So if you had one bad year at Trails, how was you?

Oh, my car insurance, I've had no claims on it, it was a thousand bucks this year.

So I no longer have it. At Gallagher, I went to State Farm.

Oh, sure.

State Farm cut it even below what I paid last year.

Oh, really?

Yeah.

I need to shop around.

Oh, I'll tell you, somebody told me Ted Fritz.

It's like a chore.

Ted Fritz.

Really?

Is the one he's out there by the McDonald's on the...

Yep.

Downs, and that's where they told me to go, and they had a young lady sit down, I gave her my old policies, she wrote up the new ones.

Good evening. Justin, could you give the invocation this evening?

Good evening, Madam Mayor, Council. As I won't see most of you probably until the new year, Merry Christmas, and I hope you all have a great holiday with your family and friends.

Same to you. Merry Christmas.

Let me pray for you, please. Father, we are grateful to you tonight. Father of spirits in whom we live and move and have our being as the giver of life. And Lord, even as I look around this chamber tonight and see the way that you've poured out your blessing upon so many, both in terms of physical well-being, life itself, but also gifts and abilities.

to serve one another. Lord, we pray that you would just continue to bless and help, Lord, tonight in terms of the business at hand. Just pray that you would continue to help this council as well as the directors, the mayor and others, Lord, to make decisions that are good for our community, that justice, truth, integrity, humility would mark the work of each one here.

and Lord, we thank you again that you have poured out your blessing so freely upon all as you are the father of lights in whom there is no variableness, no shadow of turning. So we ask these things in the name of Christ our Lord. Amen. Amen. And I apologize, Madam Clerk, I didn't realize you weren't seated.

That's okay. Anytime. Okay, so now we'll officially call this meeting to order. Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll? Mayor Miller? Here. Alder Persons, Clemm? Here. Monroe? Here. Simmons is absent. Parker? Here. Stacy? Here. Shadle? Here. Sanders? Here. And Sellers, are you present? Thank you. Perfect. Okay, next is the Pledge of Allegiance, led by Alderman Sanders. If you could please stand and join us.

Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible justice for all.

Item number one is approval of the agenda. However, we'll be removing item number 17. It's not quite ready to go. Is there a motion to approve?

So moved.

Second.

We'll be motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Clem. Alderman Muro?

do we have to vote to remove that item from the agenda this would be the vote so so right so if you're want to approve it with the amendment there it could be handled through this because you're approving the agenda as amended however all the memorable if you want to have it separated out for a separate vote on specifically to remove that item and whether that's all you know positive voter or negative you could do that as well I would prefer that please so would there be a second so I think so if someone wants to make a motion I think all the members have already been made of first and second so then right so alderman row if you want to make a motion to separate this agenda item for a separate vote on its own and that gets a second then may I ask for clarification on the rules what does the what what does the ordinances say we should do and specify it's okay there but a motion has been made to approve the agenda with the amendment um there but if you want to if you want to make a motion to to have it I'll make a motion to have it separate it out for a separate vote second so we have a motion made by Alderman Monroe seconded by Alderman Stacy to have a separate roll call on removing item

Number 17. With that, Madam Clerk, would you take the roll on that portion of the amendment only? So does everybody understand that? If you wanted to just make this one motion the way it was originally stated, then your vote would be no. If you'd like to have it separate, then vote yes. Sanders. I wasn't in tune. Are you in favor of leaving Agenda Item 17 on or I'm not saying that correctly. We're having a separate vote on only agenda item number 17. If you would like it left on, it's a yes vote. If you would like 17 removed, it's a no vote. Did I say that correctly?

We're going to do a yes on that.

Yes, for Sanders, Sellers No, so let me clarify So the motion that was made initially to approve the agenda was with item 17 removed Okay, that was a motion to approve the agenda with item 17 removed That was motioned by Shadle and seconded by Clem Okay, Chairman Monroe has asked for a to not have to vote on that amended agenda. He wants to vote separately on item 17, whether or not it should be removed from the agenda or not. So he's just asking to vote on the removal of item 17. Right. Just whether or not 17 should be removed for a separate vote to determine whether or not you guys are going to discuss it tonight. So a yes means there will be. Right. So a yes right now is to say let's separate it out for a separate vote as to whether or not we're going to talk about it tonight or not.

Clem?

No.

Monroe?

Yes.

Parker?

No.

Stacy?

Yes.

And Shadle?

No.

I have a tie vote.

No, I don't.

No, I have four yeses and a three.

Motion passes to have a separate vote on 17.

Was that the separate vote then?

Yes.

No.

Okay, to break it out separately.

So, how you're going to vote on the remaining agenda, everything, what, second?

Well, go.

17, whether or not you want to talk about it tonight.

They're not.

Because your vote, James, is that you wanted it not voted as a part of approving the agenda.

You wanted to vote on it separately, right?

So you want to talk about it tonight, right?

Is that what your position is?

Yes.

Okay, so.

That vote was four to three, so it should stay on the agenda.

So then Madam Clerk, take the roll on the agenda as is. As is. As is. As is, including item number 17. Including?

But I don't have a motion for that. No. Yeah. Oh, no. The motion was to take it off separately. Monroe.

Your motion was to take it off. You wanted to talk about it separately as to whether or not it should be removed or not.

No, I, my motion was to keep it on the agenda, but if, I mean, we voted four to three, that, to keep it on the agenda, correct?

I thought the vote four to three was to vote on it separately with being removed.

That's what I thought it was, so.

Just kidding.

Okay.

Well, that sounds like we need a vote for it.

Right, to whether or not to remove it separate, or to remove it now.

So, so the next roll call will be, do you want item number 17 removed for a later date?

Yes.

A later date or?

A later date.

No, talked about tonight.

No, later.

Well, that's what, that's what we were doing in the first place.

No, that was if it could be, if it could be.

Removed.

So what?

So what are we voting on? And what does a yes vote mean? Whether or not you guys want 17 removed now from the agenda. Whether we want it removed? Right. To be discussed at some later date. Some move. Discussion? No. Sure, I don't. What do you want to talk about? Voting on it? No, it's just, is it going to stay on the agenda or is it not? That's all this is.

It's good. It was asked to be removed by staff, but if you want to talk about it, then put it back on.

So the point of this is, and the question that I have, there were no roof repairs for Hanger J or Hanger O on the previous vote upon by this council in a unanimous vote to put money toward roof repairs.

And now it's appeared on here with information said that we had a bid opening and we've received two bids for something that was not authorized for spending of money, not by the council.

That's why.

Correct.

That's why.

So my question is, A, there's no discussion, so now we're punting it down the road again, but once again, staff is making decisions on how to spend money without authorization.

to do so. It's bordering on quickly on misappropriation of funds. So the question that I've got, this is why I want to have the discussion about what's going on and why that is occurring.

Director Richter, did you want to address that?

I would just like to state that in the 24 budget, there was $70,000 for roof repair for J-Hanger, and there was terminal updates of $50,000.

That's what's in the software for $120,000 for that line item But that money was budgeted for the new hanger, not for And I'm saying what was discussed and what we went through. I pulled the video. So my question is, is why is staff going off and spending money that's not been approved or appropriated for that function?

Manager, Boyer, I'd just like to answer your question, J. Hanger needs a new roof, so does O. Hanger, this has been discussed, it's been requested, so we have an issue with the way the bid worked out, and we're asking to remove it from the agenda, that's all.

So that's what's before you, are we going to keep it on the agenda or not? It was asked to be removed, so the vote is, the motion is to leave it on.

Do you want to leave it on? Darren, do you have some insight? Just to clarify, so it's the... Hold up, hold up, hold up, hold up. Wait, I have the floor. No, you didn't have the floor. I actually did give him the floor. Well, I've been pointing, I wanted to follow up on his discussion. Okay, I'll call on you next. Yeah, well, I wanted to... I'll call on you next. I'll call on you next. Darren, you have the floor. I... Tonight, tonight is the approval, James. If you guys voted down, then it's not approved.

there's nothing been approved for the bid it was just it's in the budget to get a bid that's what we did so tonight is the approval whether you approve it or not that's what the vote is so if you vote it down it's not approved to spend the money so point of clarification just so that way we don't have anyone upset Alderman Sanders go ahead go ahead point of clarification okay so the point of clarification is is the money was put forward for hanger upgrades so that we can at some point complete the work that was never done inside of our new main hangar, the one that was repaired for airport operations, for a pilot lounge and other improvements. And now we are going and we're trying to change what was approved last year to use that money for something else. And that isn't how this works.

works. That's not how the manager form of government works. Am I off base, Attorney Zito? Ultimately, right now, it's coming before you. If you guys don't want, it's for the council to decide, do you want to expend the money, you got to bid to do these two things. There, if you don't want to approve it, then, as Darren said, you can vote to say no.

So, but clarification again, if we vote to approve to spend the money, we can't just, we would have to vote to change our budget to spend the money differently. Is that not correct? No. Go ahead, Director. I don't think the budget is specific to which hangar letter there. I don't think the budget was. That's what I'm hearing Michelle say, right?

We, we put in the budget what we project that we're going to do, um, but a budget isn't tied to all the little individual things underneath. I mean, you're approving the line item of the budget. The appropriation is a number. Manager Boyer. Fine. Um, may I remind everybody it's been requested to remove this item from the agenda. Thank you. Okay, so again, the vote, Alderman Sanders.

And I'd like to know why that request is being made, to pull it off the agenda.

Minister Boyer?

Because we have an issue with the bid.

Okay.

We had two bidders.

That's the clarification that we're looking for.

Okay.

We didn't hear that part.

Okay, let him finish.

And so this is why we're having this discussion, because the full details of why we're pulling it off the agenda has not been clarified.

and we need that clarity as he was requesting or suggesting and we're not getting it and if we got to get it trickled out to us on meetings after meetings it's something we should be considering how is how is it that the administration is doing or the staffing is doing business without well that was my comment at the very beginning removing item number 17 because it wasn't ready so so let's take a 17 on or remove it?

No.

Alderman Parker?

Yes or no.

I mean, it's so confusing here.

Yes to keep it on, no to take it off, or how do we do this?

No.

Removed, number 17 removed and discussed at a later date.

To remove it.

Okay, so if you want to remove it, then it's a yes vote.

Yes.

Thank you.

Are we ready to vote?

Sanders. Alderman Simmons. Once we remove it, though, we'll come back for discussion. Not, right, am I correct? Go ahead. Correct. So if they want to approve any bid, it will have to come back to you guys. Which, that's the normal procedure. It's a bid, you can, Darren. So we can only hold this bid for 30 days. So once, if it doesn't pass this meeting, you could bring it back up, I believe, at the first meeting in January, otherwise the bid would not be valid any longer, unless we got a separate authorization from the low bidder to extend the bid time. Okay, if you want it removed from the item for discussion to a later date, vote yes. Yes. Ready, Madam Mayor? I'm ready. Yes. Your vote is yes.

Yeah, as confusing as it is Sellers Yes Clem Yes Monroe No Simmons Yes Parker Yes Stacy Yes to have it removed tonight, yes Shadle Yes The motion passes 7 to 1, the item 17 will not be heard tonight So now, before you is item number 1, which is the agenda minus number 17 I believe we can go back to the original of Shadle, Clem Please take the vote Sanders Repeat that again This is just for the rest of Oh, yes Sellers Aye Yes Clem Yes Monroe No Simmons Yes Parker Yes Stacy Yes And Shadle Aye The motion passes 7 to 1 Item number 2 is approval of the minutes from the regular meeting on December 2nd, 2024.

4. Is there a motion to approve? So moved. Second. We have a motion made by Shadle, seconded by Parker. Madam Clerk, would you please take the vote? Is a voice vote okay on that, Mayor? What is it? Yep. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? That motion passes. We have some public comments, although I don't know whether they're on agenda items or not. Butch?

Butch Broughton, you wanted to speak on an agenda item?

wanted to speak on an agenda item.

He wasn't waiting to.

Ready?

Yeah.

Okay.

Um, I was looking for to move, um, the garage, um, that on the build, they have it down at 15 feet.

First they said it was 10, now it was 15 feet from the line, and I'm requesting a variance for 10 feet, um, for a couple of reasons.

I know five feet doesn't sound like very much, but we have several real old oak trees, and I'm trying to stay away from the root system of these trees, and also it makes the, because we're putting out other, and it makes the yard very narrow, so if I could get the 10 feet as opposed to 15 feet, we would have plenty of room, and the other, everybody else voted yes for it, recommended it, and I had a neighbor that said if I wanted them to come tonight, they would come and testify that that they were in favor of it. Okay. Director Duckman, are you, that acceptable for on your end?

How do we, how do we work with it? I've never had anybody say that before. No, he, I think he was just making a comment. He's the petitioner for the variation, so. I didn't know if it was technical on your end. No, I mean, I'll report on it as the agenda item when it comes up. Okay. All right. Thank you. Ryan Walton, do you have an agenda item?

Yeah, number five. I'm Ryan Walton. I'm talking about agenda item number five, the swearing of the new firefighter. I just wanted to say thank you and appreciate my gratitude for the work that you guys do, especially when it came to taking out the fire that happened on Carroll Street like two weeks ago, seeing you guys in action at 1 a.m. like literally kicking down doors to like save people's lives and put out the fire like I've never had a more sense of a community and I appreciate the work that you guys do.

put your lives on the line for. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Bernie, you didn't say whether you were on an agenda item. Which number? It's going to be B and C, basically. Okay. The finance report does not include capital project funds and in a summary format. And I know we're spending a lot of money on street repairs and that sort of thing. So some of those more major funds should also be included in this particular report so we have an idea of what's really going on. The water, sewer, and stormwater funds include capital items that are not current in nature. Current in nature is defined as current physical year expenditures. Capital goes over a number of they should be removed and placed in a capital budget for those specific funds right underneath each one so that you can have an idea of your gains and losses in that fund for that particular period in time.

So the capital grant revenue investment earnings IEPA loans are capital financing sources.

Judge, Randall, moments, principal, capital grant expenses, capital outlay, capital principal, are capital financing uses.

Depreciation is also missing. So we do not have a clear idea of the true, go and source.

Depreciations is also a capital financing source for the capital budget.

to Ordinance 86, I would avoid and change it to rent or rental agreement in all cases. You do not want to capitalize these places if possible under the new lease GASB announcements. So I would strongly suggest rethinking that. I would add a CPI indicator to the rental agreement or require a new rental rate for each year as things go up. These agreements should be part of the consent agreement, in my opinion, as the city manager should have the right to sign these agreements because they're very small in nature and shouldn't be at the board level for discussion over small potatoes, in my mind.

but the process should be at the board level and approved once. Resolution 135, here's a case that encumbrance accounting should be in place and the quote should have been brought to the board in September either through a consent agreement or agenda or as a resolution. The city manager should have the ability to approve small capital projects.

Thank you, Mr. Mergali. Your time is up.

The budgeted level of control. That's all. Thank you. Thank you.

That concludes public comments. We'll move on to consent agenda. The consent agenda is considered to be routine in nature and act as one motion unless there's a member of the council that would like to have something removed for further discussion. Is there anything, council?

Not. Consent agenda consists of approving to receive and place on file the minutes from the appropriation ordinance dated December 2nd, the schedule of the regular meeting of the city.

City of Freeport for 2025, the reports for building permit, fire department, and police department for November 2024, the finance report and the cash investment report for October 2024, the community development block grant housing rehabilitation grant expenditures, as well as the finance bills payable in the total of $6,555,518.96 and payroll for pay period ending November 30th, 2024 in the total of $638,596.08.

Is there a motion to approve?

So moved.

Second.

The motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers.

Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll?

Sanders?

Yes.

Sellers?

Aye.

Clem?

Aye.

Monroe?

Aye.

Simmons?

Aye.

Parker?

Aye.

Stacy?

Aye.

And Shadle?

Aye.

Motion passes, 8-0.

Okay, good evening.

Tonight I am pleased to introduce our newest firefighter in City Council, members of the audience, and also the viewing audience and other fire departments throughout the state, our newest firefighter, Kelly Baranek. She started last Friday, on the 9th of, sorry, last Monday, the 9th of December, and she'll be leaving us to go to the Fire Academy January 6th and will be returning March 7th.

So, we'll be eager to have her back to the department in front of all of our members that she'll be returning back to this ship that's working tonight, so we're here to support you and welcome you to this department.

Thank you to everybody this evening. Mr. Bush and I are here on behalf of the Freeport Police and Fire Commission, and we get the opportunity to meet a lot of these talented individuals looking to join our stellar departments, and one of the questions that we consistently ask ourselves, is this the kind of person that we would want showing up on our front step in our time of meeting?

And if they don't pass that test, they don't make it here. And we're pleased to say that you made it here.

So that means that the entire commission on behalf of the city believes in you. And you are supported by an amazing team of caregivers.

You heard some well-deserved compliments earlier this morning. So thank you for making those compliments.

But again, outstanding individuals. So on behalf of the commission, it's my honor to be able to read your official commission. So official commission, City of Freeport, Board of Fire and Police Commission, to all to whom these presents shall come, Kelly A. Barenick, having been duly appointed to the position of firefighter in and for the City of Freeport in the County of Stevenson and State of Illinois for the term from the 9th day of December 2024 until her successor shall have been duly appointed and qualified, is hereby fully authorized and empowered to assume and perform all the duties of her said office according to the law and the ordinance of said city, and all persons are required to respect her and discharge of her said duties by order of the Board and Fire Police Commission.

So I will hand this to you because they want to hear you.

So you can raise your right hand.

Go. And you can raise your right hand and repeat after me. I, Kelly A. Baranek. I, Kelly A. Baranek. Do solemnly swear. Do solemnly swear. That I would support the Constitution of the United States. That I would support the Constitution of the United States. And the Constitution of the State of Illinois. And the Constitution of the State of Illinois. And I will faithfully discharge the duties. And I will faithfully discharge the duties. Of the Office of Firefighter. Of the Office of Firefighter. According to the best of my ability. According to the best of my ability. Congratulations.

I just want to say I'm very excited to be here, and I look forward to serving the citizens of free court. Thank you very much. It's an honor.

Okay, we'll move on to item number six, which is the second reading of ordinance 2024-83.

3. Could you please read this? Fiscal year 2024, reappropriation ordinance. Thank you. Director Richter. Thank you, Your Honor. The city manager went over my memo at first reading. I will hit some of the high points and just go through the memo. I don't think you want to hear me read the whole thing. At the end of each fiscal year, the city council amends the appropriation ordinance for that year to take into account necessary necessary revenue and expense adjustments. Starting off in the general fund, we've made small changes to some reimbursements that we received for fire and police salaries and training reimbursements. We've also included some small grant from IPRF, which is our work comp insurance carrier. You'll see some other references in the memo to items that were purchase with that grant. They are from our work comp carrier and they need to be for employee safety or ergonomics or, you know, keeping people away from work comp claims. We also increased right-of-way permit revenues. We really got into that this year with Darren's help and streamlined that process better of collecting more funds in that area.

We received additional airport grant revenues and then some insurance proceeds and that kind of thing.

Going to the expense side of the general fund, you'll see an increase in the city clerk for her to purchase an item from that grant that I was referring to from IPRF, our work comp carrier.

In the airport department you'll see offsetting adjustments so we received grant revenue and now we have grant expense for a wash in that area. We did have a let's see increase to tree assistance of 300 or I'm sorry 30,000 in forestry due to emergency tree removals. We did have also in community development and the building department, which also works out of the community development area.

We had a change earlier in the year that was approved by council in the staffing of that department.

So you'll see wages go from one area of the department from community development into the building department because of that staffing change.

I'm sorry, opposite.

We had a planner was hired and we did not hire an extra nuisance person that was included in the 24 budget.

and that's pretty much general fund we did have a change in projects fund neighborhood housing we had a decrease in the amount of fund balance we needed to you were going to need to use in neighborhood housing that's the fund we use for demolitions small changes in the health care fund and then you'll see various changes in grants so sometimes we get grants during the middle of the year that we don't know about when we're doing the budget So now is when I'm adding things to the budget for those grants, or in a couple of these cases, we took them away. For example, the FEMA BRIC grant and the FEMA HMGP grant, we had projected to receive those this year. Those grants haven't come through yet. I believe they're still being worked on, or being held up at the other, at the funding agency. So like I said, there's various little tweaks to grants.

The library fund had a few adjustments and those adjustments were taken to the library board and reviewed by them and approved by them. The MFT fund, we had a change. We reclassified some expenses to rebuild Illinois funds. The state of Illinois specifically wanted those accounted for. And I believe that was all Pearl City Road. Darren shakes this.

the some adjustments fire public safety and in the TIF some changes street improvement fund the 1% home rule sales tax increase that was done beginning of this year those revenues have now began to flow into that fund there was nothing budgeted when that was passed because we did not know at the time we did the 2024 budget so that has been added we added $175,000 grant in Street Improvement. We also added funds, ARPA funds that Stevenson County assisted us with Locust Avenue.

Capital Improvement Fund, small changes there. That was accounting for the support we received from Freeport Township to purchase the asphalt hotbox.

so you'll see the revenue come in and the purchase go out in that fund. Fire improvement, you'll see some grant activity that we added in there. You will see an adjustment, a capital adjustment in the fire improvement fund for the purchase of the fire engine. I'm just going to read this directly from my memo. An increased use of fund balance due to the receipt of the fire engine. The fire engine was ordered at the same time as an aerial truck but it took longer to arrive.

Drive. The recording of the engine to the vehicle line item occurred when the engine was received earlier this year. The amount was not budgeted. That's my error. It took a couple years for it to get here. So by the time we went when we purchased it in 22 to 24, it was a use of fund balance. That money is there. That money was there. The engine is paid for. Slight changes by police and fire pension, which were approved by those boards. Also, Foreign Fire, Landfill Closure, we had a decrease and an increase corresponding in that fund so it washes out.

Water, sewer, and storm, we did have, I did decrease the line item for the IEPA and the capital outlay expenses.

Those, the budget that was in there, it's really a capital expense, and you won't see items for capital because they will be capitalized come in. That's just a method we're trying to tell you of how much money we're using for capital expenses. And I think that's all the comments that I had on there, but I'd be ready to take any questions anyone might have. Any questions? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Sanders?

Yes. Sellers. Aye. Clem. Aye. Monroe. Aye. Simmons. Aye. Parker. Aye. Stacey. Aye. And Shadle. Aye. The ordinance passes 8-0. Item number 7 is the first reading of ordinance 2024-86. Could you please read this? Ordinance amending airplane hangar fees at Freeport-Albertus Airport and adopting revised hangar lease form. Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. We've discussed the hangar lease rates and that they are controlled by ordinance approved by city council staff was tasked with looking at the rates and coming back with with suggestions or recommendations on what we could do to make sure that those leases those hangar rates are in alignment with the with the regular with other airports in our area of a similar size and air traffic. One change has come most of the almost all of the hangar lease rates are in line with other airports. However, staff is recommending making an official J-hanger lease rate from $575 to $800. This is kind of a legacy of the situation.

is kind of a legacy of the situation with the previous leasing and we'd like to make that change permanent in an ordinance. So staff requests making the lease rate for J Hanger $800 per month. So moved. Second. So we have a motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Clem to move ordinance 2024-86. On to the next regularly scheduled meeting. Discussion? I believe there's a note to suspend the rules.

I think we have a discussion first and then we'll come back to that. Alderman Stacy?

I did not understand what you said, City Manager Boyer, EC, when you said something about the 800 and EC?

Actually, no, I didn't say anything EC. What I said was we previously had a lease rent of 575 when Jack Hooker owned it.

and it is currently at a $800 per month rate and we want to make that official in the ordinance. So we just want to make the change in the ordinance to make J Hanger $800 per month. Which is what they're paying right now? Which is currently what they're being paid, yes. Alderman Sanders? We had a lease that was calculated at $575, you say? Yes, originally when Jack Hooker had it. It was $575. When was that time period? Remember? I think it was 2020. Jack passed away. He had it subleased to someone else. That's the rate that they were paying? Yes. And then our airport manager was able to get them moved out and I believe the first person to rent that was Heritage and they rented it for $800 a month and is currently leased for $800 a month.

Smith, we just want to make that official in the ordinance. That's who's leasing it now? No, I don't recall the name of the current leasing, but they are leasing it for $800. So the lease is still open? We haven't finalized that lease yet? We haven't signed off on it yet? Yes, it came before council, it was approved by council. Was it? Yeah. If there's no further discussion, Alderman Clem, you had? Yes, motion to suspend the rules. Second.

We have a motion made by Alderman Clem, seconded by Alderman Parker for suspension of the rules only.

Suspension is non-debatable and was passed by two-thirds majority. Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll on the suspension only?

Sanders? No. Sellers? Aye. Clem? Aye. Monroe? No. Simmons? No. Parker? Aye. Stacy? No. And Shadle? Aye. We have a tie vote, four to four. Mayor? Aye.

And the motion to suspend? No? No, no, because you still need two-thirds. Oh, two-thirds. Oh, it does need two-thirds. Thank you, Attorney Zito. So it fails four to four. Okay. Well, then it will be moved on as the original motion was, so it'll be on the first meeting in January. And the original motion was Clem Sellers. Do I have that correctly? Sellers. Sellers, Clem. Other way around. Thank you.

Okay, we'll move on to item number 8, which is the first reading of Ordinance 2024-87. Could you please read this?

Ordinance approving variance application at 66 North Stewart Avenue submitted by Howard and Lori Broughton to seek relief from Section 1268.07E to allow for a side yard of less than 15 feet.

Director Duckman.

Thank you, Madam Mayor I'm going to start here by saying that staff received a permit application to build a garage at 66 North Stewart on October 22nd after discussions with the property owner and right now it's being pulled up on the screen here it was discussed that the required setback would be 15 feet and after multiple discussions with the property owner they had stated that for various reasons they would like it to be 10 feet and it was explained to them that that would require variation and with that being said staff had a hearing for this matter on December 5th with its owning board of appeals and it was recommended for approval with a vote of five to zero with zero abstentions and on December 12th the planning commission also recommended approval with a vote of five to zero with zero abstentions and in line with this staff is also going to recommend approval. Staff is recommending approval, but I just wanted to show you here what it looks like. Kind of see here, this is what's like, the technical term is a reverse corner, but really what it is, the front of their house is here along Stewart, and so their side yard is actually in line with the front of the people on Hurd Street. I have some pictures I'm going to show as well to kind of give you an idea for any of the council members who've not been on site to

visit it but what you can see here on this street here there's a privacy fence that runs along pretty much the whole way up until the front of the house and there are mature trees as a property owner stated and they're actually going to be 60 feet from their back property line which is this person's side yard which is this is treed in here and then they're going to be there's a they're going to be at well inside of a privacy fence in here as well so this is a situation where staff is recommending approval as it has has minimal, it's going to have a very minimal effect on the adjoining neighbors. So if we scroll down, I have some pictures we could show too. So staff, one last thing I did want to say is that in speaking with the property owner, we're requesting a suspension of the rules so they can get started on construction right away. If you want to zoom out. This is the side yard that we're talking about and there's the privacy fence that I was speaking of and there's some of the mature trees are over here and here as well. And then this is the road here. What's the name of, is that a road you say? Yep, the road's right here. Is that an alley or a street? No, that's an actual, it's the name of the street there is Heard Street. It's what? H-U-R-D, Heard. Yeah. And this is almost three quarters of an acre. So staff's recommending a suspension of the rule, is recommending approval as well as a suspension of the rule.

How tall is it going to be when they replace it? It's a single-story garage. Are they replacing the fence? No, that that I, but not as part of this, that's not part of this variation. Okay. They might replace it. I told it was coming down. Yeah. Are you done with your presentation? Yes, if there's any, unless there's any, yes, unless there's any questions. Is there any questions? Alderman Parker? I went and took a look at this, and it's going to be a huge improvement, and I do believe the fence is coming down.

and it is a huge improvement to the neighborhood, the neighbors, it will really increase their property value. I think it's a great idea. Right. All in the role. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Director Duckman, thank you for adding all of the notes and pictures and everything. That's very helpful and it's very much needed on all of these types. It's an awesome job. Thank you. Darren. On the Planning Commission approval of this. The homeowner testified that one of the reasons that they wanted to move the garage was to save some of these mature trees on their property. To my surprise, I received a phone call on this matter, and that was a good thing. Director Duckman, to my knowledge and understanding, there's going to be a driveway that they will have to come back to the council for why is that why couldn't it all be done at one time we know they're going to need a driveway why couldn't it all just be done together I'm not aware of that driveway at this time when they came to me the discussion was a building permit for a garage so when we went through that process that's what we did I processed what was brought to me. Could they build a driveway there and get a permit for it? Yes, they can,

but I had multiple discussions with the property owner, and the thing we went back and forth was where he was going to put the actual, where they wanted to put the garage. We didn't have discussions on the driveway, and also, to be fair, it would have been a separate ordinance anyways. If there was some sort of variation for this driveway, I would have had a separate variation for the driveway requirements. I understand. And I only say that because we're asking for the rules to be suspended so they can get moving. And yay, let's do it. So I just.

Let's do it. So I just, that's why I inquired. Yep, understood. Okay. Okay, I kind of got a little out of order on this. I didn't get a motion to move it forward. Is there such a motion? So moved. Second. We have a motion made by Alderman Seller, seconded by Alderman Shadle. And again, further discussion. If not, I'll entertain a motion to suspend. Suspension by Alderman Parker and the second by Alderman Parker.

Alderman Clem. Again, the suspension of the rules is non-debatable and must pass by two-thirds.

Madam Clerk, would you please take the vote? Sanders. Aye. Settlers. Aye. Clem. Aye. Monroe. Aye. Simmons. Aye. Parker. Aye. Stacy. Aye. And Shadle. Aye.

The motion passes. Eight to zero on suspension only. So now before you is considered to be the second reading to for the final passage on this ordinance. Is there any further discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Sanders. Here. I am clerk. Sellers. Aye. Clem. Aye. Monroe. Aye. Simmons. Aye. Parker. Aye. Stacy. Aye. And Shadle. Aye. And the ordinance passes eight to zero. May we have the lights? Sure. And then we'll move on to item number nine, which is the adoption of resolution resolution 2024-130. Could you please read this? Resolution approving the city's general liability, property, and workers' compensation insurance policies. Thank you. Manager Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. Gallagher is our insurance broker, and Gallagher has presented renewal terms for the city of Freeport's insurance policy for 24-25. Despite the difficult market conditions, terms are favorable, reflecting stable trends in the public sector insurance market. Key cost drivers include and this is larger vicinity, our nation as a whole and all the people involved. Large destructive weather events, increasing medical expenses and increased litigation. Total premiums for this year increased by 13%. This was largely due to a rise in workman's comp insurance or workman's comp cases. Excluding this on other end of it is the rest of the line items came in at about 5% over last year and aligning with market

Trends. So the total financial impact, the total cost of this insurance program is $1,139,762, and that is an increase of $132,716 over last year. Staff recommends approval of the renewal terms to maintain this coverage, and so with that, staff requests you to move forward with this resolution.

Is there a motion to adopt?

So moved.

Second.

A motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sellers.

Discussion.

Alderman Monroe.

Madam Mayor, this is a question for staff.

Did the health insurance company actually use the information that destructive weather was one of the primary drivers for the increase in health insurance rates?

Thank you, Your Honor.

Senator, essentially, they were just saying the general insurance conditions. In general, insurance conditions have been impacted by that.

I was going to say it first.

Yeah. Sure. This is not health insurance, by the way. This is Illinois Public Risk Fund, that's Workman's Comp, and also general liability, so auto employment, cyber security, et cetera.

There's no further discussion? Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Sanders is absent. Sellers?

Aye. Clem? Aye. Monroe? Nope. Simmons? Aye. Parker? Aye. Stacey? No. And Shadle? Aye. The resolution is adopted 5 to 2. Item number 10 is the adoption of resolution 2024-131. Could you please read this? Resolution approving a grant agreement between the Illinois law enforcement alarm system, also known as ALIAS, and the city regarding less lethal alternatives for for Law Enforcement Less Lethal Device Grant. Easy for you to say. Thank you. Chief Shenberger. Thank you. In the summer of 2024, staff applied for the fiscal year 2025 Less Lethal Alternatives for Law Enforcement Grant offered by the state of Illinois. The grant would allow departments throughout the state to upgrade their conducted energy device programs with Taser 7 or Taser 10 devices. The Freeport Police Department requires officers to carry, SED as a less lethal use of force option. The current devices used by the Freeport Police Department are the Axon X26P, which came out in 2013, and the Axon X2, which came out in 2011. Both devices have been in service for more than 10 years. Axon has indicated the company will be discontinuing the use of both models in the near future, thus requiring agencies to upgrade to the Taser 7 or Taser 10.

When planning for the initial rollout of the grant, staff was aware that Taser 10 required a four-year certification plan with Axon that included additional costs to cover the certification of Taser 10, as well as training for Freeport Police Department Taser instructors and the certification of the devices.

services. Staff spoke to the ILEAS representative for the Freeport Police Department and was told at that time that the grant would cover all the costs associated with the devices and suggested applying for the Taser 10 grant. On October 1st, 2024, the Freeport Police Department was awarded five Taser 10 bundles and a resolution was presented to this council and passed on October 7th, 2024 to accept that grant. There were 404 departments who applied for this grant throughout the state of Illinois.

at that time. When staff made arrangements to order the five Taser 10 bundles from Maxxon, staff was made aware the amount of the grant only covered the cost of the bundles and not the certification agreement. The cost of this agreement would have been $4,208.90 for four years. Staff spoke to the earliest representative and advised the amount of money initially allocated towards the entire grant was significantly cut by about $16 million.

after staff and other agencies across the state of Illinois submitted their grant application therefore the funding needed to cover the certification agreement will fall back on the awarded agency this issue and funding affected other agencies and not just the Freeport Police Department staff has since reached out to Ileas and Axon and was able to switch from the Taser 10 award to the Taser 7 award Taser 7 award would include five Taser 7 bundles the Taser 7 option is cheaper and there'd be no four year certification agreement. This award will significantly upgrade the Freeport Police Department CED program and offset future costs of upgrading the program. United States Department of Justice in conjunction with the Police Executive Research Forum found that CEDs when used appropriately and with a full understanding of their risks are a useful tool that can effectively help to resolve serious situations. CEDs can reduce reduce the need for other force options and can enable officers to subdue actively resisting or aggressive subjects while lowering the rates of injury to law enforcement officers and subjects.

The report police department has the most current acceptable lexipole policy outlining the use of CEDs.

The PD also has two certified CED instructors on staff and require annual recertification that involves scenario-based training curriculum that is certified by the Illinois Law Enforcement Training and Standards Board.

On November 27, 2024, staff was informed that the Freeport Police Department could switch the grant award to five Taser 7 bundles.

ILEAS would reimburse the police department $12,717 towards a purchase of the five Taser 7 bundles.

The police department would still have to contribute $1,248 towards a purchase of the five Taser 7 bundles because the price negotiated by ELEAS did not include other costs, including warranty coverage.

Tonight, I'm just asking if we could rescind the resolution passed on October 7th, 2024 for the five Taser 10 bundles.

And then, as I explained before, the cost of this whole thing would be a reimbursement of $12,717 by ELEAS, and then we would just contribute the remaining $1,248 from our 2025 police department budget, line item 101-151-6210.

Is there a motion to adopt?

So moved.

Second.

The motion made by Alderman Clem, seconded by Alderman Sellers.

Discussion?

I just have one question.

Alderman Stacy?

How many times in this 2024 year have we had to even use tasers?

Um, I don't, I don't have those numbers with me tonight Okay, you can't get them I don't want to guess, no Um, but it's, it's something that, um, that we're required to carry, um, the, um, our insurance company, uh, asks that we carry them, um, by not having them, you know, we, we risk injury to, to officers and other people out there Any further discussion?

Alderman Monroe?

Yeah, thanks, Chief.

Thank you for the update.

Have we looked at any other companies that manufacture similar devices, or is Axon the only one we've kind of approached?

Axon's, you know, they have the market cornered, so, but this particular grant is giving us funding to purchase devices specifically from Axon.

Anything else?

Madam Clerk, please take the roll. Sanders? Aye. Sellers? Aye. Clem? Aye. Monroe? Abstain. Simmons? Aye. Parker? Aye. Stacey? Aye. And Shadle? Aye. The resolution is adopted 7-0 with 1 absentia. Item number 11 is the adoption of resolution 2024-132. Could you please read this?

Resolution Approving the Payment of an Invoice from Timber Industries for Leaf Disposal Services Manager Boyer Thank you, Your Honor The City of Freeport uses Timber Industries to maintain and run the woodlot across from the fairgrounds on Walnut Road The City had three years of accumulated leaf recycling waste that needed to be barrel ground and hauled away to an EPA-approved area for land recycling Timber Industries provided equipment, grinding, semi-trucks, and farmland plowing coordination for 140 semi-loads of leaf waste for disposal and legal recycling reclamation as our contract site manager.

IEPA requested the stored leaves waste be removed and disposed of on the landfill physical audit in 2024 due to heat generation and breakdown.

The waste removal was completed in early November to make room for the 2024 pickup and city requests, or I'm sorry, staff requests approval of $27,096.71 timber industries for the trucking and disposal fees. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. The motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Clem. Discussion? Alderman Monroe? Thank you, Madam Mayor. City manager, does this mean that we'll be able to return to dropping off debris at that site, and if so, what things have we put in place to kind of protect us from the issues that popped up this year?

Manager Boyer?

Sure. The answer to that is yes. Once we are able to take care of timber industries, we had a few things in the contract that we need to correct.

contract. We need to clarify some things in the contract for the future. Also, we are pursuing a composting permit through the Illinois EPA that's going to allow us to use leaves and other yard waste and grass clippings to turn into topsoil. It will take a couple of years for that to generate, but once it's going, we should have topsoil and potting soil for not only site reclamation and other projects that we do, but we can also have it available to residents similar to what we have in the in terms of mulch. So did that answer your question? Yes, thank you. Alderman Sanders? Yeah, where is this desert needed area for dropping off? It is at the woodlot on Walnut Road directly across from the East Gate at the fairgrounds. Any other discussion? Alderman Stacy? So this amount is covering three years of where they have been picking up the leaves. Mayor Boyer. This is a portion. They bore the vast majority of the cost, but they requested a cost share on this to make sure that we get it taken care of. They had a substantial amount of cost involved in hauling it away. It was something that where the inspection from the EPA came, we needed to get it resolved rapidly so that we would be in compliance. So the EPA

had an issue with it. We had to get it resolved. Is there anyone else before Alderman Sanders gets his second?

Alderman Sanders? Yeah. Could the council look at the breakdown of this invoice to determine if there's any irregularities where we can determine how this money was spent? I don't know if it showed up in the a budget, but before we pay it, I'd just like to get a little bit more detailed information on it if we possibly can.

It's included in the agenda.

Oh, okay.

It's in your packet.

Anything else?

Alderman Stacy.

Okay.

So, it appears as if we had no idea it was going to cost that much.

to do this. So now we're going to do different, correct? We are pursuing a permit with the EPA so we can turn those leaves into potting soil, but we need a different permit to get that done. And if that is not possible, then what are we going to do? I think our backup strategy is going to be to land apply them at the airport and on the city-owned farm fields there, but I think it would benefit the city Moore to have access to essentially topsoil for site remediation for construction projects.

Thank you.

There's no further discussion?

Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Sanders?

Aye.

Sellers?

Aye.

Clem?

Aye.

Monroe?

Aye.

Simmons?

Aye.

Parker?

Aye.

Stacey?

Aye.

Shadle?

Aye.

The resolution is adopted 8-0.

item number 12 is the adoption of resolution 2024 133 could you please read this resolution approving engineering agreement with fair Graham for 2025 Freeport landfill engineering and annual services for landfills two and three and four manager thank you honor the city Freeport has annual engineering requirements for the city-owned landfill two three and four as part of the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency closure process this contract is required by the EPA for mandatory routine samples, lab analysis, reporting, and upkeep of the landfill. The city of Freeport approves a required landfill engineering contract for the annual needs of the three city-owned landfill sites. Ferrogram is a licensed Freeport landfill engineer, and their environmental team specializes in landfill monitoring and closures. This contract requires significant landfill sampling, lab analysis, leachate, system upkeep, and reporting, which is an Illinois licensed engineer requirement.

This 2025 contract reflects an increase in the EPA required sampling parameters and the cost of professionally certified lab testing.

Sampling and analysis for this contract is over 50% of the total cost of the scope of work.

Please note an alternative identified in this contract is the 2025 IEPA requirement for perfluorinated compound testing and pretreatment planning.

and just a side note there the EPA is requiring as you as we maybe have discussed the perfluorinated compound issue with the brick street water plant that is being expanded to wastewater discharge and also landfill leachate so this is becoming a more it's it's becoming more and more complex as the years go on IEPA is mandating the landfill PFAS testing and preliminary treatment analysis as part of the permit modifications and this identified fee will only be used for testing if it is mandated in 25.

So funding for this is budgeted in the 2025 budget of $201,000 and staff's recommendation that City Council approve the landfill engineering contract with Ferrogram.

City Manager, Goyer.

There's a typo in the memo.

The contract is actually $304,250.

$201,000 is just landfill two and three.

Did not include landfill four.

Mayor, so that's my error. Thank you. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Clem. Discussion on the resolution? Alderman Sanders? Manager Boyer, we're having an engineer to be contracted to do this study, because that's all it is is a study. Am I correct? No. Okay. So are they involved in the testing and sampling? Yes. Because I was going to ask you another question.

because I was going to ask you another question if I can continue. Sure. Who's doing the work right now?

Fehr Graham's been doing it for a number of years. Okay, so when was that part of the city's obligations before Fehr and Graham did this kind of work? Who was doing it before Fehr and Graham started doing this kind of study of analysis and things of this nature, and how is it that we got rid of that because I thought it was only personnels of the city, of the city employees that did the sampling and analysis.

How did that get taken away and why was it taken away? I don't believe that's correct. I don't believe the city's ever done any of the analysis on landfill leach aid or any of the compliance monitoring, but I'd have to defer to Darren on that. That was before my time. Yeah, the city has not done that before. We've been the engineer ever since the landfill closed. We helped with the closure process.

The city doesn't physically have the lab equipment or the technicians to do this type of sampling on wastewater type materials.

Are you serious?

Yeah, I'm absolutely serious. This all gets sent out to a third-party lab. It's required to be done by a third party.

No, we have been doing that for years.

Water testing we do in-house Waste the landfill We have been doing I did a study out there at the landfill so I know I was there and we did sampling out there at the landfill and we had our waste we had our lab our lab technicians do the analysis and the diagnostics for that particular kind of I'm just wondering where did it go I'm not I'm not questioning it now it's been years ago things change I know things change, but I'm just saying right now, how do we get from there to here now?

I'm pretty sure the testing that you're talking about, Mr. Sanders, is when the landfills were still active.

This is after the closure process. The closure process has to be monitored.

Analysis are still being done.

They have to be done as EPA regulations for the closure process of the landfills. It's all dictated in the landfill permits.

We don't make up the requirements.

They're told to us what needs to happen annually, and that's exactly what we do.

I was just wondering what happened to the personnel.

I think I know the answer to what you're asking.

We still monitor it internally from the industrial monitoring program, so we're just checking the leachate as it goes into the collection system for our wastewater compliance.

As far as monitoring the landfill itself, we've never actually monitored all the monitoring wells and that kind of thing, but we have, we do have a sampling manhole there, and we do routinely check the leachate for our industrial waste process.

Anyone else?

Mayor Alderman Monroe.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

So one of the ways that I did a bit of research on this over the last few weeks because of the biosolids that we had discussed, if we're not allowed to have this leach out of our former landfill, we're spreading biosolids and we're doing other things.

because we've got a well that's got high levels of PFAS. We did. Did we not? That we shut down in recent years? Okay. So, but if we're putting this back out in the environment in other ways, what are we doing to limit our risk in our community to both our water and what we're disposing of on fields builds and disposing of, you know, other ways to protect the citizens of Freeport.

Manager, Boyer.

Just to, I think, what you're asking is how are we responsibly handling all these different environmental challenges?

And the reality is the leachate is running through the waste treatment process, the wastewater treatment plant.

During that process, the whole point of that process is to basically clean the water.

Officer. Obviously, we do have a byproduct from that. It is sludge, and the sludge is land applied, and the EPA not only permits that, they permit our discharge, they monitor our discharge, our people internally monitor everything that's going on within the plant at every step. As a matter of fact, they're monitoring everything coming into the wastewater plant from significant industrial users. So, essentially, the EPA gives us the guidelines, we follow the guidelines, and that is why we are in compliance.

Is there anyone else before Alderman Sanders has his second? Darren?

I'd like to piggyback on City Manager Boyer. So just as a clarification to last week's discussion about the sludge byproduct, the byproduct that's hauled off to fields is not for human consumption. It only goes to animal consumption. So animal grain, animal hay, it actually doesn't go on to any food producing items that humans would consume.

animals only and that's part of the designation of as it's applied and that's why you get specific fields that you can actually put it on. That's a requirement. Unlike animal waste is spread out amongst all the cornfields and things like that. So that is a designation. Also on what city manager said is absolutely true. The leachate is required to run through the wastewater treatment plant process to make sure it's clean just like all of our other waste that that goes back out to the river and that's tested daily. Alderman Stacy asks for her first. I voted against that because I didn't have that understanding that it was for fields and grains for animals and if that would have been stated. That's information that's withheld that causes one to vote against something. Alderman Sanders? Yeah, if my understanding is right, there's third parties involved in the sample analysis and reports to the EPA and things of this nature. Am I correct? We have an environmental team that is licensed as landfill closure and they do all the sampling. Then it's sent to a third party lab so it has an independent result that is

is independent of the city or the collector. It's all done through a chain of custody, which is required by EPA.

Those sample results are then sent directly from those labs to the Illinois EPA so they can't be changed or recorded wrong.

They give us the monitoring and the compliance levels.

Who's paying for all of that?

This contract.

The contract is? Pays for all of that?

Yes.

And Fehr and Graham has nothing to do with any other kinds of analysis, just this third party who's doing the reporting to the EPA?

We don't do the lab sampling. We do the collection and the water monitoring. There's monitoring wells. I believe there's 31 monitoring wells around the landfill that have to be monitored. I believe it's quarterly for water samples to make sure the leachate is not leaching off of the landfill property, which it is not. That's what the collection system is for.

Can we also see the studies that you guys have accumulated?

There's not studies technically, there's annual results and they're all public knowledge, anybody can see that?

Yep.

Okay.

If there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Sanders?

Yeah.

Sellers?

Aye.

Clem?

Aye.

Monroe?

Aye.

Simmons?

Aye.

Parker?

Aye.

Stacy?

Aye.

Shadle?

Aye. The resolution is adopted, 8-0. Item number 13 is the adoption of resolution 2024-134. Could you please read this? Resolution authorizing disposition of surplus city real property to the Northern Illinois Land Bank Authority. That property is 521 West Cottonwood Street. Thank you. Director Duckman. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Talked about this last week, so I'm going to put the slide presentation back up so there's any questions.

I said our committee the whole meeting and essentially what's what is going on here is that the city staff is recommending disposition of 521 West Cottonwood which is a property that the city acquired in 2023 from the county via tax deed and the city had intentions of demolishing this property periodically it's at least once a month I go over condemned properties properties that are up for demolition with the Northern Illinois Land Bank and this happened to be a property that they were interested in, thought that they could move with a developer. So with that being said, staff is recommending disposition of 521 West Cottonwood to the Northern Illinois Land Bank. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved.

motion made by Alderman Shadle seconded by Alderman Clem discussion Alderman Stacy yes I like this ideal however is there some rule or something that can be added to the ordinance that would say this could not become rental property, but it will become a home that can be sold. Sure. So this is not actually an ordinance. This is actually the city of Freeport disposing, disposition, basically giving the property for a dollar to the Northern Illinois Land Bank so that they can essentially move it on to another, to a developer.

So the short answer to your question is no, there is no ordinance to that effect. I do want to state that the city of Rockford has utilized this successfully. I think I state in here, it's added $150,000 back into tax revenue by utilizing this program. And many of the properties that this is done on in Rockford are actually rental properties. So Rockford does this with where the developers, some of them use them for their own property in Rockford.

some of them actually use them for rentals and some of them are bought and then resold for a higher property value so the land bank certainly asks when they when they go to developers they ask what their intentions are but they don't have a rule for holding them accountable for how they're going to actually do with the property they only hold them accountable for bringing the property you know back up to code so that would pass inspection. With a time limit, correct? Yes. So the typical timeline that they hold is nine months. So in nine months, if they don't fix it, the land bank takes ownership of the property back, and then we'll put it back out again for disposition to another responsible contractor.

Lord Mayor Monroe. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Do we know if the Illinois Land Bank has had any, or any of the City Administration staff have had any conversations with Barbara Bortner or Mr. Ryan Weckerle?

No, not that I'm aware of. I can speak to me personally, I have not.

Okay, thank you.

Alderman Sanders.

And this property or any property that the land bank is dealing with here in the city of Freeport, The understanding is they're not renting property. From the last meeting we had, I didn't gather that information in my head. I didn't hear the fact that we was discussing possibly renting these redeveloped homes or these rehab homes.

Well, so here's the deal. Like, as I just said to Alderperson Stacy, they're going to, this person's application that potentially could develop this property has stated that they believe they're going to rent it, and they said that they are possibly interested in owning it and living in it. I've talked to the property, the person, the interested developer, and they said to the same effect. I mean, I have pictures in here, so essentially what council's deciding is, do the, you know, and there's an example, As an example of what this developer did in Rockford, I have pictures that I can scroll down and show you. The big, the decision up here today is not whether, you know, the city of Freeport can limit, you know, a buyer to having a rental. What is up for decision is, does the city want to put this up for demolition and have another vacant lot, or does it want to allow somebody to, who has experience, funding, to take this property and redevelop it?

that's really what's up here today so the city is not going to have the ability to and I'll stand up and run through this so this is a property unfortunately we have many of these we know in in Freeport we took down my department has taken down 50 of these and we're going to be working on 52 this year these turn into vacant grass lots so this property here this company here in Rockford took this property and made it look like this. So really what's before you today, and this is what they're renting. This person said after discussions with Leo Holmes, his name's Ivan, he's renting this to his brother. So essentially before you today is, does Freeport want this or do they want another vacant lot? Yep. Actually, is there anybody for their first time? Other than Alderman Sanders, you can go ahead for your second. Oh, thank you.

who does the final inspections for these these homes for far as infrastructure and it's going to be our building inspector would do the final inspection and what we're going to be doing is testing whether or not this home is stable all the way around foundation is stable to make sure that there's nothing impeding it or any future problems because I hate to see a property get that type of and then the next couple of years if it looks like it's falling down. Yes, that'll be inspected all our building inspector will inspect it. Okay, okay, thank you. Darren? Wayne, didn't the land banks say that the contractors had nine months to turn these properties around? They get nine months to turn it around and then at that point they start a legal process. They have deed restrictions when they purchase them, then they would start a legal process to take ownership of the property back.

Oh, Ms. Stacy.

So the land bank buys this home from Freeport.

We're giving it to them, yes.

So Freeport will give them this home?

Yes.

Yes.

Why is it given to the land bank?

Why isn't it sold?

Well, because right now we own it and we're going to spend roughly $15,000 to $20,000 to demolish it and no longer receive any potential tax revenue or we can help the community and turn a blighted house into this and then receive future tax dollars moving forward.

so the city selling it doesn't make sense and quite frankly the land bank's not interested in buying it for anything less they they want they said we'll take the property but we paid what for the property we paid eight hundred and fifteen dollars from the tax assessor and so that's too much to expect from the land bank I think it is yes they essentially say no tear down then you're out of even more. Yes so if we tear it down we spent $815 to remediate blight by demolishing it because it's owned by the city of Freeport we bought it from got it from a tax deed so we're out roughly 15 $20,000 if right now if we move forward demolition or we can let the land bank use its resources which it's done successfully and the city would not be we'd be out the $815 which we would recuperate when this was put back on the tax rolls okay there's no further discussion madam clerk please take the roll Sanders oh I'm sorry I didn't see your hand so I really want to get behind this program but it sounds like a good because it really sounds like it'll be helpful but even with this first example it seems another area in which

which we take out of these neighborhoods and give them to these people, these properties for literally nothing, to developers who have the money to buy properties to invest in versus getting it to the people within that community who need a home, not one to rent, but one to make home, because people put more value in their home than a rental property. And I just feel like this will be an example of that.

so an idea that's a good idea but the city council would have to create an ordinance that would say we're going to evaluate people by some metric and then invest probably I think this is a contractor doing their own work said they're going to put $50,000 into this so it's a good idea but I think it's a good idea to maybe make an ordinance and look into our tax funds and how we would pay to you know give somebody a house essentially.

You know, but go ahead you know but go ahead okay I don't mean we put the bill for them to to remodel I'm saying unless there's grants for that I'm saying we give them the opportunity to take advantage of this and then remodel on their own and that's and that's certainly possible I mean somebody could come in and say I want this house to remodel and live in it that's we're not holding up against that the land bank's mission is to take property that have not been in the tax rolls, prevent them from the demolition, and put them back into the hands of a developer willing to do so. The biggest advantage you're going to have with the land bank is, and I've dealt with this in this community for a long time, many people will buy these saying that they want to live in them, but they don't have the funds to actually develop these houses.

You have to have experience and good funding in the bank, in your own bank, cash preferably, because most banks aren't going to fund a mortgage for you to put into this house. When you buy these, when you're getting into these houses, they take a massive amount of money, experience, to get them to look like this.

and quite frankly you're going to put people in a bad position if you say go ahead and get started on a remodel project when their first remodel project looks like this this is dangerous people will buy this they'll see a low price tag and then they'll think they can do it and what they end up getting is a load of violations and then they run out of money they stop fixing it and then it just turns into a vicious cycle, which is what you see happen oftentimes. What the land bank does is they evaluate who comes and looks at it and they say, okay, if you want this property, you have nine months to make it look like this. And if you don't, we're going to take it back. So that's a real issue we have here is we don't, you really don't want to put somebody's first home. You don't want to give them this if they don't have experience or money to make it look like this. It would be. Actually, is there anyone else because Alderman Sanders, you already spoke twice. Oh, did I? Alderman Sellers. Because these same houses, and I understand what you're saying, Rachel, but these same houses are on the county tax bill, so if they wanted to do what you're saying they wanted to do, they could purchase it before the city got it, so they could do the same exact thing they could pay the 800 and whatever and buy the house and fix it up and try to do that but a lot of people they do do it and then they leave them like they said and then we got a bunch of abandoned houses attorney's you know what some of our problem yes and Wayne with with regards to the actual land bank program right this particular they take applications right for who will serve as the developer so you could have a individual property owner

owner that, let's say, lives in the neighborhood or, let's say, someone who wants the house for themselves, they can apply to be the developer with the land bank and if they ultimately, I don't know what their scoring system is, but ultimately if they show the wherewithal to be able to do it and the land bank says, you know what, it makes sense, we'll pick you over all the other people that apply, then they could do it that way too.

so there is that opportunity. Yep it just is stated that um and actually this the person purchasing this has state I mean I've talked to them they said that they'd like to rent it at first but they also had stated that there are interested in um living in it so what they end up doing with it it's you know that to to be determined. Uh Alderman Monroe. Thank you Madam Mayor. Uh so you said you spoke with the person is the person you spoke with the owner and because this is a limited liability corporation and when I'm looking them up there's multiple same names all across the country so just trying to understand who are the people behind this you know do you know trying to understand do they have their our best interest as a community at heart and you know you're saying they've got the capital you know just kind of give us more insight into who who who it is that we're talking to. Sure. So I met Ivan. I know his first name's Ivan. I apologize. I don't remember his last name. I met Ivan at this house and I walked through this house in Rockford and essentially saw the before pictures and saw what it looked like. There's also some broken windows in here and on the other side. And he basically, yeah, sorry. And so essentially representing that organization and work in I had the land bank was there as well. So they could testify to hey, this was who Ivan is with Leo Holmes LLC. And they said, you know, he had his nine months and he turned the project around into this. So the idea was for me as a member of staff to present to you saying I've personally witnessed and saw a property with region one staff and City of Rockford, not City of Rockford, Leo Holmes, Ivan and showed that he can do it.

So that's one of the better ways I would state to look at somebody to say, you know, they could put on an application out of the Capitol, but look, they've done it here. I've seen what they can do with a property is my best answer to that. The best to even make you feel better, this person potentially would be willing to do a nine month term to turn a house around that's really in bad shape.

The house is that this 521 Cottonwood's in bad shape and he's willing to say look I could do this in nine months so I don't see an argument where you can say you know going for every house we demolish we have a vacant lot and I'm always tasked not only to remove blight but find something to do with these vacant lots.

well this was this is potentially a vacant lot that can turn into a developed property so that would be my argument to you and I have somebody there's somebody potentially willing to do it in a nine-month term and sign to that. I mean didn't Joel from R1 say that the Cottonwood Street they probably put some feelers out on it and then this gentleman was the only one that was interested at all? He's the only one had submitted an application at the deadline, which was November 15th.

I'm sorry, Alderman Stacy, you, Alderman Sanders, and Alderman Monroe have all had their floor twice, so it would have to be an approval.

I thought I only said something once.

I bet you're down twice.

Okay, so if I wanted to make a motion, I can't.

You could ask for that if you'd like.

She can make a motion.

She can, if she wants to be able to ask, if she can speak out of that ordinance No, she's asking to make a motion I said she can I can make a motion?

Mm-hmm Okay, I make a motion that we move this to the first meeting in January and take the next couple of weeks and try to become even more educated on this process Okay, I was confused on what you were asking attorney Zito, you've got, she can, she can always, she can make a motion procedurally, I mean, that's not discussion there, so there's a motion in a second to approve this, this resolution, so you want to not vote on it tonight, you're basically making a motion to postpone this to the next city council meeting, yes, to allow for more time to, to look into this, yes, okay, so that's what her motion is, just to lay this over for two weeks to the next city council, or however many weeks it is to the next, the first meeting in January.

Yes.

Second that.

Okay.

So we have a motion on the floor made by Alderman Stacy, seconded by Alderman Sanders to lay this over to the first meeting in January.

Is there any discussion on that?

Alderman Clemm?

I just have a question.

Is there a time element on this property?

That's what I was going to ask.

Essentially, well, I know that Leo Holmes LLC wants to get going right away, and so I talked talked with Region 1, and they said, the sooner the better. You know, I told them, I said, I can't guarantee this is going to go through the council, and they said, well, you know, we have an interested developer, and hopefully it moves through quickly, so.

So basically, yeah, that would be three weeks out. Alderman Merrill?

so the question I have relating to to this about pushing it out one number one is this hasn't come before council ever before and correct we did sorry we I brought this this was this presentations from a cow meeting last week okay so we did yeah so we I did and the reason I did it was the last the land bank has done these projects in Freeport before and I've been working the past two years to get them back in here to do a project so but yeah the question I've got is last week was the first time it was brought up where did the November 15th deadline come from? Sure so let's go back to here let's go back to here to discuss the timeline this was talked about at the cowl 521 West Cottonwood if you go to the first bullet City of Freeport initially preparing for demolition, but the house but the house was salvageable so I'm a I work with the land bank at least on a monthly basis if not more I'm on I was appointed as the board member for the city of Freeport so I have to work with them about properties that could potentially be of interest to them so that's how this this bullet point one came up so they tested the market's interest by taking open applications through the land bank portal

So that was through their own marketing. They have their own marketing portal. They have a list of developers. This is an established program mostly in Rockford. So that's where this point here came up. And then we already kind of talked about this. I wanted a tight restriction on the buyer. And so they used a nine-month deed restriction with a clawback option, which basically means if this isn't done in a timely manner, the land bank will legally work to take it back.

and then there was an open house held on November 8th and kind of showing this is what was put on all of their this is what was kind of talked about through the land banks advertising here Friday the 8th November 15th and that was all part of this discussion here saying hey land bank Joel who was here he wanted to test the market to see if this could be something that would possibly drum up interest for their land bank.

so that's how that part started Ivan from Leo Holmes attended and expressed a strong interest in rehabbing the property Leo Holmes submitted an application with a bid of $8,000 Freeport will click claim the property to Northern Illinois Land Bank who will sell it to the owner and Northern Illinois Land Bank will continually follow up the buyer to ensure the progress is being made and that is what was explained at the committee the whole meeting and that's the same story that you're going to hear for the next three weeks if you guys put this off.

You're going to hear the same story from me.

Yeah, nothing changes.

Nothing's going to change in three weeks.

Alderman Shadle, you had your hand up.

Yes, I did.

A lot of times these contractors that are in this business bid this work.

In this case, they put a bid in to get this house because they've got a crew of guys that they don't have any or much work for right now.

So they want to get this job to keep their guys on staff, keep them working, get the project going. That's what makes this work. It's a nine-month turnaround. He has got to be clicking to get that kind of work done in nine months. You've got to be moving. You have to have your ducks in a row. You've got to have cash. You can't be chasing financing. There's no time for that.

If this is something that you're looking at that you want to try to help somebody destitute to get a leg up in life, we need to find a different project for that. This is not it. This is something that's going to take and alleviate us from having to spend $15,000 to $20,000 to tear the building down and end up with another lot that we have to mow and maintain.

it's going to turn that in nine months into a house and a property that's back on the real estate tax rolls.

I just, we need to get this done. We need to cut it down to simplicity that this is a good thing.

He may not be the perfect individual. He may end up making this rental property, but we need to look at it that that property is no longer money spent out of the city budget but into money coming into the Stevenson County tax rolls that we get a cut of and we have no lasting expense. Agree. So what's before you right now is whether or not the council chooses to lay it over for three weeks. So if there's any discussion on the layover itself, if not, Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll on the layover. Sanders, Sellers, No. Clem, No. Monroe, No. Simmons, Parker, No. Stacy, Aye. Shadle, No. I have three to five. The motion fails. Okay, so now before you is the adoption of this agreement. And the motion was Shadle, Clem.

If there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the roll Sanders Aye Sellers Aye Clem Aye Monroe Aye Simmons Aye Parker Aye Stacey No Shadle Aye The resolution is adopted 7-1 Item number 14 is adoption of resolution 2024-135. Would you please read this?

Resolution Approving Emergency Purchase of a Sluice Gate Alma-Atuator from Dorner Company Manager Boyer Thank you, Your Honor The wastewater treatment plant has several sluice gates that control the inflow to the plant Recently, one of those sluice gates failed And staff made the decision on emergency authorization to move forward with the repair So, as far as the sluice gate is concerned, it's been ordered and installed and staff request ratification of the $13,385 for the Alma actuator to repair the sluice key at the wastewater plant.

Is there a motion to adopt?

So moved.

Second.

We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Parker.

Discussion on the resolution?

Alderman Sanders.

Manager of Warrior, at first, at first, When I saw that word, I didn't know what the brand was, but I understood what the gate was. I'm like, okay, I never heard of this brand, but okay, let's roll with it. But my thing is, it's already installed. It's already installed. City council approved it. We had not approved it. I know it's an emergency kind of thing that sometimes council don't get in get there fast enough to give you an approval. My question is, these are the same gates and the fact that they are the same gates and if one breaks down like the one that you're referring to, does that gate have a guarantee or replacement because I understand the gate that is coming out of there is going to be moved to another designated area. Am I correct on that?

Uh, actually, it's going to be fixed and then put in inventory, so if we ever have a problem in the future, we have a replacement on hand.

Okay, got you. And, uh, and I just wanted to understand, uh, the guys over at the, uh, the lab technicians and people who control these gates and everything preventing, uh, flooding, that's what the gate is for, isn't it? For the backflow? For backflowing? It has nothing to do with that?

for flooding out the plant itself? It could involve that. However, you would never get to that point.

Essentially, you're modulating the flow into the plant. Okay. Okay. Well, that's the question that I wanted to find out whether or not we're going to have episodes, you know, I mean, throughout the city, because I know we're controlling those gates and the fact that we're controlling them, that means we can determine at our own discretion without going out into the public of the city to determine how much rainfall or well, I guess it goes by the river to determine that or is it the rainfall? We're putting in a chemically enhanced primary treatment right now. The purpose of that is to handle the additional flow we receive during rainstorms. Okay. And then that we can handle it to run it back to the plant. But the inflow sluice Sluice Gates have nothing you know we basically can handle so much flow and that that's what we regulate it with is the sluice gate okay Darren just to be clear this is just the actuator this is not the gate this is the motor operator that runs the influent gates the gates are about 25 30 feet below the surface so this is the motor operator that operates the gate from the operator station anyone else Alderman Monroe. Do we have pricing from other vendors that with respect to that type of electric motor?

No, we don't because this is a AMA actuator. That's a brand and that's what it was in there and we replaced it with any kind so our guys could do it because it's the exact same model. It's also the same gates that are throughout the plant so when the headworks is replaced this can go into another location within the plant. So that's why, right? Anyone else? Alderman Sanders. So this is part of our preventive measures, am I correct? Is this part?

Correct. Is this part of our preventive measure? We're being proactive or we're trying to prevent this type of flow?

We had a failure of the actuator. We bought a new one. We put the new one in. We're taking the old one. We're fixing the old one. We're going to keep it in inventory if we have any more issues.

Okay. That's proactive. Okay. Thank you. If there's nothing further, Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

Sanders, Aye, Sellers, Aye, Clem, Aye, Monroe, Aye, Simmons, Aye, Parker, Aye, Stacey, Aye, and Shadle, Aye, the resolution is adopted 8-0.

Item 15 is the adoption of resolution 2024-136. Could you please read this?

Resolution authorizing a proposal from Morse Electric regarding installation of variable frequency drives at Loon Street Lyft Station.

Thank you, Manager, Boyer. Thank you, Your Honor. The City of Freeport uses a series of lift stations to convey waste through the elevation changes within the city to go from low areas to other areas where the waste can be gravity-fed through the main sewer gravity lines. The Lynn Street facility is one of the main connection facilities that can handle a significant flow. Variable frequency drives were purchased with ARPA funds to run the new pumps at the facility.

It is now time to install these drives as flows are reduced. Due to the importance of this facility, the VFDs need to be installed one at a time to keep the plant active and running during low flows. Electrical upgrades will be done at the same time as needed. VFDs allow the pump system to last longer and protect the expensive motor replacements on those pumps.

Staff, our utility maintenance team worked with Morris Electric to develop a cost for the installing of the VFDs the city has already purchased. Morris has done a number of installs at our lift stations and we feel comfortable with the scope and quality of work for the retrofit to install the new drives and city staff. The financial impact is approximately $15,390.63 for the installation and city staff recommends moving forward with the installation.

motion. Is there a motion to adopt? So moved. Second. A motion made by Alderman Clem, seconded by Alderman Sellers. Discussion on the resolution? Alderman Sanders. Do we have these VFDs, that's what you call them, right? Do we have them scheduled during certain seasons of the year, or do we still have what they call a secondary VFDs to to maintain the flow action where nothing is hindered at these lift stations and they're able to continuously be monitored. Who does the service work to keep maintaining, like, you know, like putting oil, changing gaskets and all of these kinds of things? Do we have people on staff and our personnel that goes around and look at these things or is it more electric that's doing these kinds of things?

Just to answer your question, I believe there's three pumps there. The purpose of the VFDs are to kind of ramp up and ramp down the pumps to modulate flow, depending on the amount of waste that's coming in the lift station. And yes, our staff maintains all the pumps and does all the oil changes and checks on them and that. Yeah. Okay. There's no further discussion. Madam Clerk, please take the roll.

San, pardon me, Sanders, Yes, Sellers, Aye, Clem, Aye, Monroe, Aye, Simmons, Aye, Parker, Aye, Stacey, Aye, and Shadle, Aye, the resolution is adopted, 8-0.

Item number 16 is approval of bid, can you please read this?

Bid opening on December 9th for three black four-door police pursuit interceptor utility vehicles.

Chief Shenberger. Thank you. The Freeport Police Department has a need to annually replace older vehicles with new vehicles. Freeport Police Department budgeted to replace and upfit three marked squad cars in 2025. On December 9, 2024, the Freeport Police Department held a squad bid opening for new police squad cars and to trade in four older squad cars from the police fleet. Prior to the opening, the bid opening was posted on the City of Freeport website. At the time of the bid opening, staff received two Bids, Bid 1 from Stivers Ford Lincoln in Waukee, Iowa, and Bid 2, which has been deemed to be unresponsive from Bob Maxey Ford in Detroit, Michigan.

Bid 1 was Stivers Ford quoted the price for a 2025 Ford Police Interceptor at $48,190.

Stivers Ford also gave a trade-in value of $19,000 for the four older squad cars that would be traded in.

The total cost for the three new squad cars minus the four trade-ins would be $125,570.

Bob Maxey quoted the price for a 2025 Ford Interceptor at $46,560.

Bob Maxey Ford did not give trade-in values for the four older squads that need to be traded in.

the cost for the three new squad cars would be $139,680. So staff recommends the acceptance of the Stivers Ford squad bid proposal.

Is there a motion to adopt? Second. Second. We have a motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Sellers. Discussion on the bid.

Madam Clerk? All of them and Stacy. The $19,000 is for the old vehicles? Correct. Total or each? Yes, total. All of them and Monroe? Chief, have we ever looked at purchasing vehicles that are not the interceptor version since we tend not to pursue in most instances?

Well, I think the thing that we need to consider is like our squad cars run 24-7, 365, so there's a lot of wear and tear with them. And the police interceptor model, it's geared for that type of usage, I guess you could say. We also want to have a uniform fleet, so we don't have mix and match vehicles, so then it's cheaper to, you know, when you trade them in, you can use old equipment.

we also have very capable mechanics down at the city yards have saved us a lot of money this year working on our Fords we have two Dodges that have been giving us a lot of problems and costing a lot of money to get them fixed because they have proprietary software and just even from my personal life I have a Dodge Durango I can't even buy a parts at Napa for it you have to go through the dealership so the goal is to have all to have all Fords they seem to work well for us and that's It's also easier to have our mechanics down at the yards take care of our vehicles.

Sounds good.

And I think the pricing that you're getting back for the other vehicles is pretty good.

Yeah, these are older cars, you know, with a lot of miles.

Again, they were in service for three or four years, so they've just mostly been travel cars, except for one of them was the auxiliaries vehicle, and that thing, we haven't used that in a long time.

I mean, if we do, it's very, very rare that we use it, so.

Hold on, Sanders.

Yeah, Chief, I'm looking at the total for the three vehicles, but what we're not doing is talking about the modification cost for these vehicles and the upgrades and everything else, and we should be looking at that as well in this package.

This is just, yeah, I'm sorry, sir.

Go ahead.

Go ahead. Okay. This is just the bid opening, but, you know, when I come to the council for approval, I'll have that. I can tell you right now, if we do, if we are able to get three squad cards, it's going to be around $14,000 for all three of them to be updated.

To be updated. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else before Alderman Stacy's second? Alderman Stacy.

So I'm trusting that your department have this money that you budgeted for three We budgeted $170,000 Okay So it should come way under budget Thank you Very good There's no further discussion Madam Clerk, please take the roll Sanders Aye Sellers is absent Clem Aye Monroe Aye. Simmons? Aye. Parker? Aye. Stacey? Aye. And Shadle? Aye. The motion passes 7-0. Item number 18 is another bid approval. Could you please read this? This bid opening was held on December 10, 2024 for roof repairs for Hangar J. Am I in the wrong one? We removed that one. This bid opening was held on December 10, 2024 for historical storm windows for City Hall. Thank you. Manager Boyer.

Thank you, Your Honor. So each year here at City Hall, we have a historic building, and part of that historic building and part of that historic building and part of its charm is that it has single pane windows throughout.

Single pane windows are terrible at have no real insulating value whenever the building warms up but it is conducted directly outside through those single pane windows.

Also the freeze and thaw and the expansion and contraction of the wood windows also leads to more maintenance.

this year we had all the window sashes and all the windows repainted and we would like to order and install new storm windows here in the building. One of the challenges we have is the HVAC system here in City Hall on cold days barely keeps up because it's all on a heat pump so we really need to conserve as much heat as possible and we have about 106 windows here in City Hall all of which are conducting that heat right outside.

So staff inquired as to what it would take to get some storm windows put in because of our historic building category they have to be done with oversight from I believe the historic building commission we have been in contact with them and they've recommended a specific style of storm window and so we're coming to council tonight to ask for resolution to approve in manufacture and install of those windows. With that being said, the total amount of the total financial ask is $123,900. This is a lot of money. However, we will be in this building for many, many years, and we just got done spending about $100,000 fixing all the windows. I'm sorry, more than $100,000. So in the long term, it's going to be more cost effective than paying somebody every five to seven years to repaint all the windows.

and then repair all the rotted boards and that kind of thing. In the meantime, we would save some energy cost and make it more comfortable for staff to get the work done. I will remind everyone on the coldest day of the year in this building, you can see your own breath and you have to sit and wear a coat the entire day. So with that, I don't know if Darren has anything. Would you like to carry on with that?

So this was planned as a phase two project from the upgrades that we did with the windows and sashes like Rob mentioned. Just some background, there's only two companies that make historical storm windows that, you know, have good reputations. We researched both of them. We landed on this product because it's custom fit to each window. City Hall is old here and most of the exterior windows have irregularity. So these will actually be all ordered per window.

and somebody from the rep company will actually come measure each window so they fit. We did some preliminary measurements and the windows are not all even. So also the state of Illinois requires a historical storm. We actually a few years ago had a storm that was installed as a sample back here that was just a standard fit one that we just went and got from a hardware store and took a picture of it and asked them if they had accepted it. They rejected that and said due to the historical nature of this building. They have to be done that way. So, which this is a very thin frame, so they won't be very noticeable. And forgive me, I don't remember the amount, but I believe there's 106 windows. And these have to be, if you do one window, you have to do them all. That is the requirement. So that is the plan, including the half-scaped windows, if you will, the stained glass ones that are out front.

So there's a is there a motion to approve the bid? So moved. Second. A motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Clem. Discussion, Alderman Stacy. I understand that we need windows. I understand that they have to be historic windows that require certain requirements. However, I don't understand how or why we would even think we have to pay $112 times 106 windows.

I don't know where you're looking at to say there's only two companies out there, but I just think that's just over the top and that that's extremely too high.

106 windows at $112 per window? No, it's $1,000. Ultimate Sellers? I think it's $1,000, isn't it, per window? $1,000 per window, yeah, but windows are very expensive. When we were looking at windows just at our church, and we got little small windows, they went at $500 a window, and we only have little small windows, and that was like four years ago.

And that was $500 a window. And you have to remember, these have to be historical. They have to match that. It's very difficult to do. What did you say? Two companies? Yeah. Well, like I said, when we did our research, there's only two companies that the state of Illinois would approve for these type of windows on a historical building. Again, you can't just go get them from Menards or something like that.

and based on cost because we did cost to just purchase the windows outright this is not an unreasonable cost to install them they're they're very expensive we thought that this system of the the brand that we picked was superior to the other manufacturer that was there and we've done a lot of research on this over the last two years unfortunately if we want to add storm windows you know this is the cost we solicited bids we could only get NICAM to bid, which they're the ones that were the GC on fixing the windows to start with.

So there's more work involved here than what you think. And again, I agree with Joy's assessment. We did take their liberty to make sure that if we were ordering them, we did put low E glass on them, which will save some of the heat in here in the summer. They will seal better, so we'll be saving some energy efficiencies within the building that we currently don't have on heat and AC, but ultimately it's your decision whether you want to move forward.

Goldman Sanders.

In your research, did we look into the fact that the products that we're seeking are the products that we actually need or want, and then did we also ask, are there discounts to, to, consider. This is the discounted rate. If we delay, which we can, the price will go up in January because there is a price increase in January. We've talked to the manufacturer before the bid opened. Okay. Okay.

And this is the product that we want. There is, again, we had to submit these to the State Historical Society and they approved them to go on this building because it's registered. And I want to step back.

this goes all the way back to remodeling this building way back when when we purchased it we knew that that historical items were going to apply because this building was registered and the council at that time decided not to build a new facility which would not have all these requirements but anything that's done down to the painting of the windows we had to paint them the identically same color because of the historical value of the building we couldn't change the color if we wanted it it's no different with these storm items it wouldn't be any different with anything that we replaced on this building. It will have to be done to the historical value, and it has to be approved. We couldn't even do tuck pointing on the building without getting the state to approve it. Oh, so, so. Wait a second. I'm still talking. Yeah, I know, but you don't have the floor anymore, so I just want to see if anyone else wants to. Well, because Darren had the floor. He's talking to me. No, he's talking to everyone. I want to see if anyone else has a question. I asked the question. He's talking to me. I'll come back to you if no one else wants to I probably would forget the question by then. Does anyone else want to have the floor before he moves on to his second time? I don't want a second time. Okay, if you don't want a second time, then we'll go for a vote. I'm still dealing with my first one. Would you like a second time, Alderman Sanders? Okay, okay, Mayor. Yes, I do. See, I forgot. I got too old. It will come back to you if you need to. Alderman Monroe. Thank you, Madam Mayor. How much money do we spend on in the windows this year in 2024.

I don't remember the top of my head.

Look it up.

It's right there.

Like 171.

Thousand?

Yes.

This is the mind-boggling tax and spend.

We don't care.

We're going to say yes.

I got several older people up here who clearly love to spend the taxpayers' money.

I got a mayor that loves to do it.

And this is now we're back up to 200, over 200 and something thousand dollars and we could have replaced them this year.

This is insanity.

It's complete insanity.

Manager Boyer.

Boyer. Alderman Monroe, we needed to get the painting done first, and then we wanted to see where we were going to be, and now that we have a little bit extra here, we could order the materials and get that going this year. Staff is just asking for us to not only maintain the building and create an environment where everybody's comfortable and on the coldest day of the year, we don't have to wear coats, but it should have been done before now, okay?

It should have been done with the $132,000 it was spent Go ahead You know, and I appreciate your comment, but that's actually not true We have to do the paint and the maintenance of the windows before we put storm windows on top of them Or we can just neglect maintenance and end up like the old city hall Alderman Stacy, would you like your second time?

According to Darren, you all have been looking at this for a couple years now So, it's just ludicrous that it's just now coming to the council and it's something that has to happen now and you want now because it's going to go up if it's not committed to by January. So, just do it. It should have came when the paint came. That's when it should have came. Should have all come together.

Alderman Monroe.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Yeah, I agree with you.

And the fact that we're to believe that there's only two vendors in the entire state of Illinois or in Wisconsin or anywhere else, there's only two.

And one of them happens to be in Freeport, Illinois.

Oh, I will tell you when I look up NICAM.

General contractor.

Yeah. So we're subcontracting this is basically what we're doing. Or is NICAM putting the windows in and we're buying the windows from somewhere else? Correct. Because that's not the way this reads. They're buying the windows that we specified and they're installing them. So, you know, I guess. Imagine that. Yeah. I guess, you know, the question really becomes, you know, we put.

wants before needs. And that's what this boils down to. This is why I got upset about the fire engine.

When we've got a water line that needs to go out to open Bible, when we've got windows that need to be replaced on a building so that our staff can stay warm and cool. It's having a plan that we execute upon that puts our needs before our wants because we've only got so much money we can take continue to take from the citizens of Freeport and these windows while I'll agree they're needed there's a lot of improvements to this building that are needed but we have to quit just spending non-stop and once again tonight we come back with goes way up because we raised salaries and it'll go up again and we just say okay but this all keeps coming back to the spending habits of this room and these windows go back to and it's a historical building and I had nothing to do with the previous city hall but you know a lot of people thought we could have saved that but I don't know so what I'm what we have to go back to to the constituents and the people that we were elected to represent and tell them why we continuously don't do projects to completion. We partially do them and then come back and it's an emergency. And we want to do things, always suspend the rules and we've got to order it by next week or

the price is going up. It's always something. And it's gotten to the point that it's unbelievable that we go to that point. I appreciate the chief saving money with his vehicles.

is very much well appreciated, but this is insanity.

Touche, touche.

Darren?

Yeah, so again, this is not emergent, and if you choose not to approve the bid, we can rebid it later.

That's totally fine with me, or it can be canned.

This was requested to be bid.

I bet if we go back in the minutes, the window approvals were made to paint the windows, and at that time we said it was expensive and we were going to have to split to do the windows and then see where we were at for the storm windows. We couldn't do the storm windows at the same time because A, it wasn't, it was budgeted but it was, we didn't have enough budget to do both so that's why it's been pushed to this end of the year so it can be moved into the 2025 budget. Again, there's no pressure from me to approve or not approve this. They are custom, you guys can do the research if you want. There is only two manufacturers that we could come up with that the state would approve. We feel that we've picked the best one. We feel that this will be the best longevity of project. And I will state all of these discussions while you guys were not on the board, I think Mr. Klemm was, this was the discussion of the processes that would happen when we chose to move City Hall to this building, that there would be exorbitant costs that were coming in the future to upkeep a historical building. That's not on the people that are sitting here. That's on the people that made the decisions to move here, and we're bound by those choices now, or we just don't maintain it, which that's your choice, and I'm fine with that, but that is a decision that was made when we made, when the city chose to move to this building. One other thing

I wanted to point out, we couldn't do the storm windows until we fixed the windows because we had to replace quite a few of the sashes because they were rotten. And so we couldn't do them at the same time.

But again, is City Hall going to fail tomorrow if we don't replace these windows? No. But our investment in the paint may not make it as long as we were hoping. That's the only truth here. I'm sorry, Alderman, Sandra, you've spoken twice already. Alderman, Sellers? Twice. Yes. So I do understand that we do We need new windows, and if we do continue to constantly wait and wait and wait, the prices will go up, because like I said, we were looking at windows at our church, and that was like three, four years ago.

So I know if we when we look at them again, they're going to be up a little higher. So we're either going to take care of the building so we don't have a dilapidated city hall or we're going to continue to go round and round and round on issues that we know we got to do it either now or later. It has to be done. So either we're going to do it now at $1,000 a window or we're going to do it later at $1,500 a window.

So, you know, it's our, it's our decision. I mean, we got to do it now and get it over with and move on.

So vote to approve or deny it.

We'll get clarification, Mayor.

So clarity is Sellers, Sanders, Stacy, and Monroe have all spoken two times.

No, I have not spoken on Monroe.

You have, but if you'd like to have the council make that motion.

I wasn't ready, so you move to Monroe. He, he, he started the second round. I didn't get a chance because I wasn't ready to start it, because I had not thought about what Mr. Darin was talking about.

So I passed that.

You passed it.

I didn't pass it.

And then you put Monroe right there.

Okay, so can you wrap it up?

What are we doing?

Huh?

You have spoken twice, but if you're insistent, go ahead.

No, it wasn't that I'm insistent.

I just didn't speak because you passed me forward.

Go ahead and speak.

Speak.

Well, I forgot it now.

Oh, my God.

Okay, so if there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll?

Sanders, Sellers, Aye, Clemm, Aye, Monroe, Aye, Simmons, Parker, Aye, Stacy, No, and Shadle, Aye, the motion passes, 6 to 2.

And item number 19 is reports from department heads. Finance.

Nothing wrong.

Thank you. Community development?

Nothing tonight, Madam Mayor.

Thank you. Public works?

Just a quick update on Adams Avenue. You should see the traffic controls start to be removed tomorrow.

The vast majority of it's done. Some restoration may leak over to spring, but otherwise the vast majority is done.

We also have had quite a few comments about the remaining portion of Adams, and we are working on a plan, which when I say that, that's from float to exchange.

we're working on a plan to try to address that for next season but it was not currently in the Adams plan so more to come on that and lastly I'd like to tell you guys that we had some damage done by Comcast here in town and council was able or excuse me staff was able to negotiate with Comcast and we will be receiving an insurance claim check for I believe it's about eighteen thousand dollars in lieu of the and I will be here for those repairs.

Fire.

Nothing this evening.

Thank you.

Thank you, please.

I have no report.

Thank you.

IT.

I just want to say thank you to the staff and also council for getting this aggressive agenda done at the end of the year. Unfortunately, we tried to not have so much on here, but we didn't do so well. But I thank you very much for all your support. And all I would like to say is Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, see you after the first. Alderman Sanders would be up first, but he's not here. So we'll move on to Alderman Sellers. Yes, I would just like to say thank you also to the everybody that has done the work that we've done this year and the accomplishments and the beautifications and the upgrades we've done and just seeing the progress we have done together as a team. I just feel so proud to be a part of the everything that we have done and wish everybody a Merry Christmas and God bless you in the new year. I agree. Alderman Clem. I'd just like to thank all the City workers for the time that they've put in and the success they've had with projects they've done this year. It's been extremely important. The total picture of what's been done by the council, and not by the council, but by the managers and everybody involved. I'd just like to wish everybody Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Alderman Monroe.

Same. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to everyone.

Alderman Simmons.

I don't have anything. Thank you.

Alderman Parker. The only thing is that we do not have a neighborhood watch meeting next Monday.

They all decided that it's too close to Christmas, so we will not have one, and Merry Christmas to everybody.

Alderman Stacy. I would just like to say happy holidays. Alderman Shadle. I'm sorry. Alderman Shadle.

Uh, reiterate the Merry Christmas, uh, to everybody, um, keep in mind that if it happens to snow, our street department's going to be working, there's going to be a shift of police officers working, there's going to be a shift of fire when working, and keep your thoughts with them.

Move on to item number 23, is public comment, is there any public comment?

Bernie I just couldn't help but kind of chuckle on one comment that was being made when we were talking about composting at the landfill I recall me and Mr. Mooring and Mr. Gill was sitting there with Mr. Gullman composting yard waste and apparently we had a permit at that point in time What we were doing back then was ahead of the time. Now we're going back and trying to get this started again. I guess I was ahead of my time at that time and we've lost our vision of moving forward. I do appreciate what you did on the discussion of the land bank. I think the land bank is kind of a good idea. One thing that was never discussed on the land bank was the fact that $8,000 was the bid. Was that $8,000 to fix the property or just a down payment? How much was going to be invested in that property? If it's just $8,000, we're going to be back in the same old boat as we did before, just a different owner.

and I just want to say one thing. Strategic planning is the process of accumulating or articulating where and what an organization wants to be in the future. During the strategic planning process, stakeholders review and define the organization's mission, values, vision, statements, including the identification The mission is the organization's statement of purpose and reason for existing. The values are the ethical and cultural principles that guide its behavior and actions. The vision represents the future that the organization aims to achieve. Goals are desired outcomes that the organization aims to achieve.

James, will accomplish. Objectives are the actionable targets that must be reached to meet the specific goals.

Strategies are plans or approaches designed to accomplish objectives, and tactics are the small, actionable items.

I think we're spending way too much time on the tactics, the small actionable items, and not enough on the vision of where we want to be.

as we, you know, the future. I just happened was listening to Notre Dame talking about the future.

We probably don't have a future or a future vision. Most people just repeat the past.

Mr. Mergale, your time is up.

Be the future and move on. So I hope we find a way to define where we want to be instead of argue about it.

Angie, I apologize. I overlooked you. Did you have a report?

Good? Okay, I apologize. Any other public comments? Go ahead, you have three minutes. Can you state your name?

My name is David Culberson. I have a question for him. I used to be a landlord, and I sold my properties for like less than highly enough, and so if you put on a land contract for them and give them like 10 years to pay it off, for, they might, it might work out because it did for me and my homes are almost paid off and they're almost sold and I only charge them $300 a month. That's a really cheap payment. So you think about it. Any other public comments, Tommy? Police Chief, you do a good job working in that police department.

And Darren Dirkman, did you find out about that Jersey Mike, Mr.

I don't have a report on Jersey Mike's, but I'm hungry for it, so hopefully next week.

And, Monroe, you do a good job speaking.

Are there any other public comments?

Seeing none, I'll have an attendant motion for adjournment.

So moved. Second. A motion made by Alderman Sellers, seconded by Alderman Shadle. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed?