Good evening, Pastor Ramos, would you please give the invocation?
Good evening.
Madam Mayor and City Manager Boyer and all the City Council, if you would all join me and bow your heads and let's pray before we begin this meeting.
Heavenly Father, We come before you today with gratitude and humility.
Thank you for the opportunity to gather as leaders, servants, and members of this community.
Lord, we acknowledge that every good gift comes from you.
We seek your wisdom as we begin this meeting.
Lord, grant these council members discernment, integrity, and unity as they make decisions that affect the lives of the people they serve.
And the city.
I want them to lead with fairness, compassion and genuine desire to promote the well-being of every resident in this city.
Give them wisdom beyond their own understanding, courage to do what is right, and humility to listen to one another with respect.
Let every discussion be guided by truth, and Keeley.
We pray for peace and prosperity in our city.
Bless our family, business, schools, first responders, health care workers and all who labor for the welfare of our community.
Protect those who serve and strengthen those who are in need.
May this meeting be productive, respectful and beneficial to all.
Sandoval, Michael, and the rest of the city.
May we work together to build a community, marked by hope, unity, and opportunity.
As your word says, if any of you lack wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all who will find, to God, who generously will all find fault.
In James 1.5, we ask for the wisdom today.
In the mighty name of Jesus, We pray, Amen.
Amen.
Thank you.
Thank you, Pastor.
Now, we'll call this meeting to order.
Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll?
Mayor Miller?
Here.
Alder Persons-Klemm?
Here.
Johnson?
Here.
Simmons is absent.
Parker?
Here.
Stacy?
Here.
Shadle is absent.
Sanders?
Here.
And Sellers is absent.
But we do have a quorum.
If you could please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, Alderman Parker, I'll pass that to you.
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.
Item number one is approval of the agenda.
Is there such a motion?
So move.
Second.
A motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Johnson.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Opposed?
That motion passes.
Item number two is approval of the minutes from the council meeting on June 1st, 2026.
Is there a motion to approve?
So moved.
Second.
Motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Parker.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Opposed?
That motion passes.
Public comment?
Is there one signed in?
Mr. Corbin?
Is it on an agenda item?
Yes.
Good evening.
I came here to address our city ambulance rate increase.
They say they haven't raised the rates for four years and want to make them comparable to other communities.
That charge is much as $2,000.
Right now we charge $1,200 for a citizen and $14 a mile and they want to raise it to $2,020 per mile.
Going from $1,200 to $2,000 is a 66.667% increase or 16.667% for the last four years.
The Freeport Fire Chief, Tom Quartz said to capture a little bit extra from the insurance companies and then to match up to what our CMT rates is so we're able to capture the proper amount.
Are we talking about capturing like we're hunting or something.
He said, he goes on to say, it hasn't caused us to have a cutback, but there's always that possibility.
So we're not having any shortages.
A new ambulance costs over $400,000 and a new fire truck costs up over a million dollars.
We have 4,000 ambulance calls.
Let's assume they're all citizens and not out of county residents.
Take $4,000 times 1,200 bucks.
That's $4.8 million a year.
Raising the rates to $2,000 at 4,000 ambulance calls is $8 million, a $3.2 million increase per year.
That would buy two new fire trucks, or I'm sorry, one new fire truck and three new ambulances every year.
Or I'm sorry, maybe I was right the first time.
Two new fire trucks, that'd be 2 million bucks, and three at 400 would be, what, $3.2 million.
So we could buy three new fire trucks are two new fire trucks and three new ambulances every year with that increase.
They act like this is free insurance money.
We pay insurance premiums and this is actually why our premiums are skyrocketing and our people can't afford healthcare insurance.
Then say rather than increasing property taxes, this would only affect the users of the service.
That's the sick, the disabled and the elderly.
Anyone on Medicare without purchasing a supplemental insurance like Advantage, if you just have the standard Medicare program.
It owes 20% of this bill, meaning a trip that once cost you $240 will now cost $400 out of your pocket for that ambulance ride.
And also the additional money will go to our capital improvements fund that historically pays for the vehicles and facilities.
Every Freeport home through their water bill already pays $38 to capital improvements and 9.98% to the city of Freeport Corporation out of our property taxes.
Freeport's 3.03% property taxes nearly triple the national mean property rate of 1.02% and Freeport pays 1.15% higher property taxes than the mean rate of 1.88% in the state of Illinois.
Mr. Corbin, your time has expired.
You're welcome to finish that at the public comment at the end of the session.
Thank you.
We'll move on to item number four, which is the consent agenda.
The consent agenda consists of, or is considered to be routine in nature and is considered to be done in one motion, unless a member of council would like to have something hold for further discussion.
The consent agenda consists of approval to receive and place on file the minutes from the board and commission meeting of the arts and culture, May 7th, the fire department report, April building permit report of May and the approval of finance bills in the total of three million seven hundred one thousand three hundred sixty three dollars and thirty seven cents and payroll for pay period ending June 5th in the total of seven hundred twenty four thousand three hundred nineteen dollars and sixty four cents.
Motion made by Alderman Parker, seconded by Alderman Johnson.
Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll?
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
And Johnson?
Aye.
The motion passes, five to zero.
And item number five are some appointments.
Could you please read those for the record?
The appointment of Katherine Smith to fill a vacant seat for the Arts and Culture Commission effective through August 31, 2029.
The next two are reappointments to the Zoning Board of Appeals effective through June 30, 2031 for Andrew Reeder and Ron Kane.
Thank you.
Is there a motion to approve these appointments?
So moved.
Motion made by Alderman Johnson, seconded by Alderman Parker.
Discussion on the appointments.
Madam Clerk, Alderman Stacy.
I do have a question because you always ask if there's question.
You choose these people.
We have no say so.
That's correct.
You have the vote of approving or not approving.
So ultimately you do.
The mayor is the one that brings them before the council and the council then either approves or denies.
Okay.
So, okay.
Okay madam clerk please take the role should I go back to Simmons since she was the elder person on the agenda who was to lead the votes and then have her call first and then the next meeting will be all the person Parker okay all the Person Simmons?
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
And Johnson?
Aye.
The motion passes six to zero.
Item number six is the first reading of ordinance 202634.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance adopting the purchasing policy and procedure manual and amending sections 20, 24, 04, 20, not 20,239.04,239.5,830.01, and Chapter 238 of the Codified Ordinances.
Thank you.
Director Richter?
Thank you, Your Honor.
The purchasing policy was first discussed at the Committee of the Whole earlier this year in May.
At that meeting, we went through the major topics of the purchasing policy.
I just highlight them briefly, I won't go into as much detail as I did previously.
The objective of this policy is to ensure that public funds are spent efficiently, economically, impartially, while obtaining the highest standard of public trust and integrity.
All procurement must adhere to the Illinois statutes, city code, and the employee handbook, and also ethical guidelines.
Currently the city operates on a decentralized purchasing model.
That means each of the individual departments within the city handle their own purchasing of all items for their department.
The policy also includes exceptions, waivers, and special procurements, including formal bidding exemptions, bid waivers, definitions of what a sole source purchase would be.
It also includes emergency purchases.
It identifies when a change order occurs and what we are to do in that event.
The timeline for adjustments, if there are change orders, those must go to the city council, must be immediately notified of any change order that extends a project's completion date by 180 days or more.
The policy also identifies ethics and logistics and other miscellaneous rules, such as gifts and gratuities, budgetary control, which is at the department level, year-end spending.
Departments are required to pay attention to when goods are received, if it's in this current Fiscal Year 2026.
If those items were received by December 31st, they are expensed in 2026.
If they're received after that, they're expensed in the next year.
We also have a breakout for sales tax, letting each department know that we are tax exempt and they're required to use our tax exempt status when purchasing items.
Disposal of surplus property is also in the purchasing Policy, and also guidelines for when items need to be bid.
The policy is meant as a guidebook for each of the departments who purchase items.
For example, the purchase authority dollar limits are identified in the policy.
Those are ones I would like to read each right now.
For buying items that are under $500, the department director has the authority dollar limit to authorize that purchase, the department director under $500.
Between $501 and $5,000, that's also the department director, so under $5,000, department director.
From $5,000 to $10,000, the Department Director and the Finance Director.
So the Finance Director will be required to sign off in purchases between $5,000 and $10,000.
$10,000 To $24,999 is the Department Director, the Finance Director, and the City Manager.
So it requires three levels of authority to purchase items between those levels.
Between 10,000 and just short of 25,000.
Anything 25,000 and above is required to go also to those three levels plus city council.
25,000 And above goes to city council.
I would also like to identify the procurement methods and how many quotes or whether bidding is involved.
Under $500 would be one verbal quote.
Between $500 and $5,000, three verbal quotes.
$5,000 To $10,000, three written quotes.
Also $10,000 to $24,999, three written quotes.
And at $25,000 that would be the amount that we are required to go out for bid.
And I'd like to specifically say I think I misspoke at the cow I'd like to confirm with Attorney Zito that's the state statute is $25,000 on the bidding process.
Correct.
Okay.
And that's all I'd like to identify at the moment and I'd be open to any questions.
Is there a motion to move this ordinance forward?
So moved.
Second.
A motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Parker.
Director Richter, when you were talking about the dollar limits, do those purchases have to be in the budget?
Definitely, yes.
I'd like to clarify anything that is not budgeted, that's not included in the budget, would need to come to an additional appropriation by the City Council.
Just wanted to make that clear.
Thank you.
Any discussion?
Alderman Johnson?
I just wondered why under their procurement from 501 to 5,000, it was changed from written quotes to three verbal quotes from 501 needed for those purchases.
Do you mean changed from the COW?
No, in 2007 it says written quotes, in 2026 it says three verbal quotes.
That was just our discussion and putting the policy together.
Things have changed in this the original policy was 2007 so it's almost been 20 years since we've updated this policy and so we felt it was adequate or appropriate to change that to verbal quotes okay I have a couple things I'd and I'd like to see amended on it.
So do I do that one at a time or?
Yeah, if you just want to talk about them in one thing, because I don't want you to go past your twice limit.
Twice time, okay.
Under the purchase authority dollar limit, 5,000 to $10,000, I would like to see that amended and have city manager's name on there as well.
I think the more people you have looking at something, and the more transparency it is for the people, we're more transparent and we can justify what's being done.
And also under the $10,000 to $24,999, I would like to see that amended to add city council to that except for emergent situations.
So you don't want anything to change?
That's the way it is now?
Well, no, under the 2007 it just had City Council down for the $10,000 to $24,000 and under the 2007 for the $25,000 and above it just had City Council.
Now you have several people under there and I didn't change the $25,000.
So it'd be just the $10,000 to $24,999.
It would be Department Director, Finance Director, City Manager, and City Council except for emergent situations.
And then.
Alderman Johnson, that is the way it is.
It's right now at $10,000, you already have that.
And then it's approved by the council.
On here on 2026, the change, it says Department Director, Finance Director, and City Manager.
Am I not?
Wait, am I not pointing myself well?
Currently, the only amount that I'm authorized to move forward with is $10,000 currently.
So by that change, that would stay the same.
So just be clear about that.
So yeah, so in 2026, 10,000 to 24,000, it says the people that need to make that decision are department director, finance director, and city manager.
So city council has nothing to do with that decision, correct or no?
Am I wrong on that?
No, that's what it's listed here, but we currently have that in place.
So right now, if the city manager, if anything comes before me that's over $10,000, we bring it to council for approval.
So essentially, if we're going to add city council to that item, which is entirely your prerogative, that would effectively not really change anything on this purchasing policy.
Because you already do bring it to city council over $10,000.
Yes.
That's correct.
Okay.
I was misunderstanding on this.
It's just a different group of words, but it means the same thing.
Is it possible that we didn't have a city manager in 2007, so that probably wasn't listed?
Correct, we did not.
Alderman Simmons?
So what we're looking at is, right now, things over $10,000 do come to city council.
With this change, things over $10,000 would no longer come to city council.
Right, so what it boils down to is you don't want anything to change in that.
You still want to have everything brought to you that's $10,000 or greater.
The purpose behind that was just to have an updated reflection of what mirrors the state.
What mirrors the state is 25,000.
If you don't like it, that's your vote.
I mean, that's all this little piece of it is.
You're right.
Okay.
I'm just saying 10,000 to 25,000 is a lot of money, and I think council should have a say in that.
Okay, so let me make sure I understand you correctly.
You're looking at two amendments, or were you not done?
Yeah, just two.
Okay, so your first amendment, you want to add the word city manager to the $5,000 to $10,000 bracket, and you want to just do away with $10,000 and above in all of it and leave it the way it originally was?
The way it was, okay question, the way it was, was the department director still has a say in it, right?
The $10,000 to $20,000, $25,000, that's the way it was.
Anderson, department director still has a say in it.
Finance director still has a say in it.
City manager still has a say in it.
And then city council would have a say in it.
That's what I'm saying.
Yeah, but ultimately the bottom line ends with city council.
It isn't, right.
Yeah, so it's just, it's, it would just be updating it to reflect the city manager form of government versus how it was written in what 2008 or whatever.
Yeah.
Darren.
I just want to maybe make a point of clarity here.
So the purchasing policy that, uh, uh, director Ricker Richter had put out here, the, what, what is stated there is for purchases that are budgeted, right?
So they're already budgeted.
If they're not in the budget, it doesn't matter what the amount is.
They have to come back to council.
So one of the things that the utility would point out is when we buy a water main materials, everyday supplies that we buy, we are trying to buy them in bigger lots to save money.
So we're buying more units at a time, which raises those prices up.
Honestly, $10,000 with a material for the utility anymore is not a lot of money with the way the costs have gone up.
Miller.
So when we budget for water main materials for the year, it gives the director the allowance to go out and get those bids and get those materials ordered under 25,000, which is state statute and most communities go by that under budgeted items still.
So if, if I wanted to buy a mower that wasn't in the budget already and wasn't planned for in 26, that would still have to come back here, even if it was $10,000, right?
So that, that's the difference of what we're talking about.
This is for budgeted items that have already been approved in the master budget, trying to streamline the city, getting our work done, because the cost of everything, these, these are very, these amounts are very dated in today's dollars.
And what I will tell you is, uh, public works and the utility, especially Jodi, are the ones that use this purchasing policy the most because we buy the most material of every department here.
Other departments for police fire their vehicles and things like that are their big purchases and that's all through the budget.
We're talking about water main gates, valves, manholes, things that are not going to change within the utility.
It's just giving us the ability to operate quicker, faster, to get more materials here without going through these different policies.
Just $10,000 worth of material is not much anymore.
And then just to piggyback on that, let's just pretend that, you know, there's a $15,000 already budgeted mower.
You still have that knowing and the approval because it has to show up on the consent agenda.
Okay.
Oh.
Oh, and Stacy?
Yes.
The Consent Agenda is umpteen pages long, so an item like what you just said could easily be missed.
I agree with Alderman Johnson and Alderman Simmons in wanting it back the way it was on those two items, Adams, because you're taking away the power of the council.
That's what's happening.
We're not having say so until we reach $25,000.
And I don't think that that's fair.
And we could talk about other areas or other cities, but are they what we are?
Do they have a city manager?
Or do they have a full-time mayor?
All that needs to be considered and looked at because right now what you're doing is taking away the power of the council.
Ultimately, the council has the power because you set the budget.
We set what you bring to us.
We set what you ask of us.
I asked for budget to be set aside for lighting.
It didn't happen.
So we don't set the budget.
We set what you bring to us.
Manager Boyer, did you want to add something?
So every year, like for equipment, let's use that as an example.
And Darren brought up the example of the mower, but there's lots of examples like the mower.
We might've budgeted to rebody a truck and that might be 15 to $20,000.
The council gets a chance to approve that budget when we do budget time.
And then it also, as Mayor's mentioned, it also ends up in the consent agenda.
And sometimes the consent agendas get pulled for further analysis.
So this really is only talking about items that we've moved forward within the budget.
It's also items that can be pulled out for review by council.
So, it's council's prerogative, whether you want to make a change or not, but I think in the interest of keeping business working efficiently, I think it's a good change.
Alderman Stacey?
Yes.
I think it was probably a year, year and a half ago, it was brought to council to order to dump, dump, scoop things.
Darren, what were they?
Dump bodies.
Dump Bodies, and then they were never ordered even after we approved.
So how do we know what's really coming and going if it don't have to hit the council other than the consent agenda if it doesn't hit the council till after 25,000?
Boyer.
Um, that's really what those one-on-one meetings are for.
No, don't!
Yes, those are what the reason for those meetings.
I mean, as I, you know, I'm sure Alderman Klemm and Alderman Johnson can attest to this, but when we talk about what's going on, if there's a major expenditure coming through on council that is maybe a large amount and we're going to be bringing it to council, we have an opportunity to discuss it at that time.
So that's just a cross-check.
That's just an opportunity for more information without you have to read the entire consent.
And we often read the entire consent agenda, right?
So that's one answer to that.
City Manager Boyer.
Actually, you don't have the floor.
If the council wants to go a third round on it, let's, there's been twice.
Sure.
Yeah.
Okay, go ahead.
City Manager Boyer.
I just lost it.
And I just lost my whole phone, the meetings.
You say one-on-one meetings.
It's not one-on-one.
We have met and we used to meet, okay?
And so please don't continue to say one-on-one when it's you wanting me to meet with you and the mayor.
When Alderman Simmons and I used to come and meet with you and we did.
But now since you want the mayor there, there's a conflict in Robert's rules and it can't happen.
So don't say, please don't continue to talk about, well, that's the purpose of these meetings because it's not a one-on-one meeting and they used to happen and you made it where that happened.
Alderman, Stacy, you and Alderman Simmons and I have met like twice, but I meet with all the aldermen with the mayor.
So that's not unusual.
That's correct.
You are correct.
It is not one-on-one.
It's the mayor, myself and the alder person from that ward.
That's All of that has happened on these one-on-one meetings with isolating aldermen in one particular meeting and things of this nature.
That is not the appropriate way to do council governing.
You cannot take individuals from council, move them and isolate them to make decisions that the whole council body is supposed to be able to inject their views and opinions and amendments and decisions.
It does not steer from the projection of city manager.
What needs to happen with council because of the way it is being conducted in this fashion is because we permit it to happen.
There's no foundation to this structure is the reason why we're going about things and so on.
We have to change the way that we are going about it.
And if we don't want to hear that these things about one-on-one meetings, then council has to change the way things are going.
City manager is only trying to indulge us on what decision and appearances and things are happening.
Council needs to set that structure up and set any kind of meetings at all before council, before any isolation of council members to conduct any business, straight business with city managers until we recognize collectively that it's inappropriate for us to be singled out or going into office, especially if the mayor is there, That is a complete conflict of interest.
With the mayors with you guys doing that, she is not supposed to be there or he is not supposed to be there.
This is council meetings, not the mayor's meeting with the council, not with the city manager.
No, it's council.
Let us drive that whole perception in our mindset so we can put things in order.
It is out of whack right now things are totally out of order and and we're not saying anything simply because we are allowing administrators to conduct what council is supposed to be doing that is not supposed to that is not the procedure or the proper etiquette of this council and we're we're being We're not objecting to anything that administration is doing.
We're just going along.
We can look at ourselves in the mirror and see the fact that council is ineffective.
We're not doing what council needs to be doing.
Law.
And we can look at ourselves in the mirror and see the fact that council is ineffective.
We're not doing what council needs to be doing.
And until somebody stands up or collectively all together saying, no, we have to get a handle on this thing as council, this is the reason why you're having this discussion about the finance and the decision and amendments and things of of this nature because it's not coming from council.
This is coming from administration and we're asked to vote on things that is inappropriate until we understand what it is that council is supposed to be doing when it comes to governing, then we will stay stagnant all together in where we're at at this point in time and not moving forward.
Now, City Manager Boyer is wanting Boyer wanting to get things moving forward.
Are we holding them back from moving forward?
We don't know.
As a council, we don't know if we're holding.
Alderman Sanders, your informant has expired.
Thank you.
Let's circle back to your discussion of amendment.
You want to.
Can I speak?
Yes.
Okay.
All right.
Thank you, Darren, for what you've.
Are you grateful of the council?
Oh, sorry.
I thought that's what we just said.
No.
Okay.
Then my mistake, I thought it was anybody wanted to speak a third time.
Is it okay if Linda speaks a third time?
Yes.
Yeah.
Okay, Darren, thank you for your explanation to me.
And I'm, I'm connecting it here now.
So when the budget comes out, there's so much budgeted.
And so if it's within the budget, You know, they're allowed to spend that much within the budget and sometimes it's not immunized because you don't know for sure what that, how much everything will be and you know, prices change and all that.
And anything that's over the 10,000 comes to the city anyway, to the city council.
We approve it, the budget or approve that purchasing of that item.
Correct.
Yeah.
I'm correct on that.
And that will continue.
No.
Not according to what's been proposed okay go ahead city manager just just to clarify you do get a chance to vote on that through the consent agenda so if there's something that came up the consent that you you know have an issue with that needs to be looked at you can pull that out of the consent agenda now alderman stacy just mentioned that there's a lot in there and yes there is a lot in and John.
Huffines.
So, um.
So, how do you want to leave your amendment?
You were, you, you, would you like to?
So I, since it is on there, and we do vote on it under the consent agenda, we just have to read our consent agendas.
Correct.
And make sure that we know what's on there.
Um, I, however, would still like to see the city manager underneath the 5,000 to 10,000 department director, finance director, and city manager, because that's a lot of money.
Okay so you'd like to make an amendment make an amendment that city managers on the portion of five to ten thousand yeah adding the city manager to the terminology and is that a motion yes is there a second I think we'll just leave it the way it is because we do get to see it so okay so there's a motion on the floor is there a second then it dies for a lack of second okay so yes I'd like to just maybe give a different perspective I can see how you can look at the numbers and say well it used to be it used to be ten thousand and now it's twenty five thousand for city managers portion and you know the math it looks like we're giving him two and a half times spending power but I I'm going to disagree a little bit on it taking away from council with all due respect.
I look at it more as an adjustment for inflation.
I've sat here, I've been in bid openings for nine years, I can see the cost of the projects going up.
Concrete always just blows my mind.
Wilson-Boltz that now need to be made in America are 10 times, 10 times more sometimes.
I don't look at it as taking away spending power from council.
Back in 2007, council looked at things that were over $10,000, but you could get a lot more for $10,000.
I mean, sometimes 10,000.
I mean, sometimes 10 times more when you're talking some of the nuts and bolts.
Concrete has at least tripled in that amount of time.
So you're still kind of getting the same project, the same dump body, the same equipment.
That you're still approving the same mower that cost $10,000 in 2007 is now going to cost $25,000.
So you're not, it's an adjustment for inflation, not removing anything from council, in my humble opinion.
Alderman Sanders?
Yeah, it is an opinion, exactly, but here's what the problem is.
There's no oversight for finance budgeting, or the spending power of a city manager, or directors, or anyone of that nature.
We're just giving the power to these departments without oversight.
That means that we're not justifying even the spending policy.
I don't get how we just let departments just spend at will, because you can kill a city under $10,000 if it's a expenditure like that.
But here's the problem.
We're not getting to talk about anything procedural when it comes to financial budgeting or budgeting to purchase.
We're not getting the opportunity to even have a location where council can actually go to an individual or department area and talk about these spending things, not administration, something totally independent of the of the council that can govern to help us understand where the monies are flowing because all reports do not come to council when it's spending all reports do not make it to our even knowledge to even know that these kinds of expenditures are needed on what they're for in all of these council needs to be able to look at things from another perspective to know whether or We are not mishandling the taxpayer's dollars and not spending it fibrously, not putting the money appropriate to the locations where they're supposed to be.
We don't have an individual that stands guard over the taxpayer's dollars, in other words.
We don't have that mechanism where we can just come and say, where's the money going?
There's nothing in council that Miller.
We're just being told what is happening, but we're not looking at it from another area.
So we're told what is being spent, whether it meets the standards of the council or not.
But the point is, there's no kind of oversight about the financial budget.
That is one of the most important item through our council is the budgeting that is your most important thing that we should have safeguarded for the citizens of this of this county and until we adopt that kind of a policy or mechanism into inserted it right into the financial Buckeye, and others.
So, if we're giving all the power to the department, then we just allow budgeting to just happen.
And then any director that wants to come up and spend dollars, they can do so without any repercussions or any rebuttal about it.
So, in other words, like it was said earlier, we're giving all the power to the departments without counsel able to scrutinize it.
We have a department that scrutinizes every dollar, every penny.
I don't care what it is.
We have to know what that penny was spent on.
We're not trying to spend the people money or taxpayer's dollars blindly and just giving departments the power to do so.
What I am saying is there's no safeguards, there's no rails, there's none of these kinds I'm not talking about a certain individual.
We got this thing already in place, and it's been in place for so many years, but we have not, all these years, had oversight committee over finance, and why that is not established within- Alderman Sanders, your four minutes has expired.
I'm sorry.
Manager Boyer.
Alderman Sanders, you said there's no oversight.
There is.
So, the oversight starts with the budget, then department heads know what they can spend for projects that we've already defined and approved through the strategic plan, then when those bills come due, our receiving process reviews the invoice for accuracy when it's done or said to be accurate, then it goes to the finance department where it is in process for Payment.
Not only the department head is involved, obviously, but the finance director is involved in paying all the bills.
There is a lot of oversight.
Then those bills come to you every meeting in the consent agenda, which you have multiple days to review if you feel like you want to review it that far, okay, but also justification of spending that that comes through the strategic plan, that comes through the budget process, that comes through the consent agenda, and at the end of the day, you have all the power.
You have all the power.
You don't want to pay a bill.
You can pull a bill for review.
You can decide that you don't want to pay it.
You don't have to pay it, okay?
We are getting to talk.
You and I used to meet, but we have not met in years, okay?
And if there's questions, I'm always available and you can call me any time and I have answered calls from you not that long ago regarding various handicap placards, okay?
There's no location to talk about the administration.
I'm guessing you want to talk with other older persons about it.
That is at the Committee of the Whole.
That is your place to talk about things.
At the budget planning meetings, we have multiple budget planning meetings.
We have multiple opportunities for the community to provide input, so there's ample opportunities to provide that.
Okay, where's the money going?
Okay, we have the largest surplus we've ever had in this city.
We have the largest utility surplus we've ever had.
We have auditors that do an audit that tell you where the money's going, and this year we're doing what's called an ACFIR, which is a narrative that goes with the audit that that will then help describe to anyone in this city where the money is going.
If the audit is not good enough, then the ACFIR will be a part of this.
All reports aren't coming to your attention.
They are.
They are coming in multiple forms on demand whenever it is you would like them.
Where is the money going again?
I mentioned it to you.
We are spending it on projects.
We are paying for payroll.
We are dealing with emergency services.
We are paying for police protection.
We are paying for community development.
We are getting grants.
And I might add, we've received over $80 million in grant fundings in the last five years.
Our budget is $27 million, and we've got $80 million in the last five years.
So that's where the money's going.
See the new water plant on Berchard?
See the new water plant Allen at Forest Road.
See a new wastewater plant over on Hancock.
Do you see the 8.8 miles of roads that are getting built this year?
Do you see the three and a half miles we did last year?
Do you see all the water main replacements?
Do you see all the demos?
That's where the money's going.
Please do not make a point that the money is disappearing.
It is going to needs in the community that we have defined through the strategic planning process which it would be great if you would come to those because that would be a little Klemm, and then Alderman Parker.
If I could please keep in mind for all of us here, this is a first reading of this.
If everybody really has any questions, let's get together and say, hey, I'd like to do this.
I can completely understand the feelings on the consensus consent agenda and somebody being something being and somebody being, something being in there.
Rob just pretty well ran over all of the budget and that kind of stuff.
Any changes in the budget we see and we vote on.
I've been here too long and that's 20 years and we have the most honest financial person that we've had along the line.
When I say honest, I mean, Randy Bukus and Director Richter Richter, have been right on target on the monies they've given us and everything else.
If we need to come back at the next meeting, come back and say, I want to amend this.
You know, if you really feel that as though you need to see something, please don't sit back and say, well, I'll look at it in the consent agenda, because it is easy to get buried in there.
There's a lot in there, okay?
But if you have the feeling that you want to add something, please think about it, talk to Rob, talk to the financial director, do whatever you need to have that clear.
So as you move forward, there isn't really an issue every time we come up here and say I know we did this and that, or this was buried here and there, and it isn't.
This is just being refined to take these guys, take a look at what all is going on this year.
You know these guys deal with something you know like we talked to if something happens today I need an answer today to get it fixed we don't want it to sit for three months so so we need that momentum to keep going but I think there's an opportunity here for all of us that if we've got questions take a look at it if you want amended next time please do it's going to come back to it.
Alderman Parker, yes I'm thinking you know it comes down to trust now we have We have department heads that we all know, we have a city manager, we have a finance director, and we pass that budget and we go over it for hours and hours.
There's a thousand bills a month that go out of this city.
We cannot expect every penny to be passed by us.
And that's why if it goes through them steps that they're not in the budget, they're going to stop.
Or we can, all the people we can go to, we can go to every department head and say, what's this about?
What's this about?
We can come here.
She has an answer to every question she always has.
And so, the money is being spent on the bills it takes to run the city.
And they cannot, every penny, come to us.
So we gotta have some trust in the people we have.
If we can prove that they're not being faithful and truthful, then we make changes.
But right now, every department, the city, the department heads, they got a thing they gotta take care of.
Then budgets come to them, they gotta pay them.
It's in the budget, they argue every year for it.
The City Manager goes over them in here.
This young lady, she spends, doesn't spend one penny that she shouldn't be spending that hasn't been passed through the budget or she brings it to us.
So I just think that we are pushing this way out of line.
Thank you.
I second.
You've already had your second.
So is it appropriate?
Is it on the same subject?
We're on the same item.
You're on the same item.
So are you asking for a third time?
Yes.
Council?
Yes.
I'm getting no response.
So is this a yes or a no for the third time for Alderman Sanders?
Yes, I guess.
Yeah.
All right.
Go ahead.
Yeah.
I just wanted to make, I just want to make one thing clear.
When I, when I was referring to oversight committees and being able to move throughout the city departments at a city council's discretion, that means every individual without being impeded upon should be able to visit every department because we are the oversight whether we know it or not.
We don't have to establish an oversight.
We are the oversight and until we decide to want to go to any department, someone say that we're not.
I just want someone to to oppose that thought, because if that is the case, then we're derelict in duties if we don't feel that we're the oversight committee.
We are, and we have the confidence to go to any department administrator and talk with them without being impeded upon.
And my thing is, it doesn't matter whether we visit the Department of Finance, Public Works, City Manager, or the Mayor's Office.
It doesn't matter, city council does not have to have an appointment to visit these department heads.
There's nothing in council gotta have a structure where it says we have to get, make appointments to talk to anyone within the city council, within the city period.
And so until someone refutes that, then we have to recognize that we have the discretion to meet department heads, to talk to them individually on any subject matter, whether it's finance, utilities, or community, any of those forms.
So if we're not doing that as council, then we're missing the point that we're the and the Oversighters who are the people who are supposed to be asking the questions, not receiving the dictation.
Council does not receive dictation.
We give what it is that needs to be talked about and directed toward the Administrative Department.
It is not the mayor, and this is the way where people have the misconception that it's the mayor that's giving us our marching orders.
We have the wrong concept of what governing is all about.
And that's why I say when we're talking about the taxpayer's dollars, that's who you are.
You are the oversight committee who has to guard every penny of a taxpayer's dollars whether how we do it.
That is how government is structured.
We don't allow power to come from the administration to dictate until the council.
But it's not how it's done.
If you need to get a revision of how governing is supposed to happen, maybe we need another educational course, because a lot of us are just sitting here pandering whether or not what it is that we are supposed to be doing.
But one thing for sure, you and everyone else that's in council are the oversight committee, whether you know it or not but that's neither here nor there I retreat.
Attorney Zeta would like to remind everyone what the rules of council actually are.
All right so just to clarify for everyone that to the extent that an older person does have a question for a department head that those questions per our rules of council are to run through the city manager so you would submit your question to the city manager he'll get it to their appropriate department head Good, and then they'll get their answers and that is I'm reading the city ordinances right now.
It's not by council.
That's disruptive.
Please stop.
Okay.
It's not by council.
Please stop.
Okay.
I'm sorry.
Thank you.
But I will rebut that.
I think we have a motion to move this forward to the next council.
So we have another time to discuss this.
So we're good with that.
Let's move on to item number seven, which is the first reading of ordinance 202635.
Would you please read this?
Ordinance providing for additional stop signs at the intersection of Broadway and Oak. Thank you.
City Manager.
Thank you, Your Honor.
The intersection of Broadway and Oak, there's a lot of people running very rapidly through that intersection and has been requested to improve safety.
I believe we've had two accidents there over the past many years and community has come around asking for two additional stop signs.
And so the staff recommends moving this forward to second reading.
Is there a motion to move this forward?
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Johnson.
Discussion on the ordinance?
Alderman Parker?
I drive through that intersection a lot.
Who's asking for a four-way stop?
I believe that was Alderman, well, Darren, do you recall offhand?
Yes, last week, Mrs. Bradford that was in here that lives close to that intersection had noted that the traffic is very heavy there and there's been a lot of incidents there and we've been keeping an eye on that intersection and I actually have some stats that I want to share from the last two years alone.
Since January 1st of 2025, the police department had changed their software so we really can't Go, beyond that time, but Chief Frosto pulled this.
So in since January 1st of 25, there has been 52 calls of service involving that intersection.
There's been 38 self initiated traffic stops at that location.
There's been two vehicle crashes, including one that was a rollover that involved the hospitalization.
And there's been 34 citations written at that intersection since September 16th of 2025.
So obviously with those statistics, the traffic is moving way too fast from Galena onto Broadway, creating an unsafe situation and and Public Works, reviewed that where the best spot would be to help slow traffic and that's the only intersection except for an odd dog-legged intersection to actually slow traffic down.
This would be my first step to do this and if this doesn't work, then I would come back and ask for a three-way stop at the dog leg as well, but we do need to slow traffic in this.
I would like to make a motion that we not wait to the first week that we move this forward tonight.
Knight.
So are you asking for a suspension of the rules?
Suspension of the rules.
Is there a second?
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Stacy and seconded by Alderman Parker for suspension of the rules.
Suspension is non-debatable and must pass by two-thirds majority.
Madam Clerk, would you please take the role on the suspension only?
Simmons?
Aye.
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
And Johnson?
Aye.
The motion passes six to zero.
Then before you council is the final for this ordinance.
Any further discussion this can get passed this evening?
Alderman Sanders?
Since there's been a suspension of the rule there's not much to chatter about.
I just want to say that whoever's was making that study, if that was you, director, that's a great move because you're absolutely right.
It was bound to happen eventually.
It just had not happened back then.
Maybe we had had an incident, maybe we've had some but has not heard about it.
What I concur with is the fact that it brought attention and awareness to a situation like that.
And I don't know who's doing, who can do these types of studies around the city to determine what is effective when we're protecting the citizens at these crossing areas and things of this nature.
I don't know who's doing these kinds of studies but I think we should incite ourself a little bit more about it you know be a little bit aggressive about it even that much more so yeah that's all that's all I wanted to say if there's no further discussion madam clerk please take the role Simmons Parker I Stacy I Sanders I Klemm and Johnson I the ordinance passes six to zero item number 8 is the first reading of Ordinance 2026-36.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance amending Section 1048.02 of the codified ordinances regarding charges for normal domestic strength waste and hours of operation for wastewater haulers.
Manager Boyer?
Thank you, Your Honor.
At the wastewater treatment plant, we accept bulk haulers.
When they say evacuate a septic tank, we give them a place to dump it at the wastewater We're reviewing the fees attached to that and would like to make some adjustments.
This time we charge $40 for a 500 gallon tank or less, and we'd like to adjust that to $50.
And then for over 500 gallons, we'd like to increase it from 8 cents per gallon to 12 cents per gallon.
And we'd also like to adopt a new portion of the ordinance that identifies a $20 disposal Fee for campers and people that are just dumping domestic waste from their from their campers.
So staff has reviewed this and recommends moving forward with this change.
Thank you.
Is there a motion to move this forward?
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Johnson.
Alderman Sanders.
Yeah, Chief Boyer, with the dumping that we're, I don't know how we got that.
I know it was in place for years.
And it always was a question to me.
And we always talk about those digesters and the possibilities of somebody putting something in our waste treatment line and killing off our good bacteria and Shaffer, The Dysgesters, and then we have to shut them down and start all over again and all of these kinds of things.
Do we have protection measures to prevent a thing of that nature from happening?
Are we doing inspections or examines of all of those kinds of things that is happening?
Yes, we do run a sample at the lab, so if there's anything unusual, we would have the Wright to refuse it.
And yeah, that, but we're basically trying to cover the difference in our time from the last time this ordinance was updated, which has been many years ago.
Okay.
And we'll move on to item number nine, which is the first reading of ordinance 202637.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance amending part two administrative code, title six administration, chapter 242 Weir, Department, Section 242.46, Charges for Ambulance Service.
Chief Cordy.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
Our last ordinance change was in 2022, which at that time, our rates were set at $1,200 for residents, regardless of the level of care, and $1,700 for non-residents.
The 88% of our clients or customers that we service, transport, are Medicare-Medicaid.
We have a couple of different ways that we're able to recuperate or recover money from Medicare-Medicaid.
Part of it is directly from those entities, and then there's another agency called GEMT, which stands for Ground Emergency Medical Transport.
That's a kind of a federal grant program that actually comes out and, I say comes out, but they send out questionnaires and they, based on the information that we provide, they come up with a level that they're willing to reimburse us for, which is a higher level.
At this point, that rate is approximately $1,307.
When we're charging $1,200 for a transport, we're losing out on revenue from the difference.
There's a little bit of a stipulation and difference there.
The GEMT rates get set at the beginning of the year, and the CPI rates that we have are set at the end of June, beginning of July, and actually let me backstep here.
Our GEMT rate is $1,317.
If in the current ordinance it allows us to increase the rate based on the CPI or 5% whichever is lower with the rates according to CPI, that rate is the $1,307.
So we're missing approximately $10 per transport on 88% of the transports that we do.
We looked at a regional study, which showed that we're in the lower third of the agencies in the area, the highest rate being $3,900 for every patient they transport.
And like I said, ours are 1,200 and 1,700.
The proposal that the department is putting forward is to raise our resident rate to $2,000, our non-resident rate to $2,500, and the mileage rate to $20.
So this money does go into our Capital Improvement Fund.
We have a fire department improvement fund that's specific to the fire department, and it does go to replace buildings and vehicles, which we have on a rotation replacement schedule, ambulances approximately every 12 years, and fire trucks approximately every 20 years.
So that's the proposal that we're putting forward at this time.
To move this ordinance forward.
So move.
No, sorry, sorry, Alderman Klemm.
So move, because we have to discuss it anyway, so.
Okay, so we have a motion made by Alderman Klemm, is there a second?
Second.
And a second by Alderman Johnson.
Discussion?
Alderman Johnson.
Yes.
I realize, you know, I'm thankful, very thankful for the fire department and for the ambulance and that they do a great service.
But since the ordinance says that we were not to exceed 5% per year, and we had four years where we did not raise it, I'd like to amend this ordinance to say that the resident rate will be what it should be by our ordinance for the resident and the non-resident rather than raising it to 2,000.
Do you know what those amounts are?
The amount, well, I took and added it up and I got $1,352.80 when I went through and went through the last four years for the UCPI.
But I see down here it says 1305 but I got 1352.80 and 1852.80 for the non-resident.
So you're asking for an amendment to reflect what's written in this memo of what the current rate should be at 1305 and 1850?
Yeah, maybe you want to redo the math to see if it's- And check the math.
Yeah, check the math to make sure that that's accurate because I went through each year Greer and looked up the percentage.
What each year was to see what the rate should be in.
I added up a total of 152.80 should be added to both of our previous rates.
Is that a motion to amend?
Yes.
Is there a second?
Yeah.
I second it.
Oh, you did second it?
Center.
You didn't hear me.
I'm sorry.
My voice is a little gravelly.
Okay.
So we have the amendment made by Johnson's seconded by Alderman Sanders?
Let's discuss just the amendment of moving it to those dollar amounts.
I just want to understand that you're wanting to move it to the dollar amounts that represent For the last four years, that didn't happen.
For four years, yeah.
In other words, we shouldn't be expecting too much of a change in that ordinance structure.
Because what we're saying is, does it do the city or the constituents of this community Does it do the city or the constituents of this community to have a rate charge like that because you're only going one way and that's a that's a very, very costly amount going one way for that kind of dollar.
I don't know what's the procedure tactics that are being used in moving a patient or client or customer to a facility at that expense.
That's a hell of a lot of expense that we're asking an individual one way to put in their budget.
And that might be all they can put in their budget throughout the whole year.
And the 5%, I will agree with that because it doesn't really hurt the pockets of the citizens of Freeport if they need that kind of transportation.
It is very important, but when I hear the competitiveness from other counties to bring our cost of living in a perspective way that we measure up with other counties and other communities that we indulge, that we impose upon our citizens to jack the costs up without justification or anything like that that itemizes those types of costs and until we can see as council members what is driving that cost per item that is being requested of us to do, I think I think we should abstain from even discussing that matter at this time, you know.
So we should, that's my point, a view on that.
We can look at it from another perspective, but I think we should all get together and find out whether or not this type of action is really necessary and really needed for Alderman, Stacey, who is responsible for this 5% that did not happen?
Why did it not happen?
Why wasn't it added to the budget?
Who is over that?
And who failed to make that happen?
I assume it was the fire administration.
I do not know that.
But ultimately it comes down to our department to advise finance and our billing company on what the charges are.
Okay.
I have another.
May I use?
I know from last year, when something happened and all this was discussed, that 46% of every call goes to the firemen, capital account.
And 54% of every fireman's call goes to the city capital account and so instead of raising rates maybe we need to reverse that maybe 54% need to stay with with the fire department, and 46% go to the city.
That's really a budget discussion that has absolutely nothing to do with this amendment.
I know, but I'm just saying, aren't we weighing differences here, like what we can do to make a difference?
Go ahead.
So right now, what's on the floor is just Alderman Johnson's amendment.
However once you guys vote on that whether that fails or passes then we'll get back to the underlying motion which then this would that was more about the underlying okay so scratch that cuz I'm coming back yeah let us go ahead on and do the voting but but go through percentages what goes to the fire department versus general fund is not what this ordinance is about yeah it's It's not.
So let's stay on track.
So let's go back to this amendment that has been first and second or instead of it going from 2000 to 2000, it goes to 1305.
Instead of going to 2500, it goes to 1850.
That's what's on the floor.
So if there's any further discussion on that, Chief?
Yeah, the only addition I want to add onto that, the CPI's, the medical CPI, which is what we have to use for that, is a little bit different than what the general public rates are, and then like I had said earlier, we also have a rate that's set by GEMT, which they will reimburse us up to if our rates are at that level.
Which is right now currently $1,317.
That gets set at the beginning of the year.
The CPI doesn't get set until I think it's June 30th of each year.
So we're running six months behind every time.
So the idea behind this was to get ahead a little bit because we also don't know what those rate increases are going to be every year so that we aren't missing out on revenue that we could be utilizing.
Alderman Johnson.
I would think after we vote on this, maybe we need to come back and revisit what we need to do as far as our percentages and stuff, change the ordinance to incorporate it so that we have what we need later on.
Alderman Klemm, on the amendment?
Yeah, on the amendment would be my understanding if you put in the amendment, then the fee will be, what was the dollar figure on that?
For a resident?
Yeah.
1305.
And it's gonna stay there then, right?
That's what this amendment is.
Yes.
With the already in the ordinance that says can be raised five percent each.
And the chief is basically talking about raising it over above that for other reasons because of last week at the meeting of the whole cow we discussed at some lengths where those fundings went and how they Medicaid paid and all that kind of good stuff.
So I guess one thing I'm saying to you is keep in mind if you raise it to this and you stay there, I can't go off into other budget issues and stuff, but there's far more things in the capital fund, there's a whole bunch of bonding and other stuff that all needs to be paid out of this funding.
So I guess what I'm saying is if you stick to this, you're going to extremely limit the at the time.
It was far more per mile than what we have set up.
I'm not here to tell you that going to the hospital for 1,300 bucks is a deal.
I'm not saying going to the hospital for $2,000 is a deal, but keep in mind if you really restrict this, you got to take a look at where the mathematics is going to come for the whole rest of the department and stuff.
Manager Boyer?
I would I would like to just thank Chief Cordy for doing a very thorough job in presenting a very complex and difficult communication or to communicate issue.
I will just point out at what Chief is asking for or advising that we move forward with that would simply put us between Oregon, Illinois and Belvedere.
We would still be less than Boone County, Cherry Valley, Northwest Fire, North Park, New Milford, Black Hawk and Rockford.
Rockford.
That would basically place us in the middle, and I think that's a fairly reasonable approach, especially given that everybody below us would be like Lee Forever, Byron, Durand, Pecatonica, smaller communities, you know, that may not be as professional as our department.
So for what it's worth, I feel like this is a good compromise, moving things in the right direction, and bear in mind, if if we allow rates to continue to essentially inflate away, then we will have less and less opportunity to not only maintain our professional department, which it very much is, and keeping our equipment up to speed.
So I just wanted to share my thoughts on that.
Okay, so let's go back to what's the motion on the floor.
We're ready for a vote on the amendment.
Yeah, we are.
Madam Clerk, please take the role on the amendment only.
I'm sorry.
That would be, again, to move from 2000 to 1305, from 2500 to 1850, making sure that the math is correct.
Simmons?
Hold it, hold it.
It's already called.
Mayor, hold it.
Well, the procedure is once it's called, it's called.
Yeah, it is.
But my thing is, you changed.
I didn't.
The first and second, you were the second.
I said exactly what you said.
You cannot change or nor can you inject into counsel what your perspective or your thoughts is.
This is counsel.
This is not the mayor.
Okay.
Let's let's stop this.
Attorney Zito is what I said for an amendment, correct?
So when the mayor restated what the motion was for amendment, the person to go to is Alderman Johnson.
Did she accurately reflect what your amendment is?
That's right.
Yeah, she did.
Okay.
Does that satisfy your concern?
Did you think that she said something different?
The mayor spoke out a term, is what I'm thinking.
Well, what you felt is not accurate.
That's what I'm saying.
She's the chair.
I know she did because she's not supposed to been talking while she's making the uh the motion.
You made the motion and now you're still speaking.
You can't be doing that.
And you don't have the floor any longer so let's refrain from talking.
Madam Clerk please take the role on the amendment only.
Simmons?
Um no.
Parker?
No.
Stacy?
Aye.
Shadle?
Sanders?
You second did you have to say yes?
I know yes yeah.
Klemm?
No.
And Johnson?
Aye.
I am at three to three.
Mayor?
No.
And the amendment fails?
You know what?
Three to four.
Okay so we're back at the original so are we ready to move on to the next ordinance because this is going on to the next one if the way it's written.
Okay then we'll go on to item number 10, which is the first reading of Ordinance 20-26-38.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance amending Part 2, Administrative Code, Title 6, Administration, Chapter 242, Fire Department, Section 242.54, Charges for Lift Assistance.
Thank you.
Chief Cordy?
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
This ordinance is to change an ordinance that has been on the Brooks, and has been passed by the state of Illinois for us to charge facilities for lift assists.
We currently charge a hundred and forty five dollars and it based on half our increments.
The proposal is to change it to a hundred and fifty dollars at a straight fee regardless of the amount of time.
This This is not intended to charge residents in their homes or in the public for Lyft Assist.
And Lyft Assist is when somebody has fallen, can't get up, basically.
It also includes ambulance services that either don't provide enough help to move their own Huffines.
It's only intended for facilities, nursing homes, hospitals, assisted living facilities where the resident is paying the facility to provide service and they're not able to provide that and then they rely on the fire department to provide that service for them.
Chief, what was the current amount?
It's $145, but we charge it in half hour increments.
So it was $72.50 every half hour.
And your proposal was $150 without any time limit.
And this would just be two facilities?
Facilities and other ambulance services.
Is there a motion to move this forward?
So moved.
The motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Parker.
Discussion?
Alderman Sanders?
Yeah, Chief.
At these facilities, there's lift assistance.
At these facilities, are we, before we accept these kinds of things, are they considered under emergency power of the city to help at these facilities?
Or is it that we have, how do I want to put it?
We had this mechanism in place for those facilities.
What about ordinary residents?
Is there a separate policy, ordinance, structure, anything like that for?
For a resident in their home, or like I stated, in the public, it's a free charge, or I should say free charge.
It's free to any resident or anyone within the city limits of Freeport that's not in a residential facility.
It's free.
We do not charge.
Is it based on insurance at these facilities?
No.
It has no base.
Is it just plain hard cash or write a check out credit card?
Thomas.
No, it.
We don't charge the resident in the facility, we charge the facility.
Oh, the facility?
Yes.
Not the residents in the facility, the facility.
I got you.
Okay.
Nice.
I understand now.
Chief, could you tell me how many of these we do a year?
Just a ballpark.
Clark, as far as residential ones, we probably do a dozen, residential ones we probably 10 to 12 a week.
Facilities, probably six or eight a year.
It all depends.
It runs in streaks.
We also have a ramp system that we've utilized with other ambulance services before.
If there's a patient that they have that takes extra manpower to move, we purchase these ramp system that we can put through the doorways so we're not having to try and carry a large cot through the doorway and then up and down stairs.
So that's one of the situations where we build another service for a lift assist and that usually takes, we've done it with probably six or seven of our personnel.
So it's not always just a two person job for five minutes.
The reason I asked that and my concern was, are we talking a minor detail here or are we talking a big deal?
To me, if you're going from 140 or this or that, you know, I'd say, God raise it more than that, you know, considering the fact that you're going to a facility that already should have the personnel to do it, theoretically, you know, that's the only reason I asked the question.
Yes, and that's why the state of Illinois passed a law to allow us to do that.
We'll move on to the next meeting.
Item number 11 is the first reading of ordinance 202639.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance amending the master parking map to provide for additional ADA parking stalls at the intersection of Spring and Chicago.
Thank you.
Manager Boyer?
Thank you, Your Honor.
It has come to our attention that we don't have sufficient ADA parking spaces in the vicinity of Lindo and the Wagner House.
So staff has reviewed the map and has proposed adding two ADA parking stalls adjacent to the Wagner House and the Lindo Theater.
And the map is in your packet.
Staff recommends moving this forward to second reading.
Is there a motion to move forward?
Second.
A motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Johnson.
Discussion on the ordinance.
Item number 12 is the first reading of ordinance 202640.
Could you please read this?
Ordnance amending chapters 1240, 1256, 1258, 1259, 1442, and 1468 of the codified ordinances Thank you, Madam Mayor.
The Community and Economic Development Department periodically reviews city ordinances to improve clarity, usability, and effectiveness.
A draft ordinance was reviewed by both Planning Commission and Building Commission for both edits and approval.
The primary purpose of the ordinance is to consolidate most of the sign-related regulations Huffines into a single chapter, which is now Chapter 1468 to improve clarity and ease of navigation for property owners and contractors who are seeking to construct or modify signage.
Some additional amendments and clarifications were also incorporated, and I'll just run through some key changes.
We updated the sign permit fees and fee structures just slightly.
We established regulations for temporary and exempt signs, permitted wall or citywide and clarified what signage and a mural definitions are, modernized illuminated sign regulations by incorporating the lighting standards that was passed at the last council meeting, established roof signs as a prohibited sign type, but then also we do have a variance in exemptions Williams, Section, which is Section 1468.28, and then establish new standards for home occupation signs, and then reduce the maximum signs of new billboards.
That one was significant, but that is also because billboards are becoming smaller in general as they're moving to electric.
They do not need to be as big to give this same emphasis and to catch people's eye.
And then we streamlined approvals by allowing some administrative reviews of minor sign variances.
That's like, if it's slightly over, you know, 10, if it's at under 10% slightly over, then it gives us a little bit of leeway into that.
This supports and fosters safe and inclusive community by ensuring that signage is installed Holt, and maintained in a safe manner.
And then it's also responsible and efficient government by addressing some discrepancies between chapters and also it used to be all over and so we're just kind of bringing it together so that it's in one clear space and we don't have different language telling you different things.
Amending doesn't require any additional funding.
Staff, the Building Commission, the Planning Commission recommend approval of amending.
All the existing chapters pertaining to signs, following a first and second reading by the City Council.
Is there a motion to move this forward?
So moved.
Second.
We have a motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Johnson.
Discussion on this ordinance.
Item number 13 is the first reading.
Alderman Simmons, did you have something?
Director Heimerdinger, do you want us to suspend the rules on that?
On the signed ones?
Well, we could.
Yeah, let's do that.
Okay.
I'll make a motion to suspend the rules.
What did you say?
I couldn't hear you.
I am making a motion to suspend the rules.
Second.
Alderman Stacy, were you the second?
Okay, before you is suspension of the rules.
Again, it's non-debatable and is passed by two-thirds majority.
Madam Clerk, would you please take the suspension only?
Simmons?
Aye.
Parker?
Aye Stacy aye Sanders aye Klemm aye and Johnson aye the motion passes six to zero to suspend so before you is the final passage any further discussion ma'am clerk please take the roll Simmons aye Parker aye Stacy aye Sanders aye Klemm aye and Johnson aye and the ordinance Passes 6-0.
Mayor, before you move on, I have a question because for the parking spaces, I just assumed Klemm or someone would suspend the rules.
Is it possible for us to go back to that?
How would I, how would I do that?
Let's take a council vote.
Like, how would I, would I have motion to revisit?
Or like, what would I do?
I make a motion to go back to item number 11.
Is there a second?
Second.
So there's a motion made by Alderman Simmons, seconded by Alderman Stacy.
Madam Clerk, please take the roll on going back to item number 11.
Simmons?
Aye.
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
And Johnson?
Aye.
The motion to recall passes 6-0.
Okay, so this ordinance is now on the floor.
I make a motion to suspend the rules and move this forward to second reading.
Is there a second I motion made by Alderman Simmons seconded by Alderman Johnson again suspension of the rules is non debatable and was passed by two thirds majority please take the role so this is on item number 11 master Parking Map for an ADA stall at Spring and Chicago.
Simmons.
Aye.
And this is suspending the rules.
And this is suspending the rules, Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Sanders?
What if I wanna debate that?
You can't, it's non-debatable.
It's yes or no.
See, I knew that was gonna come.
I knew that was gonna happen.
Yeah, go ahead.
Klemm?
Aye.
And Johnson?
Aye.
Okay, so the rules are suspended.
Council is the second reading of ordinance 202639.
Any further discussion?
Madam Clerk, please take the roll.
Simmons?
Aye.
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Sanders?
If you don't, you better be the sneaker.
Please stay focused.
I am.
I am focused.
Come on.
Okay.
Klemm?
Aye.
And Johnson?
Aye.
And the Ordinance passes 6-0.
Okay, now let's move on to where we were before, which would be item number 13, which is the first reading of 2026-41.
Could you please read this?
Ordinance approving special use permit application at 1001 West Galena Avenue, submitted by Domino Liquors, doing business as Tony's Bar to examine the special use of a B11 restricted retail business to allow restaurants Thomas with outdoor serving areas unless otherwise permitted as a sidewalk cafe or parklet, 1252.01B10.
Thank you.
Director Heimerdinger.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
Tony's Oyster Bar is the subject property who came in for a special use permit, which is a well-established restaurant and tavern along West Galena Avenue corridor.
The business would like to offer its patrons an option of outdoor seating.
Tony Ho's Food Trucks at the property and outdoor seating option would be able to attract more guests.
On June 2nd, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval with the condition that the seating is limited to the proposed area, which is 80 feet south of Galena Avenue right away and east of the building.
If you scroll down just a bit, I think there's a image on the screen that kind of shows you.
It is that red box right there.
Thank you, Don.
I appreciate it.
So that is the location where the outdoor lighting, the outdoor seating would occur, not on the Galena side.
It was voted by five yeas, zero nays for Zoning Board of Appeals, and then on June 11th, the Planning Commission recommended approval by a vote of six yeas, zero nays, and zero Absumptions, and it passed all LaSalle's and Claire factors.
Staff recommends the approval of the special use for the restaurant to allow for outdoor dining at 1001 West Galena Avenue.
We are requesting a suspension of rules as council is the next council is three weeks away and this is a small business Johnson.
And so I usually ask for a suspension of rules for small businesses and residential so that they don't have to wait, especially since it's summertime and they want to be outside.
Is there a motion to move this forward?
So moved.
Second.
A motion made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Johnson.
Motion to suspend the rules.
Second.
And then we have a motion to suspend the rules made by Alderman Klemm, seconded by Alderman Johnson.
Same rules apply.
Madam Clerk, please take the role on the suspension only.
Simmons?
Aye.
Parker?
Aye.
Stacy?
Aye.
Sanders?
Aye.
Klemm?
Aye.
And Johnson?
Aye.
The suspension passes six to zero.
So then before you is the final for this ordinance.
Any further discussion?
Christian, Madam Clerk, Alderman Sanders.
Where is this?
I really can't get this.
It's on Galena and Whistler.
Right across from Maria's and the car wash.
Galena and Whistler?
Across from Maria's pizza and the car wash.
Oh, okay.
Okay, Maria's pizza.
There's a car wash up there?
Mm-hmm.
Simmons, Parker, Stacy, Sanders, Klemm, Johnson, and the ordinance passes 6-0.
Item number 14 is an update on a request for an ADA parking stall on West Broadway made during the public comment at the Committee of the Whole meeting.
Manager Boyer.
Thank you, Your Honor.
At the last Committee of the Whole meeting, one of our residents came in requesting this parking space, having also noted that she had requested it in the past.
And in looking into it, it was approved by Council on April 1st.
For whatever reason, the signage was not installed, so staff will be installing that right of way.
Darren, did you have Do you have anything you wanted to add to that?
Yeah, I would like to apologize to Miss Shanae Bradford.
Like Rob said, it was approved prior, and we didn't get the signage up.
She was correct.
So we went ahead and moved forward with ordering the sign and doing the locate.
So I would hope that the sign would be put up yet this week.
But again, our apologies to her, and thank you for her bringing it to our attention.
Just something that slipped through the cracks.
Thank you.
Reports from department heads.
Finance?
Thank you, Your Honor.
I would just like to let Council know that in July we should be having the presentation of our audit for 2025.
And as Manager Boyer referenced, it will contain additional details.
As we put it together, it's called an annual comprehensive financial report.
It'll have a lot more statistics and information about the past year and the Huffines.
Thank you.
Community development.
Thank you.
I just wanted to announce Freeport FindFest is this week on Thursday, Friday, Saturday, June 18th through the 20th.
We have 150 garage sales registered.
You can find them either one of two ways.
The first way is that you can use the Google Map, the Freeport FindFest Google Map, and if you click on the pins and you click, you can expand the details and know when all individual Nez, John, David, and Lee, and so on.
And there's a lot of links here.
Um, but, but for, um, for the, um, for the individual sales, um, what days and times they're available, you can also, um, in addition to that, we have a PDF map.
So if you don't really want the Google map, um, if you don't really like that one, we also have a PDF and it lists the same thing.
It also lists, um, you know, what every individual sale is going to, uh, be offering to you.
So hopefully you can go out and do some shopping and find some, some Just a few project updates.
The municipal parking lot, the infamous missing drains should be cut in later this week.
They are actually under the pavement so we won't be installing them.
They're already installed and so that should fix all the issues.
It was repainted over the weekend and looks pretty good and hopefully we'll be able to get that opened up pretty soon.
We have railings to install and the fence coming yet.
So that should end up wrapping up that project other than the electrical panel that's still on that quarter.
Tomorrow we'll be paving Concord from Cimarron to Laurel.
Shaping is left on the other section from Laurel to Middlebury.
I think the last driveway was poured today.
So that street's coming along nicely and we'd like to thank the Helm Group for all and all their hard work on that project.
Gladewood, with the excessive rains that we had last week, we had some damage to the edge of the roads that we're going to have to repair and add some curb to.
It's one of those things that happens this time of the year when you get extreme rainfalls, which we had back to back.
So we will be addressing that with the construction team.
Dewey Street, I believe it's the north half of the curb, will be done tomorrow.
So we're asking all the residents to be on the other side of the street and evacuate early because the curb machine will be coming.
That project's coming along nicely.
We're probably, I'm going to say a couple of weeks away from final paving through that corridor, but we're making good progress.
We are having some difficulties with the ComEd polls and we're making and some design adjustments to deal with those.
So we would like to thank Fishers for all their hard work on those projects this season.
The Park Street is pretty much completed.
There's some restoration going on out there.
We will be moving to Carol, Dewey, and I believe Benson shortly.
So lots of busy works on the streets this year, trying to keep up with it all.
Fire?
Nothing, Your Honor.
Please?
Nothing, Your Honor.
Please?
Nothing, Your Honor.
IT?
City Manager?
Just one thing I would like to highlight, and Darren, feel free to jump in on this.
We are looking at some pretty extensive issues with the collection system on Benson.
So just bear in mind, we have a number of streets where we're seeing collapse of the sewer system and or the stormwater system.
So I anticipate we're going to have to contend with some of those things.
The scope of which is not fully defined right now because we haven't put the camera down there to visually inspect it yet but I just wanted the council to be aware of that in the next several meetings we may have some change orders related to that coming forward on those projects thank you and we won't be meeting as a council again until July 6th so have a safe and happy 4th of July and happy birthday Alderman Klemm.
Thank you.
Alderman Simmons.
So we have the Juneteenth celebration.
There's a Juneteenth celebration coming up this weekend.
It will be Friday morning, Friday morning and afternoon, Saturday and Sunday in Taylor Park.
So hopefully everyone can make it out there.
Alderman Parker?
Only that Yes, Director Michelle, it's not a lack of trust or a lack of ability for you to do your job.
It's a lack of communication.
That all Alderman have the liberty to speak to some directors and I'll keep it nice and sweet right there.
As Alderman Simmons said, Juneteenth this coming weekend, Friday will be kids day in and I will be in the park.
Saturday, we will be having a parade and an all-day event and Sunday, we will be having praise and worship in the park.
So, we ask that you all come out and join us and let's have some fun and a 5th Ward Neighborhood Watch meeting will be tomorrow at Ampire, and Carol.
Thank you.
Alderman Sanders?
Yeah, I just want to emphasize on the project that, like Darren was mentioning earlier, is on the way in my neighborhood, which is something that should be recognized and notable at this time, knowing that my constituents is silent.
That's a good thing, because they can see things are getting done in my neighborhood or in my community or my district.
And that's a good thing.
I just wanted to throw that out there.
Yeah, Juneteenth is a very great day Mayor there.
I'd like to see Sister Johnson and Brother Klemm in the fire department, especially the fire department, to be there.
And so, so whatever community events are going on throughout the community, we expect to see everybody being a part of it on that day.
Klemm.
I'd just like to thank the police for the work they did this week on recovering a couple weapons.
Thank you guys for the great work you're doing.
We appreciate it.
Only other thing I'd say before we come up to the July meeting, let's make sure we have our discussions on the fire thing.
So if there's any questions that you need answered, please contact Rob to get to the chief for Alderman, Johnson, Yes, we have our neighborhood watch meeting this Thursday at 630 at the Laurel Street Church.
That concludes council announcements.
Public comment.
Okay.
First off, regarding the ambulance service, I wasn't aware of 88% were our citizens, so I couldn't make exact details, but a 5% increase according to my $4.8 million original Boyer, Mr. Boyer, I know you recognize my family name from your time in Freeport Business and Civic Circles.
However, my 87-year-old stepmother Betty Corbin does not own 417 South Hancock Avenue.
I do.
By passing me to contact her regarding my personal assets, especially Huffines.
Thank you.
And her concurrent role chairing the City Hall Building Task Force from 2011 until April of 2012 was entirely inappropriate.
Tempting to leverage her past civic connections, capital planning expertise, or exploiting my family dynamics to circumvent the actual property owner ends today.
All future communications regarding this property must come directly to me in writing.
All communists can be sent to me, Scott Corbin, at 417 South Hancock Avenue, Freeport.
Regarding my property, it is a legally zoned M1 light industrial, meaning standard residential setbacks and yard rules do not apply.
Furthermore, your contractor, Darren Stekel, threatened regarding a forced setback demolition and his verbal intimidation that a judge will only Walsh, 57,000 assessed market value if I reject your informal $100,000 offer.
Our offer are legally inaccurate, coercive, and border on bad faith extortion.
My shop, my four-star garage extended over the rear boundary line.
The city of Freeport just purchased that underlying lot, thereby inheriting the encroachment.
More importantly, my shop footprint was officially authorized under the and the Missile Building Permit voted and approved by the Freeport City Council itself back in 2010 for the prior owner during my father's tenure all the minute large.
The city cannot legally or retroactively penalize me for an infrastructure footprint it officially permitted on the public record over a decade ago, nor can its representatives weaponize arbitrary tax assessment numbers to scare me out of a constitutional right to just compensation.
3 Years ago, your economic developer, Wayne Duckman, told me the city isn't into selling land.
We're into buying more and told me I needed to bring more to the table.
Well, Mr. Boyer, I'm bringing it to the table today.
I've already secured independent industrial contract replacement bids and historical corporate insurance replacement profiles.
Those figures combined with the 25 to 30 percent market appreciation people has experienced since the city first froze my property life three years ago.
Thank you, Mr. Corbin.
Your time has expired.
Your $100,000 offer is fundamentally deficient.
Mr. Corbin, Mr. Corbin, your time has expired.
You are causing a destruction, Mr. Corbin.
Please abide by the council rules.
Thank you very much.
I need two legal statements signed.
Are there any other public comments?
Go ahead, Tommy.
By the time she gets up there, you'll be fine.
Freespawn, you did a good job and you because you know what to do you are smart on the road and everything and what told Jodi Miller she he does a good job a mayor and what that Teddy Baker day you said?
I saw the sign.
It's July 10th, 11th, and 12th.
July 10th, and 11th, and 12th.
And Daren, you did a good job telling that Queen down.
We want to thank you very much to do that.
Go ahead, Sue.
Hi, my name is Sue Cook, and I am over on Winchester.
And I am over on Winchester.
And I just wanna let you guys know that there was something spectacular out at the observatory this past summer.
And we had, they offered a class there.
It was phenomenal.
This class should be getting out through GFP because it was a phenomenal class.
We have brilliant scientists out there.
Jim, Bill and Tom opened the heavens.
It was amazing, absolutely amazing.
So I definitely wanna give the observatory Schultz, and I'm gonna shout out because they deserve this shout out.
They should be listed as a tourist attraction because that is what they are.
They're amazing.
Also, if you're going out for the Freeport finds, there are vendors as well.
So, when you're buying the stuff at the Freeport finds, go over to the Juneteenth celebration because there are vendors going to be at the Juneteenth celebration as well in Taylor Park Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.
Please show up folks.
Really, please show up.
Thank you very much.
Any other public comments?
Oh yeah, you do, I'm sorry, go ahead.
There's other in person.
We received an email back in February that did not get read, so we're trying to make up for that.
My name is Robert and I'm a resident of Ward 5, Freeport, Illinois.
I sent you an email about a city ordinance with the following subject line on February 8th, 2026, 5:11 PM The subject was request to be read at meeting on February 9th, 26 during public comments.
I listed the violations by highlighting and commenting on the ordinance as well as posing my question at the end and it was not read at the meeting that was held on 2-9-26.
I was curious as to why it was not read.
Below you will find the original email.
The question is at the bottom in bold.
Italicized, and in brackets.
Please read this document at your next meeting.
Thank you.
What was request to be read on February 9th, King's Tobacco and Market Dispensary Permit.
Under Illinois law, the penalty for a drug-related crime can be upgraded if you committed that offense on or 500 feet from any church, synagogue, or other building, structure, or place used primarily for religious Worship, C-720-ILCS-570-407.
A church or synagogue are clearly places of worship within the meaning of the law, but what about other structures where it's less than obvious?
To determine whether a church is a place of worship, a building need not have a particular physical characteristic of a church.
Instead, the court looks at whether the structure is is primarily used for religious purposes.
Thus, a Salvation Army building was deemed a church because people came to its chapel solely for the purpose of attending religious services.
See people versus sparks.
Even where a building is a place of religious worship, it must be one on the date of the offense.
In highlight, there is a church next door to King's Tobacco and Market.
Another heading, Cannabis Dispensing Organization Definition Scope of Sales They are authorized to sell cannabis flower, cannabis infused products, cannabis seeds, paraphernalia, and related supplies.
Just references of Freeport Ordinance.
127406 Adult Use Cannabis Dispensing Organization In those zoning districts in which an adult use cannabis dispensing organization may be located, the proposed facility must comply with the following.
A. Facility may not be located within 1,500 feet of the property line of a pre-existing public or private nursery school, preschool, primary or secondary school, or licensed daycare.
In another highlight, Faith Academy Learning Center is located as a private school by the school board of the state of Illinois.
Back to the ordinance.
Learning centers.
Madam Clerk, your time has expired.
Is there any other public comments?
I stand before you tonight as a citizen.
I don't know who I need to speak with on this matter.
However, I was totally blown when I opened up my water bill and it was $290.23 and I am the only one who lives in my house.
Home.
I was told that it was a guesstimate and not a true reading.
Why are we having guesstimates?
I was also told that next month it will balance out and I would probably have a credit.
I don't know what all this is about but I will know and I I hope and trust that I have no bill and a credit because it was $20 shy of tripling this month and it was a guesstimate reading.
How often do we have these guesstimate readings?
I'm told that the system just automatic does it.
I need some understanding on this matter and I would like to know how often does it happen?
Are people aware that this is happening?
You better be opening up your water bill because you will not know from one month to the next if you're are being built correctly.
Thank you.
There's no further public comments.
I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.
Motion made by Alderman Simmons, seconded by Alderman Parker.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Have a good.