's actually the same amount of water. It'd still be going into that box culvert. Now, as far as drinking water is concerned, they'll probably use about the same amount.

Oh, we don't charge for the drain off at property?

Not by the gallon. We charge every month. It's a flat rate every month, yeah.

You do charge something, don't you?

Yes, a flat rate across the board every month.

That's for everyone?

Everybody, yeah.

Everybody?

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay, let's remember those rules, the Roberts rules. So if he has the floor, you don't just automatically get it back.

I understand, but I'm talking to him.

Well, that's not the correct procedure, so you need to be acknowledged, Alderman Sanders.

is there anyone else that would like to have a discussion on this resolution what you just said seeing none madam clerk please take the roll Parker yes Stacy no Shadle Sanders no Sellers I plum Johnson I and Simmons I'll stay one two three four the the resolution is adopted five to two to one item number 20 is adoption of resolution 2025 82 could you please read this resolution ratifying emergency purchase of portable air conditioner for well houses from Granger manager Boyer thank your honor the city for free ports water and sewer facilities have large electrical rooms that require cooling during the summer months due to numerous electric electrical items running concurrently inside which generate heat this is a specifically related to variable frequency drives and having to keep the computers and all the circuitry cool.

It's essential not to allow this equipment to overheat. With the excessive temperatures for extended periods of the summer, the utility has had an existing AC unit running continuously at full capacity, so that's one of these units to keep the room cool. It's been running solid. Recently, we had an AC unit breakdown and parts had to be ordered. As a result, the staff had a variable frequency drive equipment issues without being able to obtain a portable cooling unit. The well house and wastewater facility VFDs are approximately $250,000 to replace and if they overheat, we don't want to risk losing them. So the city utility department purchased an emergency portable air conditioning unit capable of fully cooling the well house and wastewater electrical room facilities during unit breakdown. The unit can be deployed quickly to any utility facility in the city and has the ability to keep water and sewer facilities in operation. This unit was sized to be able to operate in all facilities including the future well 12 and so this was actually purchased because we had a problem with our normal air conditioning and we've got that repaired now but we needed this in the interim so this was a the city basically purchased an $11,126.34 portable AC unit. We'll be keeping that for future repairs if necessary, and so staff would request a ratification of that emergency. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Clem. Discussion on the resolution? Alderman Sanders? Yes, so because it's portable,

Yes. And there's an emergency throughout the city is what we're what we're saying. Right. That this particular item would be able to utilize for any area throughout the city at any given time at the purchase price of what what are we talking about? Well, the actual cost is $11,000. But this portable units and industrial that you would put in under emergency circumstances. So if we had an issue with the bath blowers, we've got a lot of variable frequency drives there. If we had anything go down, we would actually have some way of dealing with the situation right away. And we learned dealing with the police department that renting units gets very expensive very quick. And so by having our own on hand, that's going to save us money long term in emergencies when it's related to heat. Okay. Any other discussion? Alderman Sellers?

Yeah, I'd just like to know, what is the warranty on this air conditioner?

I'm going to have to.

I believe it's a 12-month warranty, but it's an industrial unit, and most units like this only have a 12-month warranty.

Now, it'll only get used in emergencies, and we'll keep it, but it can be portable to any of the units by a trailer, so it'll be kept in one of the buildings that is clean.

Alderman, Stacy, did you have a hand up?

What is this 50-50 split?

That's to basically split it between the water and the sewer budgets.

Any other, Alderman, Stacy?

There's no insurance that we could fall back on?

Not in this case.

the repair of the air conditioner was repaired under I think in this particular case warranty but there's no way for us to preserve the variable frequency drives in that electrical room without some auxiliary cooling and that's not paid for through warranty work. Any other discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Parker. I guess you have to go to breakfast. I'm going over to this. Aye. Stacey.

Aye.

Shadle, Aye.

Sanders, Aye.

Sellers, Aye.

Plum, Aye.

Johnson, Aye.

And Simmons.

The resolution is adopted 8-0.

Item number 21 is the adoption of resolution 2025-83.

Could you please read this?

Resolution ratifying emergency rental of portable air conditioning units for police department from Geostar Mechanical.

Manager Boyer.

Thank you, Your Honor.

So this is similar to the situation we had at the police department due to the issue with the power coming in and causing our compressor to burn up. We, for a period of time, had a portable air conditioning unit that was brought in to keep the police department cool. The city, essentially, we rented it through Geostar as part of our repair, and we'll be seeking reimbursement for this through ComEd due to the power issue.

so staff is requesting us move forward with this ratifying this emergency rental. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. A motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Clem. Discussion on the adoption? Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Parker? Parker?

Parker? Aye. Stacey? Aye. Shadle? Aye. Sanders? Aye. Sellers? Aye. Clem? Aye. Johnson? Aye. And Simmons? Aye. The resolution is adopted 8-0. Item number 22 is the adoption of resolution 2025-84. Could you please read this? Resolution approving purchase of two pickup trucks from J.H. Barco & Sons for Street Department.

Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. The City Street Department and the utility need two new pickup trucks. We did budget for them in the 2025 budget under item 331-304-7005 and 880-000-1800. That was in the 2025 budget. This was a planned purchase for replacing existing equipment. The first one, and I'm going to hand this to Darren because I want to make sure we got the most up-to-date information from Rick Barco as a recent source well dealer.

Correct. I received notice today that Barco's is currently a source well dealer. Also, I don't know who looked through the memo. We did get three quotes just to see where we were at. Barco's was the cheapest for both trucks combined. We put the price out for both trucks combined. And after the bid closed, We got information back from Carl's Auto and they were approximately just over $5,000 more than Barco's for the same two vehicles. It was too late because we had already turned the memo in to include those. So staff is recommending the two budgeted purchase vehicles from Barco Chevy. They have them both in stock and we can take delivery as soon as the plows come in. Is there a motion to adopt? Second. Motion made by Alderman Johnson.

seconded by Alderman Sellers. Discussion on the resolution? Madam Clerk, I'm sorry, go ahead. Yeah, I just wanted to know, I know we're getting two new vehicles. Are there going to be, how many more new vehicles will we probably need in the next two or three years? Are we going to be purchasing vehicles every year? Yeah, the idea is to try to, you know, turn our inventory of vehicles every couple years. It's really budget dependent. It really depends a lot on how the budget works out.

And if we think we can get by with what we have for a little while, we do. But we do need to start rotating some of this out. And just on that note, one of the things we are planning for and will need to continue to plan for is large, you know, large dump trucks. So those are coming through. And I think we actually have a line item for dump trucks for this year, at least in the utility, right, for one. Was that street department? Yeah. So we'll be coming back with one of those. The reason it's taken us so long here is because they've been on back order because of COVID.

years. So we didn't really feel like there was a reason to budget for them in the past years when you couldn't even get them for years. So we'll be bringing that up in the 26 budget as we move forward. Alderman Stacy? Yes. What budget will they be coming out of and what are these trucks going to be used for? So City Manager Boyer referenced the two budget items. One's coming out of water capital funds and one of them's coming out of sewer for capital funds. The 2,500 single cab is going to be used for our meter department. I don't know if anybody recalls, but we've added people to the meter department, and we've also added a staff that we had an old vehicle that was in really bad shape that we're going to be replacing. And then the 3,500 is a replacement for the sewer division with the service body boards, flaps, and undercoating. We're adding some of those after fits to make them last longer. We've learned our lesson over time, but the bodies are just rusted apart at this point. We use our vehicles quite heavily, and these two replacements are set up to last for, I would bet we'll get 10 plus years out of both of these vehicles. Alderman Sanders? Yeah, did I hear you mentioned plows for these vehicles, the two pickups. Yep. When we get in the winter months, we need to have more vehicles outside of our big heavy-duty trucks that have plows on them. It's very difficult to use the big plows downtown at some of the water and sewer facilities. There's just not enough room to use one of our big trucks. So we outfit the bigger one-ton trucks with plows and some of the superintendents to

be able to assist in the smaller areas and it reduces our time in plowing. So. Alderman Sanders, would you like the floor again? Is there any other comments, discussion? Would you like? I'm still updating right now. Well, let me know when you're done updating. Yeah, I'm done for now. Any other discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Parker. That was a yes, Curt. Stacey.

Got it. Yes. Shadle. Aye. Sanders. Aye. Sellers. Aye. Clemm. Aye. Johnson. Aye. And Simmons. No. The resolution is adopted, 7 to 1. Item number 23 is approval of the bid. Could you please read this? Bid opening on July 15th, 2025 for demolition of 17 through 19 West Main Street. Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. As everybody knows, we've been working on this for for years, 1719 West Main as former sanitary cleaners. We recently had a bid opening. We received four bids for the project from Fowler Enterprises, Green Demolition Contractors, Northern Illinois Service Company, and Fishers Excavating. After the bid was opened, Fowler Enterprises and Green Demolition informed the city that they had made a critical error and they were withdrawing their bids.

their bid specification requirements were incorrect so neither party has staff attended to the non-mandatory bid informational meeting and neither party understood the detailed scope of the work that was required so Fisher's excavating is the lowest responsible bidder and staff requests moving forward with the Fisher bid for $1,145,456 for the demolition of 17 and 19 Main Street is there a motion to adopt so moved Motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Clemm, discussion on the bid, Alderman Sanders City Manager, what was those numbers again?

It's the winning bid was $1,145,456 For how much was the square acres on that building?

I don't have the square acreage all I can tell you is that it's two contaminated brownfield sites in downtown Freeport that's adjacent to another building that needs to be supported and protected and these all drive the cost very high and by the way this is all this is grant funded okay okay that's good all right any other discussion I have a question Alderman Simmons thank you has already been approved yeah we've had it for years We just have taken forever to get it deployed due to the complexity at the site. Alderman Stacy? When do you anticipate it being down? Darren? The building should be down by the beginning of December and restoration will probably perk into May and June of next year of the property. Just wanted to remind everybody this is a Brownfields grant that we've received. We have not received the money but we have the commitment of one point So with the bid of just under 1.2, which was the engineering estimate, with the engineering and everything, we will not expend all the money on this grant and likely give some of it back, which we never really took the money, right? It's on hold for about four years to complete the project. We reminded everybody at the last meeting, I believe, that the difficulty in getting this to bid is the conjoined buildings that are downtown and protecting them and one of the building owners,

owners was less than thrilled about the project, and so it took a lot of time and structural analysis to make sure we can get these buildings down, and one of the reasons it's so expensive is one of them's three-story, one of them's like two and a half stories, and those sections are going to have to be basically taken down foot by foot in order to safely not damage the other buildings, so a lot of extras was involved in these projects. I will tell you if you divided them up by building, these prices are very close to the last two buildings that we very close to the last two buildings that we took downtown together. Any other discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Parker. Stacy. Aye. Shadle. Aye. Sanders. Aye. Sellers. Aye. Plum. Aye. Johnson. Aye. And Simmons. The motion passes 8-0. And item number 24, an additional bid, could you please read? Bid opening on July 15th for concrete work for driveway at fire station on Park Boulevard.

Manager Boyer.

Thank you, Your Honor.

Some of you may or may not be aware that the Park Boulevard fire station has a differential in grade between the road and the driveway approach.

That creates a problem with standing water.

It also creates a problem with ice formation.

And we have another issue in the vicinity, which is the cast iron sewer line that comes out of the fire department there.

for the fire station. That routinely clogs up due to the fact that it has tuberification forming inside the pipe. So with that being said, we looked at just replacing the drive approach, and then we talked about, well, if we're going to do the sewer, what do we want to do there? The concrete is rather old, needs to be replaced, and it would also offer us some opportunity for later on to be able to install some conduit so that if we ever decided to put a crossing lights in that vicinity, we'd be able to do that so fair Graham design and bid the driveway concrete driveway and sanitary sewer improvements for the park station at the request of the fire department a public bid was held on Tuesday July 15th at 11 a.m. in City Hall city staff received five bids for this project from DPI construction out of Pecatonica O'Brien civil work so strums and son night cam construction and home DPI construction was the lowest bidder at $120,000, $120,751.24. DPI has recently completed other concrete work for the city of Freeport with positive results and staff requests council approval to move forward with this reconstruction of the driveway approach, the parking pad, and the sewer line. Is there a motion to approve? So moved. Second. Motion made by Allerman Sellers.

seconded by Alderman Shadle. Discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Parker? Stacey? Aye. Shadle? Aye. Sanders? Aye. Sellers? Aye. Clem? Aye. Johnson? Aye. Simmons? Aye. And that motion passes 8-0. Reports from department heads, finance? Thank you. Community development? Nothing tonight, Madam Mayor. Thank you.

Public Works? Yep, just a few project updates. Cleveland is being paved. The west side, about three-quarters of it was done Friday. The other remaining intersections and the other piece should be done sometime this week if weather allows. Next week, you should see the west side of Cleveland being paved. They're just about done with the base repairs there. Black Hawk is in process. We just got all the water main passed.

bacterial tests today and they're working or I'm sorry last week and they're working on water services so probably the following week they'll be doing core out and the street should be done probably the first week of August. Carroll Avenue is in full swing. They are installing water services right now and they've flipped sides and they're heading from Galena to Adams right now installing water mains so a lot of good things.

progress within the city. Also, we received notice from the solar company that is building out on 18th Avenue. They give us permission to go out to bid for that project. So my team is going through the plans and making up the specials and provisions for the city of Freeport so we can get that out to bid in the next couple weeks. Anticipation will be that we will try to bid it to have it done yet this year.

The solar project has everything done out there about the driveway, and so just as a reminder, the agreement that Wayne and I were able, actually Wayne mostly was able to agree with the solar panel company as we will be getting $400,000 towards that project free to the city to repave 18th Avenue. So a big win for the city, and they'd like to see us have it done by, honestly, we need to move on it because it'll have to be done by about the second week of November.

Fehr.

Yes, thank you, Your Honor.

Last Wednesday evening, the fire department responded to a residential structure fire on West Clark Street.

As companies were arriving on the scene, forcing entry to the front door, they were met by one dog that had facial burns, and he self-rescued out of the building on his own.

and as the firefighters were deploying hand lines to extinguish the fire they located a second dog that was barely breathing. So while extinguishment was taking place other personnel administered oxygen to the second dog through pet masks that we received as a donation from the pet mask company. So animal control quickly responded to the scene and transported here in town. So the house sustained heavy fire and smoke damage and good news is the dogs were sent home the next day. Why I talk about this is I have to preface this by stating the fire is under investigation but we have a strong indication that the fire was originated by the dogs. There was a crock pot on top of the stove. The family had left for an event with the family that that evening. We believe the dogs jumped up with their paw, turned the burner on, and that's what created the fire. We've seen this before, so that's why we're speaking about it now. This is pending the review of their insurance carrier, but again, all indications look to be that the fire was caused by the dogs being curious, jumping up and seeing what was in the crock pot on the stovetop.

so word to the public if you're not going to be home don't have anything stored on the top of your your stove with burners that can be adjusted by air by by animals and pets so again we've seen that before so this is not something new and this is worthy of you know telling the story so perhaps it's avoided in the future. Police. Thank you I have no report tonight. Thanks library. No report tonight. Airport? IT? Nothing tonight. City Manager? I'd just like to say thank you to the staff. We've got quite a bit going, and I appreciate all the work that goes into what we're doing every day. Thank you. I have nothing new to report. Alderman Parker, do you have anything? Alderman Stacy? Alderman Shadle? Nothing. Alderman Sanders? Nothing. Alderman Sellers? Nothing. Alderman Clem? Neighborhood Watch on 729. Please come with your friends and questions.

Alderman Johnson? Just invite everybody to come out to the fair and enjoy the fair this week.

Alderman Simmons? No, thank you. And that leaves us with public comment. Hi there, Sue Cook, Winchester Drive.

have a question about or a suggestion possibly on number 12 when you guys are going back and forth about these people are getting their gyms today but going forward they're not going to have to worry about that $250. Could there be a discretionary so that if these people are coming, the ones that just got in today before the vote in the council, Could there be a discretionary on either the planning committee or community development, public works that would say, you know what, we're going to give this to you. Could there possibly be that so that you're able to allow them, since they're so close to the wire, literally right before the vote, to maybe give them a little break. And that way it would kind of go with what I kind of go with what Councilman Stacy was saying is that they get the break as well. Thanks.

Any other public comment?

Father God, in the name of Jesus, we praise you and we thank you for this day, for this is the day that you have made, and hopefully we have rejoiced and been glad in it.

We thank you for this council meeting tonight, O God, for the agenda was full, as you know. Lead us and guide us and direct us, Father God. Your will be done in this city. Not our will, but your will be done. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen.

Any other public comments? Seeing none, I'll take a motion for adjournment.

So moved. Second. Motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers. Please call the roll. Parker, Stacy, Aye, Shadle, Aye, Sanders, Aye, Sellers, Aye, Plum, Aye, Johnson, Aye, and Simmons. Aye. For adjournment.