I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
And some of the most recent city council meetings.
I just wanted to draw the council's attention to section 220.10 rules of council.
And note that while we have not in the past strictly adhered to this, we may need to start looking at adhering to the rules of council in the future, primarily as it relates to assuring that we have quorum for purposes of necessary meetings like we unfortunately didn't have tonight for the finance committee of the whole.
The quorum section under rules of council is in subsection eight and it states at all meetings, a majority of all older persons elected shall constitute a quorum.
In addition, there is a section entitled frequency of speaking subsection 15 and it states no member shall speak more than twice to the same general question.
No more than once to a previous question without unanimous leave of council, nor more than once in any case until every member choosing to speak shall have spoken.
In the past, I think that the city has not necessarily strictly adhered to that particular section under 15 frequency of speaking, but we have been contacted by members of council.
When I say we, I mean, Attorney Zito has been contacted by members of council just with some concerns about frequency of speaking as it relates to certain items and the overall length of the meeting and getting through agenda items.
So we just ask council to review those.
And if you have any questions, please feel free to direct those to myself or to attorney Zito, but we do suggest that the council continue to adhere to the rules that have been adopted now for many, many, many years, dating back to 1977.
So if anyone has any questions, happy to answer those, but just wanted to bring those to your attention.
Thank you.
Item number one is approval of the agenda.
And just so you know, we do have executive session tonight.
So is there a motion to approve the agenda?
So moved.
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Parker.
Madam Clerk, could you please take the role?
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy, Shadle, Sanders, Klemm, and Simmons.
The motion passes 6-0.
And item number two is approval of the minutes from the regular meeting on October 21, 2024.
Is there a motion to approve?
So moved.
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Parker.
Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll?
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Sanders, Klemm, and Simmons.
The motion passes six to zero.
And there were no public comments signed in so we'll move on to item number four which is the consent agenda.
The consent agenda is considered to be routine in nature and act as one motion unless a member of council would like to have something removed for further discussion.
Is there anything?
Seeing none the consent agenda consists of approving to receive and place on file the board and Commission minutes from from the Joint Review Board for the Lamb Road TIF District November 8th, 2022, the Joint Review Board, Downtown West Avenue Meadows and the Berchard Hills TIF Districts November 8th, 2022, the Foreign Fire Board August 8th, 2024, the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners September 23rd and 24th, also is the Greater Freeport Partnership Monthly Report dated October, 2024.
The approval of the finance bill is payable in the total of $1,845,653.82.
And the approval of payroll for pay period ending October 19, 2024, in the total of $651,206.30.
Is there a motion to approve?
So moved.
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Parker.
Madam Clerk, could you please take the roll?
And Simmons.
And that motion passes six to zero.
Item number five are some reappointments.
Could you please read those?
Darren Steckel to the Planning Commission effective through October 31st, 2028.
Andrea Scholl-Swinder to the Planning Commission effective through October 31st, 2028.
Is there a motion to We have a motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Shadle.
Discussion.
Alderman Simmons.
I feel as though this is a conflict of interest with Darren and Andrea both being on, or members, how do I say it?
Employees of companies that we do business with, and this being the Planning Commission sort of like a board.
They shouldn't be part of that.
They should report to that commission.
So I'm confused at why they're on it and why we're reappointing them.
Why would we?
They're active members in the community.
That's what commissions are.
People that want to be involved in boards and commissions are just people that care about the community.
So again, seeing as they are employed by companies that the city employs and does business with, that is a, in my eyes, that's a conflict of interest to have them on this Planning Commission.
If I had to remove people on boards and commissions based on that, I wouldn't have that terrible many people.
I mean, people are involved in many ways, so that's where that was.
We have a substantial community of people that are qualified.
And getting them to step up and serve is another Sanders.
It's a big commitment.
Alderman Sanders?
Moving on that notion of the conflict of interest, it does illustrate a conflict of interest.
As a matter of fact, it's a direct conflict of interest.
I don't know who's doing the appointment, but if someone is doing the appointment without the consent of the council, well, that's not supposed to be happening.
But anyway, because that's something that is going on, it's got to immediately stop.
No more appointing any business, profit organizations, or anything without the Council's consent.
You cannot appoint people to any position that directly becomes a conflict of interest to the community and not only that to the council.
We're not talking about the administration, we're talking about the council.
And for us to not be able to give the consent of hiring practices, we're gonna have to reevaluate how these things have been, how these things are done.
We need to move forward with it because there's gotta be some recalibration.
And you know what I mean when I say recalibration because we had not had the privilege to get involved in the consent efforts of Darren Steakle that is in direct correspondence with Fehr and Graham, another organization we have in too many boards, we've got too many boards within that we don't have no say so in certain matters and that's gotta stop.
We're going to put a complaint in enforcing these rules so the city becomes compliant to the way order of the council, the administration of the city, the board of whoever they are because we still haven't nailed that down and that's one of the things that I wanna bring address and we need to move forward on those things.
This is not gonna lay down easy because it's gonna be brought up on each matter or each council chamber meetings.
We're going to make that a priority.
That's an absolute thing that we wanna talk about.
There's a direct priority that as council, we move forward to recognize and evaluate all of the things that I'm stipulating and I have more.
I'm not even at the tip of the iceberg.
And we need to take a very good look at how we doing things and how things are being done.
And so we're gonna address those.
I want everybody to be aware of that, especially in our council.
I want us to know that we're gonna be vengeance, vigilantly trying to get down to how we orchestrating things.
That's all I have to say, Mayor.
Mayor Miller, just to address some of the comments that have been made by council with regard to the appointments.
So these appointments under item five are in fact recommendations by the mayor that then are placed on the agenda for council approval.
So the council is to give advice and consent, that is the process.
So the mayor makes the recommendation under the appointment process, and then the council gets to give advice and consent by way of voting on these two appointments.
If it is the will of the council not to reappoint Darren or Andrea to the Planning Commission, that's completely within the council's purview to make that decision that the council's not going to reappoint these individuals to the board.
If in fact the individuals that are not appointed to the board, the positions will then just be vacant until the mayor then brings forth new names and the council then provides their advice and consent at that time.
So these are appointments that are being brought to the council for advice and consent.
And that is the formal legal process that would be required under state's DHU.
With regard to the conflict issue, I would note that we do have a number of in fact even city employees that sit on different boards and commissions throughout the city.
There is not a legal conflict to Mr. Steckel or Ms. Winter to serve on the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission is a recommending body only.
They make recommendations to the council, but ultimately the council has to make the final determination.
Now, with regard to a potential legal conflict, could it occur if, for example, Ms. Winter had a planning matter that she was involved in, and if she served on the Planning Commission, she would then be required to recuse herself if it was something that rose to the level of being in a matter of which she was financially involved.
Illinois law only prohibits conflicts of interest in which there is a financial relationship and the board of trustees.
We have a number of recommendations for board members to be able to get directly involved by the individual who would otherwise be serving.
Again, these two recommendations are for counsel's review and for you to decide as a body whether or not you want to move forward with these appointments.
Just to piggyback on that, the comment of hiring practices, boards and commissions are not hired.
Sosnowski said about our current ordinance and everybody having an opportunity to speak before the second time.
I really need to allow that for others before I call on you, Larry.
Well, I just wanted to address her.
She's making a comment by the last address.
Well, you can after everybody else has had a chance.
Wayne, did you?
Well, do you want my thought to diminish or what I'm going to talk about?
Well, that's not my fault.
I'm trying to go by the ordinance.
Director Duckman?
I just want to say something quick as well.
If there's many matters, variations, special use permits, right now we have a subdivision plat that's going to be going through.
And we're required by ordinance to have a Zoning Board of Appeals meeting or a Planning Commission meeting.
Many of these petitions require the Planning Commission to review it.
So just keep in mind that there's going to be developers waiting on permits to be reviewed if we do push this off.
So the longer we wait, and it is a challenge every week to get people to show up, meaning our planning commission members to make quorum.
So I just want to throw that out there, that if there are decisions on changing somebody, we're going to have a backlog of variation, special use, and different permits.
Alderman Stacey.
I feel that their roles place them in a position of power, that while beneficial in some ways, also present a risk of bias.
We must be cautious in the context of the existing mistrust and concern surrounding transparency in our local government.
It is crucial that we maintain the public confidence in appointing people to the Planning Commission which such close ties to inferential organizations could only fuel further distrust.
We should err on the side of caution and ensure that we do not give our citizens more reason to distrust the decisions that we make.
So I would just like to say about the transparency.
Every council member is invited to every board, and John, and I think we have a say in everything that commission does and what these two do.
Thank you.
»» Anyone that has not yet spoken?
Larry, did you want to do a second round now?
»» Oh, second round.
Yes.
By all means.
I have to excuse my voice.
But the thing about it is I have, I just want to make sure I get my point across.
Okay?
And the magnitude of your position, but for you talking to the council at this time, that's not something that we have to consider based upon what you're saying without the documents or the policy before us or the ordinance before us.
So when you're sending out messages like that, you're talking as if though it's a fact.
We don't know that it's a fact and we get to judge whether or not you're being honest or trustworthy or we have the confidence of the things that you're saying.
So first of all, when you start doing that, then we have to evaluate you for your action and then your influence on what you're trying to impose upon the council about without addressing anything that we tangibly can look at for ourselves to see if we can walk this thing with you so we can determine whether or not we are out of alignment with what you're discussing.
You haven't brought us anything of circumstantial evidence to prove that what you're saying has a factual basis.
And so that is one of the things that I am not pleased with when you inject like this.
I know who she is.
And besides that, this is totally off-subject of reappointment.
Yes, it's within the confines of what I have to discuss.
It's what I'm discussing.
Wesson.
Let me ask you this, is what you're saying relevant to the reappointments?
Okay, well, I put it like this here.
Since I'm being imposed upon about where I should be at.
I know that we're talking about reappointments, but the thing about it is I just want people to know it is not acceptable just for someone to inject their viewpoints into for this council for any determination on what we should think and how we should think about it.
Only thing we know is that what's on the agenda and all this other outside conversation that is being made, we haven't found the validity of truth there.
So, but anyway, if we're going to talk about reappointments, We're not just gonna, we just don't want to vote on reappointing someone without evaluating their progress.
If we had not done that, then we're doing ourself a disservice as council members, and then we're doing the citizens of Freeport a disservice.
And John.
We have to make sure that we're doing what we can to make sure that we're making progress.
If we had not done that, then we're doing ourself a disservice as council members, and then we're doing the citizens of Freeport a disservice.
And so we need to be making sure that any reappointment of anything is being scrutinized to the fullest so we can make sure that what we're doing, we're making an educated vote.
And and we just can't just mishandle their confidence when they have confidence in us to do the right thing or talk about the right thing or to bring the issues out and those kinds of So, I just want to make sure that we're treading that path and that we're not dodging and suppressing information that needs to be brought forward to the council, and I yield my argument.
Thank you.
Is there any other discussion on the reappointment?
Alderman Stacey.
Alderman Parker, I understand how this process work.
I've been at it a little over a year now.
Madam Mayor, there's people out there willing and wanting to be on this committee.
They're just not asked or invited to be.
And the truth remains to have our public's work director who's also involved with Fehr Graham's who does 95% of all the work here in the city to have the head person of Greater Freeport Partnership.
It's just, there's other people out there that can hold that position and can bring something to the table.
When we use these same people over and over and over again, you all start to play in one another's hand, giving each other what they want.
And yes, it's gonna come to the council and yes, we're gonna say yes or no and we're gonna take a vote and guess what, you will break the tie and it will always be what you want.
Well, that's a lot of accusing.
Anything else?
That's what?
If there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
No.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
No.
Simmons no we are tied at three to three attorney Sosnowski do we need a five to pass this okay mayor what say you aye and the motion passes four to three item number six is second reading of ordinance twenty twenty four fifty seven could you please read this ordinance amending boundaries of the joint northwest Illinois certified enterprise zone for the operation of an enterprise Boyer.
Thank you.
Manager Boyer.
Thank you, Your Honor.
This change of the Enterprise Zone came up at the October Committee of the Whole.
It was discussed and had a presentation by Andrea Schultz-Winner also at the last Council meeting.
This was moved forward for a second reading.
And staff recommends moving forward with Ordinance 2024-57.
Any further discussion on this matter?
Thank you.
At the last council meeting.
This was moved forward for second reading.
And staff recommends moving forward with ordinance 2024-57.
Any further discussion on this ordinance?
Alderman Sanders.
Director Boyer, question.
Have you guys have did your scope of a survey of all of this that is taking place in this particular sector?
And then I wanna ask you a question in regards to whether or not this is something that we made a discussion fully and I think we're leaving a lot of details out of this thing because we don't know for sure who's running this program or attempting to run this program without the consent and the action of the council itself to make a decision on whether or not we should get involved with this particular program.
And so we have not done enough study, have the, whoever brought this to us or this program project to us has enough study been brought to the commission or the council so that can be an in-depth study on all of the things that is required of us as council people to evaluate to see if we can make a sound decision whether we should move forward or not.
If not, if we don't have that information before us, then we should think about sustaining this until we do.
Put this on the back burner, move it out the way until we have absolutely done a complete study because I have to know who's in place, who's running this project, and I have to know who's all involved in it, okay, and how we get to that point.
I like to know all of those things and I don't speak for everyone but I'm just I'm just versing my my own study and opinion about it and I believe that we can get further down the road if I had more information so I can make a conscious decision with it.
Alderman Parker?
Yes this here is a thing we're doing for Pearl City Elevator because they're in the Enterprise Zone down the Road.
We may have a project we want in Freeport and they would have to approve it for us.
So we don't want to cut our own throats by telling them no on this.
So I think we need to move it forward, pass it, and let them get it going.
My opinion.
Manager Boyer, did you have something you wanted to say?
Alderman Sanders, we have gone through all of this.
It's essentially, it's just adding two parcels in that they exist in Alena to the enterprise zone that originally weren't Incorporated.
This isn't expanding the footprint of the enterprise zone and there's many other communities have to pass this as well.
So my recommendation is to move forward with it.
Alderman Stacey?
Yes.
What or who is the TIF district that this is used for?
It's not a TIF district, it's the enterprise zone and the enterprise zone is made up of eight different governing bodies.
Village of Lina, Stephenson County, Joe Davis County, Hanover, Freeport, I'm missing some.
Lina.
Did you say Stephenson County?
Stephenson County.
There are several governing bodies that make up the Enterprise Zone and so many of them have already passed this and so that way they can get moving.
It's no different than when we wanted to extend the Meadows Shopping Center into the enterprise zone.
We had to get them to buy in and pass so that way we could extend the enterprise zone.
So it's a give and take on multiple levels of government organizations.
Anybody else have something before I call a second round of questions?
Alderman Sanders, if you'd like to have your second opportunity.
Yeah, Mayor, I noticed that you're very well versed in the activities of this particular project.
And my thing is, since you're so versed into it, why isn't that the council is reverberating the things that you're talking about?
That's what I'm evaluating.
And all of the things that you know, council should know.
You should not have the opportunity to sit before us and tell us the story of a project that I expect my city manager, My developers and people of that nature to be giving us the whole concept of this whole project.
I don't expect you to be sitting there in your chair trying to direct us in what's taking place.
It is not your place to be telling us this because we need to have this information before us.
We don't need you to read off of whatever you're reading from or demonstrating from.
We need to see that for ourselves.
So we are not here in the council trying to wreck our brains on how did we get from A to B. And that's where we at right now.
So I just wanna make sure that a complete evaluation study has been made, survey has been made.
The things that you're talking about and discussing with council that we have this literature before us.
I don't see it and I don't have it.
Actually, you do.
It's all in your packet.
I read it off of the ordinance just like you have the ability to do, and I didn't read a script.
Yeah, but it doesn't allow me much time to sit here and try to read.
Well, this is the second reading of this ordinance, so you've actually had a good several weeks to bring your questions before the council.
Several weeks?
This is the second ordinance, the second reading, so we're going to move on to Alderman Stacy, your second one.
Yes, the cost of this project is $4.5 million.
Is it costing the city of Freeport anything?
No.
Okay, and it says that it will generate $5.6 million in property taxes.
Is it bringing our city anything?
You want my opinion on that?
Boyer, yours, I don't care, whoever.
Fowler, Kare, whoever.
I'm just asking, is it going to bring anything into our city?
Are we going to reap any benefits from this project?
Well, the benefits are many.
I mean, it's about working together.
They could have, all of those taxing bodies could have said something contrary when we wanted to extend our enterprise zone.
What did they have to gain from us doing that?
No different than what do we personally Gain.
It doesn't matter.
It's about being a good partner.
I don't know that they did or didn't.
That's why I'm asking the question.
If there is anything for us to gain?
Well, we've had many enterprise amendments and we've never had an issue.
Manager Boyer?
I just wanted to say, older person Stacy, the thing we gain is indirect, right?
We work with other communities for the benefit of the enterprise zone.
They work with us.
Meadows Mall was an example that was brought into the enterprise zone and that does benefit us.
So in this particular case there's no direct benefit to the city of Freeport outside of the fact that we are able to work together as a community to improve our total economic picture.
Anyone that has not spoken yet?
No one has anything further on their second?
Well Alderman Sanders you've you've spoken twice and I'm trying to adhere to to our the rules that the council have and that was explained by attorney Sosnowski at the beginning of the meeting you spoke twice when on this particular subject and the last subject on this particular subject that's correct so if there's no further discussion madam clerk would you please take the Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Simmons?
Aye.
The ordinance passes 6-0.
Thank you.
Item number 7 is the second reading of ordinance 20-24-58.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance amending newly revised building code to 2018 ICC additions.
Thank you.
Director Duckman.
Thank you Madam Mayor.
Presented this last week, no major changes.
Just kind of give you a recap here.
So the City of Freeport adopted the 2018 edition of the ICC building codes and we did that back in August of this year and in reviewing this recent ordinance, staff saw a few changes that they would like to make, mostly clerical, and based on that in line with last week staffs recommending amending chapters 14 20 26 29 and 82 of our codified ordinances for the 2018 ICC building code additions thank you is there any further discussion on this ordinance madam clerk would you please take the role Parker I Stacy I Shadle, Sanders, Klemm, and Simmons, and that ordinance passes six to zero.
Thank you.
Item number eight is the second reading of ordinance 2024-59.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance approving two airport farm leases, one with the Kemple family and one with Dan Julius.
Thank you.
Manager Boyer.
Thank you, your honor.
Staff's been working on all the farm leases at the airport and we would like to move forward on two of them, one with the Kemple family and one with the Julius's family.
Both of the parcels are relatively small but they make sense for their standpoint because they have contingent farmland.
So staff is recommending moving these two farm leases or approval of these two farm leases.
Discussion?
Alderman Stacey?
Yes, so this 481 is for the entire Year, 481.
Yes, that's correct.
Anyone else?
Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
No.
Klemm and Simmons?
No. Attorney Sosnowski, do we need five on this one?
Okay, the motion passes four to two.
Thank you.
Item number nine is the first reading of Ordinance 2024-60.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance approving Airport Hangar M8 lease with David Hayes.
Manager Boyer.
Thank you, your honor.
David Hayes is interested in renting Hangar M8 at Alberta's airport.
The agreement is for $165 per month.
Staff recommends moving forward with the lease.
Is there a motion to move Ordinance 2024-60 onto the next regularly Scheduled Meeting.
So moved.
We have a motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Shadle.
Discussion on this ordinance.
Alderman Stacy.
Earlier this year, we had a discussion about all these hangers and the screwed up leases, if you will, and we were supposed to be able, and Gable as a council to get a clean cut lease to view and see that it was designed as it needed to be.
And that has yet to happen, yet we continue to be given hanger's lease to approve when the lease have not been To our knowledge all the scribble and whatever on on this have not even been Still redlined.
What are we doing here?
Are you addressing me?
Yes, sir At the request of the airport manager, we are enacting a new lease format at the end of the year That was a request by the airport manager Bender.
So the new lease format will be approved and we'll discuss it.
So why wasn't that brought to the council?
That it's not going to be November, now it's going to be the end of the year?
Well, it's essentially the first of the year where the new leases will take effect, so we'll approve.
The first of the year?
Yes, the first of the year.
The end of 2024, beginning of 2025, the new lease format will go into place and then we'll approve those leases.
Miller.
I apologize.
We need to go back to item number 8.
The item did fail.
I just pulled the statute.
The requisite section is 11-76-1, and it states for leases, there does need to be, this power should be exercised by an ordinance passed by three-fourths vote of and the next item is the corporate authorities.
It's the corporate authorities of the city then holding office.
So not what that means is the corporate authorities as a whole, not the corporate authorities that happen to be present.
It is the corporate authorities then holding office.
So item 8 failed as it did not have the requisite number of votes to pass.
It isn't even necessary to call the Mayor's vote in this particular case because we would not be able to, вр, y of Officer Jodi and Mayor Bob Sinewan.
I apologize for being wrong the first time.
I didn't have a second to pull the statute both item 8 and item 9, so item 8 did fail.
And so are you saying that every council member needs to be present when there's an instance like this?
We're talking about 2024-60, is that the one we're referring to?
Gertrude, Heimerdinger, Emmet, Mike, my question is.
My question is who's determining or evaluating what the value is for the leasing, who's doing that, who has the authority to do that and then do not bring it to the council to let them know that that's what they would like to present instead of giving us this right on an agenda to make decisions on.
If we're not doing that, if that's not what we're doing, then why are we discussing this matter when we had not had an opportunity to discuss it as a whole?
As a whole, I mean, we just get saying yes to everything, no to everything without looking at the stipulations of these leases and how we got to 1.8.
B. Is that what we're doing?
Well, I have a problem with that.
So I just wanna know that those kinds of actions are not something that council should be considering when it comes to making sound decisions.
And right now we're discussing something that is ready to be fired off to be not looked into because $165 for a hanger.
I'd like to understand what was the previous leases on this particular property.
I do believe that the leases were set by council.
Well, that's what I want to know.
Council set those leases.
So if you're wondering, that would be the council.
Okay.
Did we sign off Huffman.
Do you want to jump on that?
Well, it would have been done.
2021.
Yeah.
Okay.
So we're going to move on to Alderman.
It's before our time.
Okay.
It's before our time.
Okay.
I just want to mention that fact that these are governed by, the amounts are governed by an ordinance and it's been discussed several times on the floor in the past.
That was before our time.
2021?
Yeah.
That's what they said.
What's before our time?
This topic has been discussed.
The topic of how the numbers have arrived, we've talked about that before, but you are correct.
Those specific numbers were set in 21 as far as what those leases are.
So you obviously weren't sat in that seat in 21, but we've talked about how that comes about several times.
Just before you, is there anybody that hasn't spoken yet that would like to?
Then Alderman Stacey.
Yes, we have talked about it.
However, we did not make any decisions on the cost, but I understand the cost.
I don't have a problem with the cost.
I'll even say I agree with the cost, but the bigger picture here is that this gentleman is already in that hanger as of, was it October 11th?
Yes.
So do this need a three thirds vote to pass?
Yes.
But the person is already in there before it even came to the council.
He's been in there since October 11th.
It came to the council today.
And this is the things that keep happening that has to stop.
Now, do we make the customer, the one who's in need of, the ones who's paying suffer?
That's not fair either.
And let's say he came on the spot, he wanted it, this one was open, so he got it.
The very next council meeting, that should have been in our face.
Not today.
Because now we don't have three fourth vote even available for it to pass, but it's already happening, so it done passed.
Yeah, we have six people here.
Manager Boyer.
First, I'd like to say that this hanger lease was signed with our airport manager who was going through surgery.
So she moved forward so this person could get into a hanger and we did not receive this at City Hall until she was well enough to come bring it to us.
We are simply approving a hanger lease for $165 a month as prescribed by ordinance.
We are working on the farm leases as requested by council.
We are bringing all of the leases before council and we will give council the updated hanger rates when we have an opportunity to get that data collected.
So I am a little bit incensed that I am being accused of something here that is not correct.
Any further discussion?
Alderman Sanders, your second time.
Okay, my second time, okay.
Manager Boyer, you may think that we might be and John.
I want to make sure that we are not harsh with our comments or our opinions what the point of the matter is.
If these things were brought to our attention beforehand, consideration for anyone having any issue in their personal lives should not be affecting the council at any given time.
It's either that we put it on hold.
I don't know who's signing off on it.
Did we sign off as a council on this particular hanger?
I understand you're saying that the airport manager or whatever has signed off on this hanger, but did the council, the city hall, did we sign off on this issue or this hanger or this lease?
I don't know.
That's the reason why the question is being asked.
So, you know, if you can explain Fowler, John Fowler, John Fowler Anderson.
If you you asked it did we sign off?
We meaning the council.
That's what this is.
No, that's what this is.
We are bringing you this ordinance in the first reading.
It goes to second reading.
And then that's your sign off when you vote.
Yes, that's how it works.
That's how it works since you sat in the seat.
But we're still in discussion.
What are you talking about?
We're still is there anything else that someone would like to bring up before we move on?
See, that's what I'm talking because you've already had two times to talk and what you're doing please stop talking stop it you need to stop talking you are out of order and you need to quit well far as I'm concerned okay so we're gonna move on to we already have a motion on the floor to move this ordinance forward so it will be on the next council meeting so we'll move on to item number 10 which is the adoption of resolution 2024,112 madam clerk could you please read this resolution to Thank you.
Manager Boyer.
Thank you your honor.
So just moments ago we approved the ordinance amending the boundaries and this resolution authorizes the amendment for the intergovernmental agreement for the operation of the enterprise zone.
So this is essentially a two-step process.
The first is we authorize it through the ordinance and then through the resolution we enact it.
I recommend moving forward with resolution 2024-112.
Thank you.
Is there a motion to adopt?
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Shadle.
Discussion?
Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
And Simmons?
Aye.
The resolution is adopted 6 to 0.
Item number 11 is the adoption of resolution 2024-116.
Could you please read this?
Resolution accepting 53-11 grant award for Pretzel City Transit.
Thank you.
Director Duckman.
Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
So looking at the Pretzel City area transits, every year we need to receive funding from two different sources.
Mainly it's the.
And others.
P. Huffines, Michael, and John.
So we're going to go through the application to apply for these grant funds, which is the 5311 and the downstate operating assistance funding.
So we've gotten past that step.
And this resolution before you today is to accept the actual funds and any matching funds that would be necessary here.
Would be to accept $198,017 just shy of $200,000 and staff recommends moving forward with this resolution to accept.
Is there a motion to adopt?
Yes.
So moved.
We have a motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Klemm.
Discussion on the resolution?
Seeing none, Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll?
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
And Simmons.
This resolution is adopted 6-0.
Item number 12 is the adoption of resolution 2024-117.
Could you please read this?
Resolution approving an intergovernmental agreement with Stephenson County regarding sharing the cost of an electronic ticketing system.
Thank you.
Chief Shenberger.
Thank you.
Excuse me.
The Stephenson County Circuit Clerk is moving to an electronic and Knapp.
We have a new electronic ticketing platform in 2025.
Staff from the Freeport Police Department, the Stephenson County Sheriff's Office and Stephenson County Circuit Clerk's Office evaluated two platforms, a DigiTicket and QuickIt.
After evaluating both, the agencies determined that QuickIt would be the best fit for the law enforcement agencies in Stephenson County and has an overall lower cost.
And John.
We have a number of benefits and benefits of using electronic ticketing systems.
One of those benefits, some of the benefits include the following.
An improved efficiency and use of time for officers by using less time detaining motorists on traffic stops.
Electronic ticketing systems reduces the amount of errors associated with handwritten tickets.
Miller.
And after the initial investment, moving to an electronic ticketing system could be more cost-effective when factoring in the cost of paper citations and the decrease in manpower hours for officers and clerical staff.
The state of Illinois allocates funds to law enforcement agencies to help cover the cost of maintaining an electronic ticketing system.
Many law enforcement agencies throughout the state of Illinois have already moved to an electronic ticketing system.
Moving to an electronic ticketing system would digitize traffic citations, non-traffic citations, and crash reports.
The cost for the Freeport Police Department to transition to an electronic ticketing system would include the following, $9,450, which would include the cost of the equipment, ten Zebra printers, and equipment for nine squad cars, and the main booking room at the police Huffines.
This is an annual cost made payable to the Stephenson County Circuit Clerk due the 15th of January beginning on January 15th, 2026.
This agreement can be canceled with 60 days notice.
The Stephenson County Circuit Clerk is going to assume the initial implementation costs of $40,000 which is due in January 2025.
The Freeport Police Department has budgeted $5,000 in 2024 and in 2025 to cover the costs of purchasing paper citations.
This budget has been exhausted in 2024.
Further, the state of Illinois has allocated a total of $8,549.87 to the Freeport Police Department since 2020 to implement a digital ticketing system.
Staff intends on utilizing the $8,549.87 and digital ticket funds plus an additional $900.13 from DUI funds to cover the startup cost of the equipment purchase.
Starting in 2026, staff intends on using the $5,000 traditionally budgeted for paper citations plus $2,000 for a combination of digital ticket funds and DUI funds to cover the annual cost to the Stephenson County Circuit Clerk.
Is there a motion to adopt?
I got a question, please.
Do I have to have a motion to adopt first?
To adopt it.
Second.
The motion by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Shadle.
Alderman Parker, what's your question?
The question, me just being ignorant to this, what is the offender going to have in his possession to tell him to go to court or whatever?
Sure, so there's going to be a printout that would explain the citation, what's being issued, if it's a mandatory court appearance or not, how to take care of the ticket, if sometimes Huffines.
You can just pay for it.
And then that can be done on the online platform or at the clerk's office, or if it's a must appear.
So he'll be handed a paper copy.
Yeah, there'll be a paper copy.
Same with accidents.
So right now we use LexisNexis for our accident platform.
And that's been a struggle at times.
And both parties aren't on the forms that we issue or the note that we issue.
This new platform, we would then have all the parties that were involved, which would help out the motorists who were involved in accidents.
Thank you.
Alderman Sanders.
Oh yeah, Chief.
Could you give us, I know Alderman Parker was just asking about the ticket, electronic ticket, how does that actually work so we can give the constituents an opportunity to visualize it, of how it will be administered, will it be like an old ticket issue, somewhat, you know, with the same information and everything, and on the site, will tickets be done right on the site, like a printing tool?
Kessler.
So that's part of the $9,450 which would include printers that would be in the vehicle in a squad car and in the booking room.
So what we're trying to do is get rid of the paper, the carbon copy paper citations which are handwritten, handwriting can sometimes be sloppy.
This way license can be scanned in and then it's a web-based platform so all that information is immediately uploaded or not well when it's done it will be uploaded and then transferred to the clerk's office so they have that information and then the the person who's getting the citation would then get a printout that would have all the important information that they would need to take care of that properly.
Follow-up?
Well we have to allow everyone else to have an opportunity first.
Alderman Stacey.
Okay I heard something about 40,000 and I I heard something about $7,000.
Yeah.
And the $40,000 is paid every year in January?
No, the $40,000 that's being paid by the clerk's office, that's to get it started.
So that's just a one-time cost for them.
The $7,000 a year will be split between us and the sheriff's department.
And since we already spend at least $5,000 a year on paper citations, we're gonna just use that money and Knapp, and we have a $7,000 budget to go towards our $7,000, plus we get roughly $2,500 or so a year to implement a digital ticketing system, and we also have a DUI fund that we can use this.
So we're not, we don't want to have it, an increase in our budget that's going towards this.
We want to use the same money that we've been using to purchase tickets, but then Miller.
We're going to talk about the cost.
Is there anyone that has not had a chance to speak yet?
Alderman Sanders, would you like to give your second opportunity?
Yeah.
Chief.
Yes.
Would this device be administered to all vehicles?
To our Mark Squad cars.
Yeah.
Okay.
And this is what it would total up to?
Yeah.
The 9,450.
Yeah.
That's for the printers to go in the Squad cars.
So, and then we'll have one in our main booking room.
Okay, all right, thank you.
Alderman Stacey.
Yes, I understand that the $9,450 is for the actual supplies.
Correct.
For all nine squad cars.
But what is the fee, the yearly?
$7,000.
So every year is $7,000.
Correct.
Will this 9,450 even get us through a year of supplies?
Yes.
I mean, that includes the print.
That includes the printers to get things started.
It also includes the paper.
Yeah, there'll be more additional costs with paper and stuff, but we can, like I said, we can utilize the digital ticket money that we get from the state as well as the money that we get from our, into our DUI fund.
So then that way we're not taking or asking for more in our budget.
We can utilize those monies to help pay for the system.
But every year the city would have to pay that $7,000.
Correct.
Any other first time?
The others have used up both of their spots.
So if there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk.
Parker.
Would you like me to ask for council to have, it needs a unanimous vote for you to speak again, Larry.
Do you want me to do that?
Yeah.
That's a new ordinance, right?
No, actually, it's an ordinance that's been in place for a long, long time.
It's just Right.
And so we are we are using our ordinances correctly.
That's our goal.
Okay.
So did you want me to call for a unanimous vote or are we moving on?
Well, no.
Well, no, I can do it another time.
Okay.
So there's no further discussion.
Madam Clerk, could you please Please take the roll.
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
No.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
Simmons?
Aye.
The motion passes 5 to 1.
Item number 13 is the adoption of resolution, I'm sorry, oh, the adoption of resolution 2024-118.
Could you please read this?
Resolution approving electrical supply agreement with a supplier to be determined tomorrow or tonight yet for downtown street lights for three locations.
Thank you.
Manager Boyer.
Thank you, your honor.
Every so often we have electrical aggregation contracts come up for council for approval.
Tonight we have one such contract coming to expiration and we need to renew it.
We've looked at the bids from Constellation, Dinergy, AEP, and MC2.
These are all electrical aggregators, and the constellation numbers are coming in low, but city staff would request staff allow us to engage in an aggregator contract for the lowest rate tomorrow when the rates come out.
So staff asked council to move forward with allowing staff to sign for that aggregator contract.
Is there a motion to adopt?
I'll move.
Is there a second?
Second.
We have a motion on the floor made by Alderman Sanders, seconded, I'm sorry, made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sanders.
Further discussion?
Can we just have a minute to look at this?
Okay.
Go ahead.
Mayor, these are example numbers that came out today, tomorrow they'll be different.
In addition, I would, we will be moving forward with the 24 month column, Do the fact that it'll help us line up the other aggregator contracts at a similar time period for Next in 2026 so that when they all expire they'll be expiring around the same amount of time and we can be more efficient about Doing doing these kind of contracts in the future Alderman Sanders Are we doing according to This discussion that I'm reading are we following through with comparisons on this?
Yes, on this item.
If there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the role.
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Klemm?
And Simmons?
The resolution is adopted 6-0.
Item number 14 is approval of the bid.
Can you read this please?
Bid Good opening on October 24th, CD0102024 for rehabilitation of single home at 1010 South Adams.
Thank you.
Director Duckman.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
So the City of Freeport, as we know, has been awarded the Community Development Block Grants Housing Rehabilitation.
We've been awarded $550,000 where $64,000 is allocated to our Grant Administration and nearly 500,000 goes into the rehabilitation of homes.
On October 24th, we had a bid opening for rehabilitation services of 1010 South Adams Avenue.
We received one bid in the amount of $48,225 by CMM and Associates.
The scope of work has a few highlights.
This property owner will be receiving a new furnace, a new hot water heater, a new central air conditioning Unite.
They will have their gutters replaced, which includes gutter guards for the leaves, and the entire house will be painted.
So staff recommends issuing a contract to CMM and Associates in the amount of $48,225.
Is there a motion to approve?
So moved.
We have a motion made by Alderman Shadle, seconded by Alderman Sanders.
Discussion.
Alderman Sanders.
How does one qualify to have their home rehabilitated and where do they get the information and how do they go through the process?
It's closed now.
And this was a 2021 grant.
Okay.
And right now we're at the point of implementing the the people who applied back in 2021.
So right now there is no applications.
We don't we do not have a current grant open for this.
Follow.
Well, as soon as if there's anybody else has a question.
That's what I'm talking about.
Is there any?
I'm not done with my thought.
And I will give you the floor back if no one else has a question.
Gossian.
Alderman Sanders, would you like to have your second round?
It's a routine thing every year.
Alderman Sanders, would you like to have your second?
Is no one else's?
Yeah, I would probably like to have a third too, but you know, you're disqualifying me at that point.
But anyway, I didn't damn near forgot what I was going to say now.
See, that's what I'm talking about.
Well, I can't help what the ordinance says, Larry.
Yeah, I understand.
I'm trying to get used to it.
I'll get back with you, I'll make contact with you later.
All right.
If there's no further discussion, Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
And Simmons?
Aye.
The motion passes six to zero.
Next, if it's acceptable to the council, I'd like to deviate from the agenda just for a moment to allow Chairman Helms to do a short presentation.
Are we okay with that?
Yes.
Well, I would have put it on, but I didn't know his time frame of when he'd be here.
So I guess we could have it abode if we need to.
No, it's not on the agenda.
Who wants to talk?
I didn't catch.
He wants to give two minutes of a presentation.
Is it acceptable?
No.
We follow the rules.
Madam Clerk, would you please take the role?
I have a question.
Huffines.
So it's, it says, you know, that we take a vote if a council member says no, it's not on the agenda.
Where do it say you could just take a vote like that?
Well, it's like anything else that someone would just want to come and just say something kind to us for once.
Mayor.
Go ahead.
We could cover this item under agenda item number 19, which is just after the reports of department heads, managers report and mayor's report.
Anyone can speak during public comments, so the individual could speak number under item number 19.
Taking a vote or are we going to move?
There would need to be a motion to amend the agenda, I suppose to move the public comment up to above reports of department heads if there is an emotion to amend the agenda then and it would go under item number 19.
So do we have a motion to amend to allow County Board Chairman to have a couple of minutes to speak now?
So moved.
Is there a second?
Second.
Any discussion on this particular motion?
And Kovach.
I would like to speak to the person who wants to speak.
If we're following rules from A to B, we're following rules from A to B.
I'm sorry, did you have something?
Yes, she made a motion not to do this.
And then you asked for someone to make a motion, well, she didn't make a motion, but she made a statement.
So she would have had to say I make a motion that we not do this.
Madam Clerk.
This is most, it's recommended to put most motions in the positive.
Attorney Sosnowski, would you agree?
It's just seem like tonight we are making so much up that we have never done before and I don't even know who wants to speak and I, whoever it is, I think it can be done at Public Comments.
Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll?
Parker?
Aye.
I'm sorry, I was out of voting sheets here.
I'm going by shorthand.
Stacy?
No.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
No.
Plum?
And Simmons?
No.
We have a tie at three to three.
Mayor, what say you?
Aye.
The tie is broken.
4-3, The motion passes.
Figures.
Mayor Miller, councilmembers, thank you very much for those of you who don't know who I am.
My name is Scott Helms, I am the Stephenson County Chairman of the Board.
From 2005 to 2013, I sat in, I think that spot right there, a different building.
I have a unique perspective of serving on the Freeport City Council, as well as the county board.
And in that time, it was not lost on me how little the city and the county worked together.
Collaboration was virtually non-existent.
When I was elected to the county board in 2016, it continued.
So when I became chairman of the board two years ago, I vowed to make sure that this county worked locked in step with the city of Freeport as exactly half of our board resides within the city of Freeport.
And it's critically important that we all work together and find areas of commonality to make sure that the citizens of this county are treated fairly and correctly.
So as I became chairman, I notified the mayor that I had a strong intent of making sure that the county worked for crime suppression with the city of Freeport, which we've been very successful at so far, and as economic development.
And again, through greater Freeport partnership, I feel we've done a reasonably good job with that.
To the credit of the mayor, she found another item of collaboration, which was Locust Avenue here in Freeport and the complete renovation of that project using county funds, half a million dollars worth.
So while I know it's unorthodox to have me speak now, I do appreciate it.
I understand your meetings are quite lengthy, but what I would like to do is thank the mayor for her leadership on this and recognizing that this was an excellent opportunity for both the city and the county to work towards and to present this check for a half a million dollars.
We're gonna turn this way.
All right.
Okay.
Thank you, Mayor.
Appreciate your leadership very much.
The city's lucky to have you.
Well, thank you very much.
And I would just like to say, it's been a pleasure meeting with you on a regular basis and being able to work together to accomplish something far greater for the entire city of Freeport.
And so without that, without your participation in that, Locust would not have gotten done.
So thank you for that.
Thank you.
So finance director, I'll be happy to give you this check when the meeting's over.
I'll be waiting for it.
We will move on to reports of department heads, finance.
Nothing this evening.
Thank you.
Community development.
Nothing tonight, Madam Mayor.
Thank you.
Fire?
Nothing from fire.
Thank you.
Police?
I have no report.
Thank you.
Library?
Nothing tonight.
Nothing from communication, IT?
All right, then we will move on to the City Manager's report.
Thank you, Your Honor.
Just like to report that the city crews have started leaf season.
They actually started late last week so make sure your leaves are raked to the curb in a continuous line and don't park vehicles adjacent to leaf piles and we should have a very efficient and effective year Miller.
Thank you.
And then I just have three things actually that I wanted to touch briefly on.
Before the council, I put a map on each one of your desks with the last five years worth of projects, mainly infrastructure projects with a little bit of blight reduction mixed in there as well as some tree removal.
So you'll be able to see by the map, it's all specified to each ward.
And so Alderman Klemm for ward one, in the last five years, $4.6 million has been spent.
For ward number two with Alderman Monroe, $2.2 million.
Alderman Simmons in ward three has been $16.6 million spent.
Parker in Ward 4, 3.5 million, Alderman Stacy Ward number 5, there's been 10.4 million spent, Alderman Shadle in Ward 6, 8.2 million, Alderman Sanders in Ward 7, 3.5 million, and at large across the city to benefit all has been an additional 70.9 million dollars spent.
So the numbers don't lie, they're We're right there.
And so to be able to bring that before you as a huge success in infrastructure within the City of Freeport in the last five years.
And then also the second thing is just wanted to give a little attention to I have been in contact with the captain that is over the 333rd on our National Guard.
They were deployed a little while ago.
They were sent to Alaska.
I talked with the captain and I just said you know I I'd like to as a community be able to support these men and women that are serving and what could possibly be their need and so he quickly got back to me and had a list of things that they were in need of as you can imagine Alaska is very cold this time of year they need toiletry items hand warmers snacks wool socks and batteries and so we are collecting here at City Hall right here in the council chambers to be able to bring whatever those needs might be, there are 62 of them.
And so if you would like to donate to that project, you have the month of November to be able to do that.
And then my last piece is tomorrow is the election.
Please do your duty and vote.
So we will move on to council announcements.
Alderman Parker.
Nothing tonight, your honor.
Thank you, Alderman Stacey.
Yes, I do have something.
Last week, I sent an email to Director Richter and I had four questions.
How many bank accounts does the city currently have?
The answer was 30.
What is the total of all these accounts?
The answer was 183 million.
Do we have an Illinois Fund commingo account?
The answer was yes.
If so, how much is in that account?
And the answer is 27 million.
In April 2019, memorandum from city treasurer, Randy Bukas, to then city manager, Lowell Crowe, states that the city had 45 accounts that they reduced to 41.
In that same 2019 memorandum, the total dollars amount in those 41 accounts was $78 million.
As of October, 2024, we have 30 banks account and the total of those accounts are $183 million.
This is an increase of $105 million collected over the past five years.
The average out.
The average out to be $21 million of tax revenue collected by the city per year.
Councilman, I've been receiving questions from my constituents.
I even overheard the conversations of some of the attendees at the mayor's so-called budget input meeting meeting, questioning how much money is our city spending and what really are they're spending the money on?
This leads me to a comment by Alderman Monroe, who I wish was here at our last council meeting when he said, I asked this question a couple of years ago, where did all the money go over the last 30 years?
And I never got an answer.
Matter of fact, I'll like to see line items of where the money was spent.
As I too desire to see a line item document showing where monies have been spent.
I agree with Audemar Monroe, we need to know exactly where taxpayer's dollars and Sellers are being spent.
Alderman Monroe also said that records only go back to 2017.
Before that, we can't even get accurate, clear information as to where these monies have been spent.
Really?
Council members, this is a problem.
We are collecting and spending taxpayers money imposing sales tax increase, denying referendums to be placed on ballots and can't even get a clear accurate information on how this money is being spent.
It was March of 2017 when the city stated collecting capital improvement from, started collecting capital improvement from our residents.
Based on the information that I get from finance director Richter, the city has 15 million in its capital improvement fund.
And so that leads me to another question, director Richter.
Can you tell me how much money we have spent out of the Capital Improvement Fund since 2017?
Would you like to get back to her?
I can tell her right now.
Okay.
Please, and thank you.
Alderperson Stacy, I really wish you would have asked me prior to this meeting what exactly these accounts are.
Because $61 million is fire pension and $55 million is police pension, which you can't touch.
As far as the CIP funds, I have an Excel spreadsheet that I'd be happy to send to you that details every dollar that went into the CIP fund and went out.
Please contact me at any time.
I'd be happy to sit down and meet with you as I have not met with you.
Alderman Shadle.
I'm not done.
Council, in order for us and taxpayers to gain a full understanding as to where their tax dollars are being spent.
I feel it is necessary for this council to request a forensic audit to be conducted starting with the capital improvement fund.
The range of the audit should be from March 1st, 2017 2017 through December 31st, 2024.
This is the only way that we will get the truth of how tax dollars are being spent.
Truth be told, the hidden agenda, the lies, they must stop.
I will be bringing this recommendation before the council for approval in January, 2025.
For my final request, let the record show that I am asking for, in PDF form, copies of all itemized and regular invoices of all work between the City of Freeport and Fehr Graham.
These files need to represent information from January 1st, 2024 to present.
Thank you.
Alderman Shadle.
I think it's best I pass.
Alderman Sanders.
Yes, I have something I'd like to elaborate with what I just heard.
It's nothing new to me.
I was not surprised with the reading that Ms. Alderman Stacy was reporting.
I'd just like to say, when I heard the numbers of accounts that the city holds, and we don't see these accounts in our financial reports, and well, I don't see, yeah, but it doesn't and talk about what bank's accounts that these are.
Yeah.
Oh, well, if it is, then I need to see more of it.
Maybe I'm not here enough to, no, don't do that.
Don't do that.
You're making yourself a nuisance, so don't do that.
Please don't speak to our department heads that way.
Wait a minute.
They deserve respect.
Well, you tell her that.
You're accusing her of something.
I didn't accuse her of anything.
You are accusing her and she has- I have not accused her of anything.
I have not accused her of anything.
So don't you even go there.
You can't direct me when I'm talking.
That's my point.
You're always interjecting when you're not supposed to be doing that.
And that, but my thing about it is, if I had not received that information, I'm inquiring about it right now, okay?
I like to get a copy of all of that myself, not just Alderman Stacy, but Alderman Sanders would like to get a copy of what that report was all about, and you're making it sound and John.
So, I'm just going by what I know and what I know is that I have not heard about 40-some bank accounts that we deposit taxpayers' dollars in and we need to do an itemization and Stacey.
I need to know every transition that took place, same thing that Alderman Stacey was recommending.
That's what needs to be done, it needs to be brought to the floor, it's one of our priorities that we hear this stuff many times before because we're speaking before our tax payers and they're concerned about it too.
You know, we're not just, the council is not the only ones that are concerned about it, but the constituents out there, they're concerned about it and they need to know how we're governing the finances of tax dollars and they need to hear this on a regular basis and they need to be trained to understand and educated on every aspect of what the city is governing.
And so that's the reason why I'm injecting that simply because we need to reveal anything that has been brought up.
I mean, it's not like you are trying to hide anything.
I'm not saying that, but the thing about it is if it's available to us, then if we're requesting for it, then it should be presented to us.
That's all I'm saying.
Thank you.
I yield.
So I would like to say you should probably start by reading the agenda because twice a month the consent agenda is on there and every detail is available to you.
Alderman Klemm, would you like to have anything to say, Alderman Klemm?
Your comment was not necessary.
Tell you.
Thank you.
Alderman Simmons.
A couple of things.
So, I would just like to comment on tonight's meeting, and we are not doing this city any service by behaving the way that we behave.
I understand and appreciate the quorum as a way to keep the meeting fair and timely.
And John.
I think that we need to have a meeting fair and timely and moving in a manner that it should.
When it is used to silence people, that is not okay.
When we gaslight certain councilmembers because we know we're going to get aroused out of them, those were unnecessary comments and gestures.
Your comments were unnecessary.
Everybody was unnecessary tonight.
Huffines.
Let's do it in a way that makes us better, not to silence who we don't want to hear.
My official comment for the night is, though, Third Ward, please stay tuned.
We are having a meeting at the library again on Friday, November 22nd, and we'll start at 4 o'clock.
So again, I will keep bringing that up, and hopefully I can see you all there.
Then that concludes Council Announcements public comments.
Go ahead.
I wasn't going to say anything tonight, but this debate, it brought me up to a point that something must be said.
And my ward is Stacy, and we talked a little bit before, and I did mention that $173 million is a portion of the police and pension funds.
And before that that was totally reported we're still reporting that I would suggest that we would report just the city funds that we control and the pension funds as a separate sub item to prevent some confusion.
Thirdly as I went through this budget completely in the budget is in in fair shape there are some issues with it I did find a an issue with transfers not being totally Huffines.
We are going to probably invest almost $70 million in infrastructure this year.
We have the ability to do that based upon this sheet that was presented by the city manager.
And it is all entirely possible.
We might have to go through this capitalization listing to see and prioritize it to determine what comes first and how fast it can come so that we can actually maintain our cash flow.
When it's all said and done, we're going to start off with, in our governmental funds, a little over $41 million.
We will end up with $34 million after it's said and done with the loans, the grants, and the difference between that, we're going to be investing and reducing our fund reserves by $7.8 million.
All of this is possible if we work together and make it all happen.
She's doing a pretty good job.
I had been able to take all of the documents, bring them into a system, model it, and I can produce reports in many different formats, which is what we probably don't have available here at the city, unfortunately.
But having said that, I'm optimistic moving forward.
I will be in the hospital for a couple weeks, so I won't be at the next meeting.
That's why I presented this today.
And what happens after I get out, maybe it won't even matter where we go in the budget.
One other final thing on the budget, and I'll get out of it, property taxes.
You're probably not interested in raising that.
And I looked at it in terms of perspective.
I live with emoji, Tommy, Joey, Mr. Miller, we are still on a public road.
We have a 63 feet of road.
Mr. Ferriero, your time has exceeded.
That is maintained by the state.
Mr. Ferriero, your time has exceeded.
Thank you.
Okay.
Is there any other public comments?
Tommy?
Joey Dickerman, the beef roux is open.
Joy Miller, you do a good job.
Thanks, Tommy.
I went, I had to be food, but those were heating, and it was good food in there.
Thank you, Tommy.
Is there any other public comments this evening?
Yes, ma'am.
Last week, last week I was, I had heard, not last week, the week before, I've heard Alderman Sellers mention something about the parking lots.
And there was a discussion about it and possibly that this would be moved to 2026 instead of 2025.
And I park in the municipal parking lot a lot right in the handicap area.
And if you look at the handicap area, it kind of looks like a war zone because it does one of these things with big pockets.
And if you look across the municipal lot, which is kind of the municipal lot and the lot across from Lickies are the two biggest lots in Freeport.
And we have all these beautiful stores with all this gorgeous shopping coming up.
And we have divots that are the size of a car in the handicap parking area, as well as other places.
And I remembered Alderman Sellers saying that she pushed her ankle in one over across from Lickies.
So rather than waiting until maybe 2026, if you could possibly look at that budget item and see if those parking lots, especially municipal lot where you have the Stewart Center and all these beautiful buildings to shop in, it's our prize, it's our huge parking lot.
To come out of a car and twist your ankle in a pothole isn't fun.
So if we could possibly think of that for 2025 instead of pushing it off until 2026, that was the only thing I was asking.
We have executive session pursuant to 5 ILCS 120 slash 2C2 collective negotiating matters between the public body and its employees or their representatives, or deliberations concerning Sally and her colleagues.
Suttman.
And finally, salary schedules for one or more classes of employees.
Is there a motion to enter into executive session?
So moved.
Is there a second?
Second.
We have a motion made by Shadle, seconded by Parker.
Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll?
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Klemm?
Eric, does it look like Klemm is still connected?
Okay.
Simmons?
Aye.
We still have a vote of five to zero to enter closed session.
Thank you.
Cindy.
Lucinda.
Thank you very much.
That's a real check.
Wow.
Thank you.
The big one.