2026-09-01 - City Council

09:53Good evening and welcome to the

09:55September 1st Neighborville City Council

09:57meeting. Roll call.

09:58>> Worley

09:59>> here.

09:59>> Gibson

10:00>> here.

10:01>> Here.

10:02>> Jane

10:02>> here.

10:03>> Kelly.

10:04>> McBroom

10:05>> here.

10:05>> Say

10:06>> here.

10:07>> White

10:07>> here. Wilson

10:08>> here. Please rise and join me in the

10:11pledge of

10:11>> allegiance

10:20to the standyice

10:27for all.

10:33As we begin tonight, I want to recognize

10:35our city clerk, Dawn Portner, as this

10:37will be her last meeting as an employee

10:40of the city of Neapville. After a decade

10:42of service, she has served in various

10:45roles, and Dawn will be moving on to

10:46lead the downtown Neighborville Alliance

10:49as its next executive director. I want

10:52to thank you, Dawn, for your continued

10:53dedication to Neighborville, and we look

10:56forward to working you with you

10:59or working you, I guess, in your new

11:01capacity.

11:03uh representing downtown.

11:07Thank you.

11:16I also want to introduce Miranda Barfus

11:18who will be filling the role of city

11:20clerk beginning September 11th. She'll

11:22be sworn in on that day. Miranda joined

11:24the city in 2020 and for the past six

11:27years she's worked with community

11:28organizations, elected officials,

11:30commissions, residents and departments

11:32across the entire city. We look forward

11:35to working with you Miranda as you take

11:37on this new role and we know you're

11:38going to do a great job.

11:47First item on the agenda this evening is

11:49public form. I'd like to remind everyone

11:50of the citizen participation rules in

11:52the city's municipal code for speaking

11:54at city council meetings. Speakers are

11:56asked to present their comments in a

11:57respectful and courteous manner.

11:59Speakers should stay on topic and be

12:01cognizant of their words. Personal

12:02attacks on council members, staff, other

12:04speakers, or members of the audience are

12:06not allowed. If inappropriate language

12:08or comments are expressed during this

12:10meeting, you will be asked immediately

12:11to stop commenting. Also, for audience

12:13members, there is no cheering and no

12:15jeering. Actions such as applauding,

12:17cheering, finger snapping, booing, or

12:18any other noises during or at the

12:20conclusion of any remarks made by any

12:21speaker are not allowed. This occurs,

12:23you will be asked to stop immediately,

12:24and if it continues to persist, and it

12:26will recess the meeting until the

12:28audience abides by the rules in our city

12:29code. No speaker should ever feel

12:32intimidated by the crowd. Audience

12:34disruption is meant to intimidate those

12:36speaking, and I will not allow it in the

12:37chambers. Audience members with signs, a

12:40sign must not block any other audience

12:42member's view. Speakers are given three

12:44minutes to address the city council. To

12:45help speakers stay within the

12:47three-minute time frame, we have a timer

12:48located on the side and dis to your

12:51right. It will give the visual cue when

12:53the three minutes are expiring. This

12:54will help the speakers conclude their

12:56comments in a timely manner without

12:57being cut off. The timer will buzz when

13:00it hits zero and we will alert the

13:01speaker that their time is up. If the

13:04speaker's name is called and they are

13:05not in the room, we will move on to the

13:07next speaker and we will not go back.

13:09Speakers are encouraged to remain in

13:11council chambers until the conclusion of

13:13public forum in the event council

13:15members want to ask follow-up questions.

13:18Also, when your name is called, please

13:19come and have a seat in the front row.

13:22Mrs. Shots, please call the speakers.

13:25>> There are six speakers signed up for

13:27public forum. The first speaker is

13:29Shannon Catrell, followed by John Doyle,

13:31Bob Carlson, and Joe Hus.

13:39Hi, good evening. I'm coming to talk

13:42about the district 3 203 bus issue that

13:45we're having. I know I've emailed many

13:48of you multiple times and I appreciate

13:50some of you getting back to me. Uh we're

13:53looking at elementary age kids being

13:56asked to spend almost two hours, in my

13:59kid's case, two hours and 15 minutes on

14:02a bus in the morning to get from

14:05the middle of Neighborville to Bethany

14:08Lutheran School. I emailed the district

14:11a couple of times with questions such

14:13as, "Who's keeping these kids safe? How

14:16are children who are 10, maybe 11 at

14:20most, expected to sit on a bus for two

14:22hours without distractions, access to a

14:26bathroom, being able to say what they

14:30need to say and move around when they're

14:32supposed to remain calm and sitting on a

14:34bus. Unfortunately, as I said, I've

14:37reached out to many of you because I

14:39haven't received a response from the

14:41district. Initially to my email, I

14:44received something that was about their

14:45carbon action plan and keeping bus rides

14:48to an hour at most. Well, none of that's

14:53happening. And when I asked about safety

14:55on the bus, such as my son who's ADHD

14:58and autistic, he needs to be able to

15:01move. So, who is on the bus monitoring

15:04him and keeping him from distracting

15:06other riders? who's keeping the other

15:09riders from picking on him because he

15:11repeats himself when he tries to keep

15:13himself calm. What is the district going

15:16to do to keep these kids safe? And I

15:18haven't received a response. I know that

15:21you guys don't deal so much with the

15:23district, but I'm one of many parents

15:26who just can't let their kids ride the

15:27bus in the morning. And to be cynical

15:31about it, it appears that that's what

15:33the district's trying to do is to cut

15:35down on the number of kids that are

15:37utilizing the bus so they can put a win

15:39in their carbon action plan. Oh, look,

15:41look at all the buses we've saved

15:43because these kids aren't riding

15:45anymore.

15:48So, that's what I came here to say.

15:50Hopefully, we can find some kind of

15:52solution in the near future.

15:58Thank you. Next speaker.

16:01>> The next speaker is John Doyle.

16:18John Doyle, Nepville resident. Thank

16:20you. You know, sorry I couldn't stay

16:22full time last session, but there were

16:23some pretty big statements made on the

16:24record by the city that I wanted to

16:26revisit. You know, if if over the

16:28history of the utility, the cost has to

16:30equal rates and our rates are currently

16:32undercharging, doesn't that mean at some

16:34point we're going to have to overcharge

16:36for everything to balance out? Isn't

16:37that the only way for both those

16:38statements to be true? So, that of

16:41course begs the question, at what point

16:43over the history of the utility do you

16:44plan on having rates be high enough to

16:46overcharge?

16:49The undercharging is is not a recent

16:51thing. Each of the last four rate

16:52studies have shown that our projected

16:54revenues would be below cost of service.

16:56So, aren't we committing to overcharging

16:58people in the future? And the second

17:00question would be, is that strategy

17:01considered good governance and a proper

17:03way to set rates for a municipal owned

17:05utility?

17:06Regardless, it has big implications on

17:08our energy procurement decision. And

17:10here's why. It was also mentioned that

17:13for at least one month in particular,

17:15the undercharging explained the

17:16difference between our price and

17:17commeds. Remember several months ago

17:19when I said affordability is a policy

17:21choice that had very little to do with

17:22our energy procurement. This is exactly

17:24the kind of thing I'm talking about. The

17:26price difference is here is because of

17:28policy choices we make on how to operate

17:30our utility, not because of our

17:32partnership with IMEA.

17:34As the mayor pointed out, the cost of

17:36the utility can be split into energy

17:37procurement, which is the big purple

17:39part, and the cost of running utilities,

17:42which is everything else. Our PPA by

17:44design ensures we are recovering the

17:46exact full cost of energy procurement

17:48and our IMA bills are paid in full every

17:51month on time. So any undercharging

17:53that's happening has to exist within the

17:56costs of running the utility.

17:59You know, no one wants us to sell to

18:00KMED and we're not asking for you to do

18:02another rate study before committing to

18:04an energy plan. In fact, I think we

18:06finally have everything we need to get a

18:07commitment at the workshop. We just want

18:10the record to be honest about why our

18:12rates are lower than KMEDs. To claim

18:13it's because of our deal with IMA simply

18:15isn't true. We are cheaper because of

18:18how we operate our utility. Here's what

18:20I would have paid last year 2025 under

18:22KMED versus what I actually paid in

18:24Neapville. My power costs with IMA are

18:26actually higher than they would have

18:27been with KMED. Even though my total

18:29bill is lower, you have to evaluate

18:32these suppliers on their own merits, not

18:34just look at the final bill. We can take

18:36these costsaving measures that we have

18:38for the utility to any supplier

18:40including a PJ and market market

18:41participation.

18:43This is why you can't just look at one

18:45bill and the other bill and point at the

18:47small one. It's more complicated than

18:48that. Thank you.

18:52>> Thank you. Next speaker.

18:53>> The next speaker is Bob Carlson followed

18:55by Joe Hus and Scott Lee.

19:02>> Good evening. My name is Bob. Climate

19:04alarmist. in attendance this evening

19:07regularly warn of a cataclys a

19:09cataclysmic future if we don't act now.

19:12Doomsayers have been predicting climate

19:14disasters for eons. Al Gore's

19:17preposterous, now false prediction in

19:192008 could be exhibit A.

19:23[clears throat]

19:23Not one of these apocalyptic predictions

19:26has ever come true. Go back to the

19:281980s. Acid rain was killing lakes and

19:31forest read a New York Times headline.

19:34The coverage of this pending disaster

19:36was relentless. I was there. Heard it

19:38all. All the maple trees in the

19:40Northwest were expected to be dead in a

19:42decade. Maple syrup gone. It never

19:45happened. Hypocrisy runs parallel with

19:48some of the alarmist. In 2021, Jeff

19:51Bezos traveled into space. Replying to

19:54an inquisitive newspaper reporter on the

19:57brief trip. He enthusiastically replied,

20:00"Fill her up. I want to go again." Note,

20:03he didn't say charge her up. He needs

20:06liquid rocket fuel, not windmills. In

20:10that same paper, Mr. Bezos spoke

20:12negatively about fossil fuels. Which is

20:15it, Jeff? Not mentioned in this

20:17irresponsible sprint to eliminating all

20:19fossil fuels are two key points central

20:21to current and future Neighborville

20:23residents. First, clean wholesale

20:26natural gas prices are 60% less than

20:29they were 20 years ago. Can you think of

20:32anything else costing less now, let

20:35alone 60% less. And second, our current

20:38power supplier owns their own resources,

20:41and they offer municipalities

20:43attractively priced long-term contracts.

20:46This allows them to deliver more

20:48affordable energy prices to Neapville

20:50residents. Prices that are 20 to 30%

20:53less, at least for now, than what KMED

20:57charges in nearby suburbs. I'm not

21:00anti-renewables, but be reasonable. Why

21:03mandate future deadlines of where we

21:05must be? Imagine going to Henry Ford's

21:08parents uh when Henry was only six years

21:11old. Mr. and Mrs. Ford, we need young

21:14Hank to perfect the automobile

21:16production line by the time he's 10,

21:18four years from now. We can't wait.

21:21William and Mary would have probably

21:23exchanged a brief glance, then said in

21:25unison, "We're not there yet. Can we

21:28lighten up with the hair on fire

21:29mentality that accompanies so much of

21:31this relentless and at times

21:34questionable

21:35environmental agenda? I ask these

21:38supercharged environmentalists to

21:40maintain their energy, puns intended.

21:43However, adding just a fraction of

21:45common sense, frugaless, and reality to

21:48your messaging would elevate the

21:50substance and tolerance of your

21:53position. Thank you, mayor and council

21:55members for this opportunity to speak. I

21:57yield back.

21:59>> Thank you. Next speaker.

22:01>> The next three speakers are Joe Hus,

22:04Scott Lee, and Tim Fero.

22:18I'm Joe Hus volunteer and I'm building

22:21on the strategy team's presentation from

22:23the last meeting and I'll focus on three

22:26items

22:28uh regarding the energy market. Solar

22:31and battery continue to dominate the

22:33first half of this year. However, my

22:35message isn't that we should select a

22:36technology today, but that we should

22:39recognize that the electricity market is

22:41changing rapidly. Solar generation has

22:43grown by more than a,000% in the last

22:46decade and battery by more than 4,000%

22:49in just the last five years. As

22:52technology and policy evolve,

22:54flexibility is more useful than trying

22:57to predict what the market will look

22:58like in a few decades. That's why it's

23:02important for the city to agree on a

23:05vision before comparing specific

23:07options. One potential vision is to

23:10provide affordable, reliable electricity

23:13while preserving future flexibility and

23:16advancing Neapville sustainability

23:18goals. The wording is intentionally

23:20broad. It doesn't pre-seelelect a

23:22supplier or technology. It gives council

23:25a durable standard for judging choices

23:28today while protecting future council's

23:30ability to respond to new information.

23:34To implement that vision, we recommend

23:37hiring an expert to support this

23:39infrequent high-V value decision. An

23:42expert could provide deep market

23:43knowledge and understanding of

23:45specialized commercial risks and

23:47experience with the energy selection

23:49process. an advisor um should support

23:52the city's decision-making process but

23:55not make the decision for it. The MBR

23:59RFP highlights why expertise is

24:01valuable. We did a few things with that

24:03RFP that likely drove up prices. Vendors

24:06were given just five months from award

24:08to negotiate a three-party contract with

24:11IMEA and begin delivering par power

24:13power. By comparison, IMEA proposed 10

24:17years notice. I just as I don't think 10

24:20years notice is appropriate, I don't

24:22think five months notice is either. For

24:25context, the fastest new generation

24:27projects typically take two to three

24:29years and replacing a new supplier 3 to

24:32four years. An experienced adviser could

24:35help determine a practical schedule.

24:39Finally, here are some criteria that we

24:41could use to evaluate vendors. I group

24:43the criteria into five categories.

24:46What will it cost? Will it be reliable?

24:49Uh can we adapt to adapt to market

24:52changes? Is it sustainable? And what is

24:55the governance? Clear criteria would

24:57help staff focus on the critical

24:59information they need to collect. Thank

25:01you.

25:03>> Thank you. Next speaker.

25:05>> The next speaker is Scott Lee, followed

25:06by Tim Fo.

25:13>> Hello. Hello. Good evening everyone. Uh

25:15my name is Scott. Um long time um

25:19resident of Neapville. Uh some of you

25:21guys might not remember my name, but

25:23certainly I look familiar to you

25:24probably. You certainly know where I

25:25live, which is uh right on the the edge

25:29of the proposed Neighborville Ridge

25:31development project. So um I want to use

25:33my time today to kind of talk about some

25:35of the potentially uh unidentified

25:37wetlands that are that are included in

25:40the parcel. So some significant portion

25:42of wetlands were not identified or

25:44evaluated in the wetland determination

25:47included in the preliminary storm water

25:49management report. There are two

25:51additional areas observed on the

25:53property that contain you know unmarked

25:55wetlands. These areas have not been

25:57fully surveyed nor were these areas

25:59included in the preliminaries storm

26:01water report. Neighbors have observed

26:03vegetation and standing water similar to

26:06those associated with the wetlands that

26:08already identified and verified.

26:10According to the soil uh data map, those

26:13these unidentified areas contain some of

26:15the same soil types as the identified

26:18and existing wetlands. So um before we

26:22so we're asking the council to kind of

26:24vote no when that proposal comes up uh

26:27until you know uh we've done a

26:29comprehensive uh analysis of the area.

26:33Also uh last time two weeks ago um I

26:36brought up that my wife had started an

26:37online petition uh opposing this

26:40proposed project and um it's had at the

26:43time had garnered over 2700 um you know

26:46signatures right so I'm pleased to

26:48report that uh with two weeks uh after

26:51two weeks has uh the the number has gone

26:54over 3100 so that's an increase of over

26:5710% uh within the last two weeks so um

27:01yeah thanks for for your time.

27:04>> Thank you. Next speaker.

27:05>> The final speaker in public forum is Jim

27:07Fo.

27:21>> Good evening. Tim Fero, Neighborville

27:22resident. I'm here tonight to talk about

27:25the rate study performed by consultant

27:27UFS versus the actual finance financials

27:30of Neighborville Electric Utility. I

27:33will say right off the bat that for

27:352025, Neighborville Electric's

27:37financials were far better than what was

27:40what the rate study was projecting. In

27:43fairness, some of this is due to the

27:45rate hike that Neighborville Electric

27:47had.

27:49Furthermore, I think it was premature to

27:51talk about a 24% correction factor

27:54without going through the financials in

27:56detail.

27:58Let's look at the the comparison between

28:01Neighborville Electric and UFS is

28:04projection. Again, again, UFS is a

28:07consultant that did the right study. I'm

28:09just going to cover a few of these. So,

28:12for net income, UFS was projecting minus

28:166 million 6.3 million The actual came in

28:20at 15.4 million. That's a difference of

28:2321.7 million.

28:26The annual cash position, well, UFS was

28:29projecting it would drop by 12 million

28:33for 12.9 million. It actually went up

28:35by.5 million. So that's a difference of

28:3813 million.

28:40Next, I want to highlight the debt

28:42coverage ratio.

28:44Neighborville doesn't have a lot of

28:45bonds, so its debt coverage ratio is

28:49pretty high. So UFS was projecting

28:533.56. It turned out to be 15.6.

29:08Okay.

29:09So right now I want to look at the the

29:11bond debt between KMET and

29:13Neighborville. So Neighborville in 2025

29:16had a bond debt about 13.5 million.

29:20Uh in contrast comet had a bond debt of

29:23about 12.9 billion. That's principal

29:27face value debt. Of course come is a lot

29:31bigger than than Neapville electric. So

29:33I I tried to do this based on megawatt

29:35hours served. And basically uh if you

29:39look at it that way, KMED is 14 times

29:41greater than Neighborville Electric. And

29:44the reason I bring this up, if if you

29:46want to increase your cash position, you

29:48could increase your debt load right now.

29:51Like I said, uh Neighborville has a very

29:54low debt load.

29:58This last uh

30:00uh table here is is mimics what's in the

30:04in the great study. Uh I just want to

30:07look at the first person uh uh the

30:10residential rate the cost of service

30:12they were projecting was 82.9 the actual

30:15came at 77.1 only a difference of 7% but

30:19the residential that 82.9 is a little

30:22bit high and needs to be corrected for

30:23the actual financials. Thank you

30:25>> speaker time is up.

30:27>> Thank you. Any more speakers?

30:30>> Hearing none up next is city council

30:33public forum. As a reminder per the

30:34code, council members have three minutes

30:35to speak during public forum and can

30:36speak up to two times. Councilman

30:39McBroom.

30:40>> Thank you, Mayor. U

30:44so I I I just need some clarification on

30:48um a vote that we had last u meeting and

30:54based on answers questions maybe I'll be

30:57pulling the minutes, but it looks like

30:58we have a resident pulled the minutes

30:59anyway. So, I don't know if it's on this

31:01topic, but um so and and I'm not just

31:06want to be clear, pure clarity, I'm not

31:08looking to um accuse anyone to make a

31:11mistake or doing something wrong, but u

31:13in regards to the parking fund that we

31:16all voted unanimously on the shift um

31:19from capital general funds to um or pay

31:23for these routine maintenance costs from

31:24the the parking fund. Um,

31:28we had a memo on it. Uh, we got meeting

31:30minutes on it. We've got, um, a tape on

31:33it. And I'm still not entirely clear.

31:35And, and the reason why I'm going to ask

31:36these series of questions, uh, director,

31:38is I just I think we may have set a

31:40precedent here, and I just want to make

31:42sure that we're not, um, putting in

31:44motion something that has ripple

31:45effects.

31:46um you know as far as

31:50the precedent and we did get a memo that

31:53we have been um

31:56you know doing routine maintenance on

31:57parking decks uh you know through the

32:00general fund and and that was corrected

32:03by us we decided to change it. So, I

32:05just want to make first of all clear.

32:07Did this does the city agree? Were we

32:08doing something incorrect there? Uh or

32:10or and if not, were were we were we did

32:14we make a preference change or did we

32:16correct the incorrect an error?

32:20>> Mr. Kger.

32:21>> Uh thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um few

32:23questions in there. You know, first off,

32:26um did we correct an error? Was there an

32:28error made? Uh I would say no. Um the

32:31downtown parking fund can be used up to

32:35um we are under no obligation uh to use

32:38it for any um the uh second uh with

32:43respect to the action taken last

32:44meeting. Uh I took that as specific to

32:47the agenda item itself uh which in that

32:50case was elevator maintenance where we

32:52did make a shift in uh the funding

32:56sources um for that maintenance item. Uh

33:00I will tell you that um discussions

33:02around this are continuing. Uh but but

33:05that uh that answers kind of your

33:06questions today.

33:08>> Okay. And and that that was my concern

33:10and that's why I'm bringing it up and I

33:11think we can look I mean the minutes are

33:13getting pulled anyway that the language

33:15in the minutes is this is how we were

33:16going to fund it moving forward. Um we

33:18saw a memo that according to kind of

33:21handling it this way I guess it was

33:23millions in the past and there was even

33:25a suggestion we call that back. I mean,

33:27I wouldn't support that. But anyway, my

33:29main concern is, do we need to clarify

33:32what the intention of uh, you know, the

33:34food and beverage parking was it for

33:37major renovations, uh, a new parking

33:39deck? We will be talking about uh a new

33:42parking deck next year. Um and and if

33:45the minutes reflect that this is how

33:47we're going to do this moving forward

33:48and if it's cost millions in the past,

33:50are we are we setting a precedent that

33:52we're going to be drawing down millions

33:54from a parking fund which we might need?

33:56Um I just want to be clear on that. Were

33:59we correcting just for one item or are

34:01we correcting moving forward? And um I

34:04think I think you've answered my

34:05question and you know if we need to

34:07correct the minutes can.

34:12Okay, Councilman say,

34:13>> thank you, Mayor. So, as you all know,

34:16summer is a busy time for everyone,

34:19including the road closures and the

34:21construction. So, I've been getting a

34:23lot of emails, text messages, social

34:27media post about Neighborville road

34:29closures on 59, 248, 95th, Book Road, a

34:35lot of things. So just wanted to have an

34:37high level update

34:39from the team from the staff to see what

34:42what are the timeline

34:45and when it's going to complete and

34:48share some thoughts on that. Thank you

34:52>> Len.

34:56>> Thank you. Um so the work being done

34:58right now in Illinois Route 59 um which

35:00is a state of Illinois highway um is

35:04part of the state's um roadway

35:06maintenance much like we do our own

35:07roadway maintenance programs every year

35:09they do theirs as well. Um so that is

35:11basically um patching of the concrete

35:13and then they're going to actually do

35:15resurfacing with asphalt. So, um that

35:18work um goes from McCoy south to I think

35:22Artisian. Um they're expecting to finish

35:24that um by the uh end of October. So,

35:29that will continue through the next two

35:31months. Um with that, you'll see, you

35:35know, changing closures, daily lane

35:37closures to do the work in the specific

35:39areas that they're working on. Um the

35:41other three roadways that you mentioned

35:42are all part of the water link project

35:45being done by the dupage water

35:46commission. So while those are um on

35:49city of neighborville roadways um that

35:52is a water commission project um as far

35:54as book road goes that's obviously been

35:56the one that's been most impactful to

35:57everybody uh for the whole summer. So

35:59one piece did reopen on Friday. Uh that

36:02is the portion of book road from 75th to

36:05Rickert. So the small section north of

36:0775th. Uh the benefit of that is that we

36:10should see some relief along those

36:11intersections along 75th Street. I know

36:13Planefield Neighborville has been having

36:14some congestion, so that should improve

36:16there. Um and then as far as the other

36:18pieces, um they are expecting to be able

36:21to open the portion uh from 75th to 83rd

36:26Street um by the end of this month. by

36:29the end of September and then um 83rd to

36:3387th um their timeline's less certain on

36:37that but it will be uh reopened yet this

36:40year so I'd say later in the fall um and

36:43then 87th Street 9th Street we do have

36:46southbound traffic only and that's

36:47mainly to serve um local traffic only

36:50for the residents who who live there but

36:52we won't see all those lanes reopened

36:54until later this year as well.

36:57Okay, thank you.

37:00>> Thank you, mayor. Um, I just wanted to

37:02highlight a few good news stories in the

37:04community. Um, I think when people come

37:07to city council, a lot of times they

37:09only hear about the toughest issues, the

37:11ones that we have a divided vote on.

37:12But, um, a few things I was really proud

37:14of in the last month. Um, one, you know,

37:17the Riverwalk Commission, they're um, it

37:21was brought up that the benches that we

37:24have on the Riverwalk are not the

37:25easiest for seniors and people with

37:27limited mobility to get out of. So,

37:30there was a proposal for a new kind of

37:31bench um, which aesthetically um, didn't

37:35look like the rest of the Riverwalk but

37:38functioned. Um, and what I thought was

37:40really great was there's a very

37:41productive discussion about it and

37:43people I think uh, our representative

37:45Central actually went and found a vendor

37:47that could um find a bench that both

37:50aesthetically fit and would be helpful

37:52to our seniors. And I thought that was

37:54just a great example of volunteers in

37:56the community working together and

37:57solving a problem. Also, you're going to

38:00hear later tonight uh one of the

38:02developers is proposing Neighborville's

38:04newest development. Um has worked

38:06together with our city staff suggestions

38:09from neighbor settlement. Me, thank you

38:11very much for the for the help. Um, but

38:14one of the proposals in that development

38:15is going to be to have a a street to

38:18honor Candace Parker, right? Who

38:20Neighborville's um greatest uh pro

38:23basketball player um actually just

38:25inducted to the Hall of Fame. Um again,

38:27community effort to to honor one of

38:29Neighborville's heroes. And a final one,

38:32um many neighborhood residents, hundreds

38:34participated in a survey um done by um

38:39an outside contractor uh to prepare a

38:43bike plan which will be unveiled to the

38:45public at this week's transportation

38:47advisory board meeting. Amazing

38:49presentations available on the city

38:51website. Um I think it's really going to

38:53make the city better for a generation

38:56and a number of um leaders including the

38:58mayor um the heads of I'm going to miss

39:00some here, but um DNA

39:04uh head of DAC, head of um NDP, and so

39:09many other organizations came out and

39:11just walked the um the downtown path uh

39:15just to see what it's like um for people

39:18and little ways that things could be

39:19improved. You know, hey, a sign here's

39:21got an arrow pointing the wrong

39:22direction or this particular crossing

39:24could be a little bit better. um we

39:27forward that on to um the contractor

39:30that's doing the report. Um but I just

39:32bring all of these things up to say we

39:34have so many volunteers, so many hard

39:35workers in the city who are who are

39:37doing the right thing and and helping

39:39out and I'm just proud to live here.

39:40Thank you, Mayor.

39:42>> Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman

39:45Jean.

39:46>> Thank you, Mayor. Um I wanted to thank

39:49um Mr. us for his presentation and for

39:54the suggestion of um a new statement and

39:58possible criteria as well as the

40:00suggestion of an expert um in the area

40:04that might assist with the workshop. And

40:06I know last meeting we ran we ran long

40:10and so we didn't really Councilman

40:12Councilwoman Gibson and I in a

40:14discussion addressed how we didn't

40:16really get a chance to talk about the

40:18details of the workshop. Um so Mayor or

40:23Mr. Kger, are we going to have time

40:26today to talk more in detail about that

40:28workshop or um have suggestions such as

40:32what Mr. Hus uh provided today?

40:34>> Mr. Greger. Uh thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um

40:37and uh thank you for the question. Uh do

40:39we have time? Uh that is completely up

40:41to you. Uh I mean I can tell you that uh

40:44our plan um our our group has been

40:47working uh on the agenda. Uh our plan is

40:50to send out materials in advance to

40:52council to collect some early

40:54information uh to improve the efficiency

40:57of um the actual workshop. Uh hope

41:00hoping uh that we can kind of lock in on

41:02vision. Uh but um Miss Mr. Hus's

41:06presentation was great and um uh it

41:09tracks very much um with kind of my

41:12thoughts um and uh I I don't think we

41:16will miss anything uh that Mr. Hus would

41:19like um in the presentation.

41:23>> Could I have a followup question, Mr.

41:25Krueger? So as of right now we are not

41:29um foreseeing the need of an expert to

41:32help facilitate it. We will be using our

41:35um staff

41:36>> for for the workshop. That is correct.

41:38Yes.

41:38>> For the 25th workshop.

41:40>> Yes.

41:40>> Okay.

41:41>> Uh down the line we down the line. Um

41:44that's absolutely an option.

41:46>> Okay. Thank you,

41:47>> Councilman Wilson.

41:50Thank you, Mayor. Um just wanted to

41:53quick say thank you Shannon for

41:55following up with regard to your um your

41:59your son. Uh obviously really

42:03disappointing I guess to say the least

42:05for him to spend over two hours on the

42:07bus. So uh as you know uh typically

42:12council, school boards, etc. don't

42:15really get involved but I'll follow

42:16certainly follow up. Uh with regard to

42:19Mr. H's suggestion. Um, for people that

42:24weren't aware or here, uh, at the time,

42:28uh, we did have a, I don't know what I

42:32would consider an expert, uh, come and

42:34speak from CES during the PUAB, um,

42:39energy presentations. um one of so we

42:44could I don't know I as part of that

42:45suggestion I' I'd offered to uh uh bring

42:50their presentation uh into our

42:53discussion for whatever we talk about

42:55during the workshop. So thank you.

43:00>> Thank you. Um I I want to speak to the

43:04first speaker we had in public forum. It

43:05would be Miss Catrell. Um, I appreciate

43:08your your words tonight and I'm I'm

43:10sorry what you're going through with

43:12your um your children and and the

43:14extended bus rides. I can tell you that

43:17the city manager and myself have

43:19expressed our concerns and and your

43:21concerns to the superintendent of

43:24schools. Um I I think

43:27that it's important that the city in

43:31under the guise of um the autism

43:34friendly community that we're trying to

43:35project here and aspire to be really

43:40looks at this from the perspective of

43:41how we can get all these different

43:43government agencies to work together,

43:45especially on something like this when

43:47it involves children and being on school

43:50buses for extended hours, especially

43:52those who have So, um, thank you and I

43:57look forward to hopefully working with

43:59city professional staff on on some sort

44:01of resolution that we can work with on

44:03the school district side.

44:08>> Okay. Seeing no other public forum, the

44:10next item is the consent agenda. May I

44:12have a motion to use the omnibus method

44:14of to approve the consent agenda?

44:16Councilman White.

44:18>> Mayor move to use the omnibus method to

44:20approve the consent agenda.

44:22Second Ols.

44:23>> All those in favor say I.

44:25>> Opposed. Motion passes. 8 Z.

44:31>> May I have a motion to approve the

44:34consent agenda removing I1, I 9, I 11,

44:37and I12. Council White.

44:39>> I move to approve the consent agenda

44:41removing items I1, I9, I1, and I12.

44:46Council,

44:47>> second hold tower.

44:48>> Mrs. shots. Please read the consent

44:49agenda removing I1, I 9, 11, and 12.

44:54>> Approval of the city council meeting

44:55schedule for September, October, and

44:56November 2026. Approval of the award of

44:59the cooperative procurement for fire

45:00station 4 garage floor restoration to

45:03Garland TVs for an amount not to exceed

45:05$119,824.

45:08Approval of the award of the cooperative

45:10procurement for Debook Financial

45:11Software to Fifth Asset Incorporated for

45:14an amount not to exceed $137,326.

45:18for a two-year term. Approval of the

45:20award of the soul source procurement for

45:22Tyler Pace and Tyler Basic to Tyler

45:25Technologies for an amount not to exceed

45:27$100,851.7

45:29for one-year term. Approval of the award

45:32of change order number two to the work

45:34order for engineering services for

45:36central elevated water tank relocation

45:38to Baxter and Woodman for an amount not

45:40to exceed $8,55

45:42in an additional two years. Approval of

45:45the award of change number one to the

45:47contract Pay by phone mobile application

45:49to pay by phone technologies for an

45:51amount not to exceed $51,000 for a

45:53sixmonth term. Approval of the award of

45:55change number one to the contract for

45:57architectural and engineering services

45:58to Incorporated for an amount not to

46:01exceed $52,800.

46:03passing the ordinance establishing

46:05temporary traffic controls and issuing a

46:06special event permit for the Neapville

46:08Central High School marching band

46:10competition scheduled for Saturday,

46:12October 10th, 2026. And adopting the

46:14resolution approving prior unapproved

46:16close session meeting minutes

46:18designating certain close session

46:19meeting minutes as non-restricted and

46:21continuing to maintain the

46:22confidentiality of all other restricted

46:24close session meeting minutes.

46:26>> We have a motion and a second to approve

46:28the council consent agenda as read. Roll

46:31call.

46:31>> Gibson. I

46:34>> Jane

46:35>> I

46:35>> McBroom

46:36>> I

46:37>> Sed

46:37>> I

46:38>> White

46:38>> I

46:39>> Wilson

46:40>> I

46:40>> Worley

46:41>> yes motion passes 8 Z. Next item I1

46:45>> item I1 is a recommendation to approve

46:47the regular city council meeting minutes

46:48of August 18th 2026. There is one

46:51speaker John Doyle.

46:57>> John Doyle Neville resident. Thank you.

46:59Uh I did not pull this for the same

47:00reason as Mr. Mcroom was talking, but I

47:02do support you in your efforts for

47:04clarity. You know, we all always agree

47:06on policy, but we definitely agree on

47:07process. So, I'm here for similar

47:09reasons. I' I'd like to request a motion

47:12to amend to get some additional clarity

47:14added to the minutes regarding the

47:15discussion of uh the utility situation.

47:19I know minutes aren't meant to be

47:20verbatim, uh, but I feel like these

47:22three statements in particular were

47:23important enough that they need to be

47:25captured. After all, local news did find

47:27them important enough to quote them

47:29directly. Um, so yeah, that's it. Thank

47:32you.

47:45>> Councilman McRone.

47:48>> Uh, thank you, Mayor. Uh, so going back

47:50to the minutes that I topic that I just

47:53referenced. in in the minutes

47:57um regarding the downtown parking fund.

48:00Um

48:03council. Okay. So

48:06close to your microphone.

48:08>> Should have brought my glasses here.

48:09Sorry. Um

48:13so two things moving forward. Staff can

48:16utilize the downtown parking fund for

48:18maintenance and new construction. So I I

48:20just think there's two things that need

48:22to be clarified. One In light of the

48:24fact that the city doesn't think that we

48:26were making an error or doing this

48:27correctly, incorrectly, this appears to

48:30be just a a preference change for this

48:32one item. Um,

48:35and that we weren't directing you to to

48:37move forward to spend money down from

48:38the parking deck fund. Uh, I guess

48:42council in the future could could decide

48:43to do that on a case- by case basis. Um,

48:47but as as far as the direction, it looks

48:49like we're giving you um direction

48:51moving forward to uh to change the way

48:54that we've been funding it in the past.

48:56And then I know Councilman Gibson uh

48:58referenced the 23 1-3 split. That's not

49:00in there. It almost reads like we're

49:02saying we're taking it all from the

49:03parking fund. I think that that uh you

49:06know, it's in the municipal code. If

49:07that's what we're choosing for this one

49:09maintenance project, that that should be

49:11in there as well.

49:14Councilwoman Gibson.

49:16>> Uh, thank you, Mayor. I I recognize this

49:20item. We're talking specifically about

49:21the minutes, so I'm not sure how much

49:24we're talking about the parking fund or

49:25not, but my understanding of that item

49:28was I had worked with city manager Kger

49:31ahead of the meeting who asked if he

49:34could word the motion to make sure that

49:36we didn't hold up any contracts that

49:39historically parking garage maintenance

49:41is 2/3 from that and one third for

49:43capital projects.

49:45Um I'm not sure why roofing was treated

49:49different from other maintenance

49:50projects and that was the question I

49:52raised over emails in the Q&A and in the

49:56meeting. Um

49:58also to what happened in the actual

50:00meeting, I had clarified whether we

50:03would be putting all of the funds from

50:05the parking maintenance or a ratio. So

50:08I'm all for clarifying that. I don't

50:10think this motion any rules or

50:13precedents. The fund was set up to cover

50:16twothirds of parking garage maintenance

50:17and the initial question was why roofing

50:20would be treated different than any

50:22other maintenance done at the parking

50:23garage. That clarifies it.

50:26>> Councilar.

50:27>> Yeah, thank you, mayor. I appreciate

50:30that we're bringing this to light. So, I

50:31just want to be very clear. There's a

50:33page in the budget from last year and

50:36every other year that I've been on

50:37council. It is titled quote downtown

50:40parking deck maintenance and there's a

50:42dollar figure allocated for the um uh

50:48capital projects fund and the downtown

50:51parking fund and every single year this

50:53council has voted in budget season for

50:55exact to the any twothirds oneird split.

50:59Um so if we're deviating from that or

51:01using creative accounting to get away

51:03from that I just disagree with my

51:04colleague. I don't think that's a case

51:06by case basis. Um, I think that is a

51:08systemic issue we need to look at and if

51:10it takes another vote, then happy to do

51:12that in budget season. Thank you, mayor.

51:13I

51:13>> I think the question before us is

51:15whether or not the minutes accurately

51:16reflect the statements that were made by

51:18the city manager. Uh, Mr. City Manager,

51:21are you comfortable in affirming those

51:23or would you prefer that this be tabled

51:25until the next meeting so you can

51:27confirm what was said or not said from

51:30the table?

51:30>> Uh, you know, I'm comfortable with the

51:32minutes as is. Um, you know, again,

51:35their their uh their intention is to

51:37serve as a summary. Um, we do retain the

51:40full um transcript and audio and video.

51:44>> Council McRone.

51:47>> I'm fine.

51:50All right. Is there a motion to approve

51:53the regular city council meeting minutes

51:55of the August 18, 2026

51:58meeting? Councilman White. Mayor, I move

52:00to approve the regular city council

52:02meeting minutes of August 18th, 2026.

52:05Council

52:06>> Holar.

52:06>> Second. Holder.

52:08>> We have a motion and a second on I1.

52:10Roll call.

52:10>> Holer.

52:11>> I.

52:12>> Jane.

52:12>> I.

52:13>> McBroom.

52:15>> No.

52:16>> Say

52:16>> I.

52:17>> White.

52:18>> I.

52:18>> Wilson.

52:19>> I.

52:20>> Worley.

52:20>> Yes.

52:21>> Gibson.

52:22>> I.

52:23>> Motion passes. 71.

52:26>> Ite. Item nine is recommendation to pass

52:29the ordinance authorizing the execution

52:31of a recapture agreement for the

52:33installation of storm sewer improvements

52:35as part of the 623 Willow Road offsite

52:38storm sewer plans. There are two

52:40speakers. The first speaker is Richard

52:42Phillips followed by Patricia Fister and

52:45the petitioner is here and signed up for

52:46questions only.

52:58Good evening, Mayor Oley and members of

53:01the council. My name is Richard

53:02Phillips. I live at 643 Willow Road, and

53:05I'm here tonight in support of my

53:06neighbors of 633 and 639 Willow Road to

53:11ask you to deny the Willow Road

53:13recapture agreement on tonight's agenda.

53:16My wife sent a letter to Mr. to Santo

53:19supporting our neighbor Patricia

53:20Fister's opposition to this agreement.

53:23And I want to walk you through why. My

53:25wife and I built our home at 643 Willow,

53:28three doors down from the Patels. And we

53:30knew we're uh we knew going in that this

53:32site street sits close to the river with

53:35a very high water table. So we built up

53:39rather than down and said dig deep down.

53:41This option was available to the builder

53:43at 623 Willow Road 2. During

53:46construction, I stood with the owner

53:49looking at standing water in the

53:51excavation pit and told her directly

53:53she'd have water issues.

53:56This wasn't a surprise to anyone on the

53:58street. It was a known avoidable risk.

54:02This would be the city's first storm

54:04sewer recapture agreement. We've

54:06confirmed at least two other groundwater

54:08mitig mitigation systems installed

54:10within two blocks of us over the years.

54:12In every case, the owner or builder who

54:15caused the problem paid for the fix.

54:19So this was never, I'm sorry, not once

54:22was an uninvolved neighbor asked to pay

54:24because a pipe passed near their land.

54:27This ordinance would break that pattern

54:28and nobody has explained why this case

54:30is different. I'd also ask you to look

54:33closely at the agreement itself. Recital

54:35two says the storm sore improvements

54:37were installed at the owner and

54:38developer sole expense. Recital five

54:42says that they only agreed to pay

54:43because a city would seek reimbursement

54:45from my neighbors. So this was never

54:47really at their sole expense. It was

54:49conditioned from the start on recover

54:52nearly twothirds of the cost from people

54:53who had no part in the designing of this

54:55project. No seat at the table and no

54:58notice until the agreement was already

54:59drafted against their homes.

55:02That obligation would sit against their

55:04title for up to 20 years. My wife has

55:07spent over 30 years in residential

55:09mortgage and she's confirmed no

55:11appraiser would add dollar value to

55:12these homes because of this mitigation.

55:15My neighbors would bear the full cost

55:17permanently with no benefit to show for

55:19it.

55:22Uh the one of the two families affected

55:25has lived on this street since 1957

55:29and includes a 92 and 96 year old couple

55:32who have no input on any of this. Along

55:35with the merits of this argument, I

55:37think it could also be said the optics

55:39do not look good. Four generations of NA

55:42pavilions have come out of this house.

55:44This is how we're going to treat them.

55:45I'd ask the council to deny this

55:47ordinance. Thank you for your time.

55:50>> Thank you. Next speaker.

55:51>> The next speaker is Patricia Fister.

55:56>> Good evening.

55:58Good evening. My name is Patricia

55:59Fister. I live at 633 Willow Road and my

56:03parents live at 639 Willow Road. I'm

56:06here regarding agenda item nine, the

56:08proposed Willow Road storm sewer

56:10recapture agreement. I respectfully

56:12request that the council deny the

56:14agreement or at the very least defer it.

56:18The storm sewer extension project cost

56:20approximately $36,000.

56:23Ravi and Shawani Patel live at 623

56:26Willow Road and he Mhouse House built

56:28their home and deep basement. This

56:31project was undertaken to correct the

56:33known and foreseeable flooding problems

56:35at the Patel's house. Yet the agreement

56:38assigns only onethird of the cost to the

56:40Patels while nearly 2/3 about $24,000

56:44plus up to 20 years of interest would be

56:47recorded against my home and my parents'

56:50home. That allocation is backwards. The

56:53extension stopped the flooding at the

56:55Patel's house and protected the use and

56:57value of their approximately $2 million

57:00property. Our homes have no flooding

57:02problem and the project did not correct

57:04a problem on either one. The claimed

57:07benefit to our homes is that the storm

57:09sewer might be available if either

57:11property is redeveloped someday.

57:14But the nearly $12,000 assigned to each

57:17home is not based on any calculation of

57:19future benefit. It simply shifts to us

57:22the present cost of solving the Patel's

57:24problem, a problem our homes don't have.

57:27And after years of interest, that amount

57:29might exceed the actual cost of any

57:32storm sewer work required in the future.

57:36Most importantly, the Patels and M house

57:38knew all along that the house was not

57:39connected to a storm sewer and that a

57:42connection was not included in part of

57:44the build. They knew this at the design

57:46stage, during excavation, throughout

57:48construction, and after completion. They

57:50also knew about the groundwater

57:52conditions. There is sub there was

57:54substantial standing water in the

57:56basement excav exc excavation. Water had

57:58to be pumped from the site and neighbors

58:00warned them about the high water table.

58:03Despite that knowledge, they proceeded

58:04with the deep basement design. When the

58:07resulting flooding continued impacting

58:09Willow Road, a city infrastructure

58:11project, their house, and neighboring

58:14property, the Patels were required to

58:16install the extension to stop the

58:18outpouring of the groundwater.

58:20The Patels received an immediate

58:22benefit, but now seek to shift nearly

58:24twothirds of the cost with interest to

58:27neighbors who receive instead an

58:30immediate encumbrance on their homes.

58:33This would also be Neighborville's first

58:34storm sewer recapture agreement. That is

58:37significant between because two other

58:39storm sewer projects involving

58:41extensions and corrective work were

58:43completed within just a few houses of

58:44the Patel's home and neither involved a

58:46recapture agreement. I have lived in my

58:49home for 25 years. My parents have lived

58:51there since 1957. We did not create this

58:54problem, request a project, or receive

58:56any present benefit from it. The

58:58decisions that created the need for this

59:00extension were made by the end house.

59:02The financial con consequences of those

59:05decisions should not now be transferred

59:07to neighbors.

59:08>> Thank you.

59:08>> Thank you,

59:10>> Councilman McRo.

59:12>> Thank you, Mayor. So, um, you guys got

59:14me going here. If this was my property,

59:17I'd be upset, too. Can Can the city

59:18explain to us why um these homeowners

59:22should be expected to pay for this?

59:25>> Deputy Director Hines.

59:27>> Uh sure. So, all the houses on Willow

59:30Road, they're already considered part of

59:32the city's storm sewer gap program. Um,

59:35so what that means is that when a house

59:37either is reconstructed or there's a

59:40large addition that they're required to

59:42put a storm sewer along their street

59:45frontage. Um, so in this case, the

59:47property at 623 when they when they

59:50rebuilt their house, uh, they did

59:52install that storm sewer in front of

59:54their frontage. Um, following

59:56construction, um, there was a number of

59:58drainage issues related to that related

1:00:01to uh, their sump pump discharge. Um

1:00:04they attempted to address that in

1:00:05various ways. It was still creating a

1:00:07nuisance. Um so their engineer looked at

1:00:10different u approaches to try to deal

1:00:12with that drainage issue. Um the only

1:00:15feasible option was to extend the storm

1:00:17sewer um to properties to the south to

1:00:20connect to the existing gap sewer that

1:00:22was in place. Um so that's kind of the

1:00:25the um the the the background on how the

1:00:29storm sewer was installed. um the

1:00:31properties that uh you know that are

1:00:33adjacent like I said were already part

1:00:35of the gap storm sewer system. So in the

1:00:38future if they redeveloped they would be

1:00:40required to install that gap in front of

1:00:43their house. So um this uh recapture

1:00:47more or less advance that solution um so

1:00:50that the storm the property owner could

1:00:52extend the storm sewer to the uh

1:00:55existing sewer that's in place um

1:00:58address the drainage issues and then um

1:01:01in the future if these other two

1:01:03properties were to be developed they

1:01:04would be

1:01:06the the property owner would be be able

1:01:08to rec capture the costs associated with

1:01:10installing the storm sewer along that

1:01:13the existing property owners that are

1:01:15paying now would be able to recapture

1:01:17for future development.

1:01:18>> Uh correct.

1:01:19>> Okay. Uh is this common? Are we if we

1:01:24were to require the homeowner that's

1:01:26that's building to to bear this cost, is

1:01:28that uh against code or is that would

1:01:30that be wrong?

1:01:32>> Uh so so as far as the recapture goes, I

1:01:35mean this was the first time we would be

1:01:36doing a recapture for storm sewer. Um

1:01:40but like I said that that obligation is

1:01:43you know like it would already be there

1:01:44if there was a tear down you know in

1:01:47accordance with our current city code.

1:01:52>> We do have the petitioner attorney

1:01:55suck from Rose and Whitaker here for

1:01:58questions only from council members.

1:02:00Council members have questions.

1:02:03>> Um thank you mayor. Not a not a question

1:02:05for m but just just some comments. Um,

1:02:08thank you, uh, Councilman Groom. Those

1:02:09are excellent questions, the same ones I

1:02:11asked the staff. Um, I, uh, a little bit

1:02:15torn here. I'm protective of staff's

1:02:17process. Um, to be honest, I think

1:02:19they're interpreting the city code

1:02:20correctly. Um, I get it on kind of a

1:02:24micro level, in a legalistic sense. Um,

1:02:26I'm intending to vote no. Um, though,

1:02:29and I'll I'll share why. I mean, so I

1:02:31grew up in this neighborhood, right?

1:02:33This is a neighborhood that um was on um

1:02:37you know one of the first developments

1:02:38his neighborhood became a boom town

1:02:40became very prime territory for for tear

1:02:43downs and um there was a lot of

1:02:46consternation in the neighborhood when

1:02:47the first came tear downs came about 20

1:02:4925 years ago and I think the basic

1:02:52fundamental bargain the city made with

1:02:54the homeowners was somebody may tear

1:02:57down a house next to you but it's not

1:02:59going to negatively impact you okay and

1:03:02and that was the bargain that was

1:03:04struck. And here you have a homeowner

1:03:06that's house wasn't flooding before, but

1:03:08because of construction on a house next

1:03:10door, now their house is flooding. Now

1:03:13they had a problem. The city had to come

1:03:14in and fix it. And um and there's an

1:03:17incumbrance being placed in their

1:03:18property and that may be recovered later

1:03:22on. I get it. It's not a fee that has to

1:03:25be charged now. But just in the big

1:03:27picture, if I'm living there and that's

1:03:28the bargain I agreed to 25 years ago, I

1:03:31just I think it's a really bad look for

1:03:34the city to then turn around and do

1:03:35this. So, I'm I'm going to be voting

1:03:37voting no. But no disrespect to the

1:03:39petitioner or city staff. I think you're

1:03:42you know, your points on the merits are

1:03:43are very reasonable. Thank you, mayor.

1:03:47>> So, I I guess I'm got a little concern

1:03:49about the way this is is put together at

1:03:51this point. Um,

1:03:55number one, the interest rate that is

1:03:58assigned to it, 2% or whatever it is per

1:04:00year for the extent of the deal, but um

1:04:03how this would be potentially reported

1:04:05on the

1:04:07the affected parties properties. Um, are

1:04:11you referring to this as is this like a

1:04:13lean or is this is a

1:04:17memorandum of conditional recapture or

1:04:19how is this going to look on a title

1:04:22search for these properties and I'll

1:04:26refer to

1:04:28>> I'm happy to answer if if I may to just

1:04:31kind of back up just shed a little bit

1:04:32more color. Andy gave a great response.

1:04:35Uh but just with respect to the

1:04:36property, so 623 Willow is three lots

1:04:38south of Hillside on the west side of

1:04:40Willow Road. If you look at this storm

1:04:42water utility atlas, we have what is

1:04:45shown as the storm sewer in this area as

1:04:48this red dashed line. So the storm sewer

1:04:50stops in this location. So to Andy's

1:04:53point, that's where the city's gap sewer

1:04:55program kind of comes into play. So

1:04:57under city's code, the city engineer can

1:04:59direct that storm sewer be designed and

1:05:01constructed based upon the need to fill

1:05:04uh system gaps. So when M house was

1:05:06hired to do the construction of the home

1:05:08at 623 Willow Road, they it's identified

1:05:12here by the star. They installed the

1:05:14storm sewer along the frontage of 7 or

1:05:17623 Willow. It's identified there by

1:05:19that red arrow to the north. You can see

1:05:22there that's in line with the city's gap

1:05:24sewer program, but it's not really

1:05:26fulfilling the goals and obligation of

1:05:28the gap sewer program because ultimately

1:05:30when storm water was coming through, it

1:05:32had nowhere to discharge. It had nowhere

1:05:34to go because we were not connected to

1:05:36the public uh storm sewer. So ultimately

1:05:39in talking with city staff and trying to

1:05:42find some thoughtful solutions, like

1:05:43Andy said, we we went through this for

1:05:45about six months trying to find

1:05:47solutions. Um the best option was the

1:05:50extension of the storm sewer from our

1:05:53property, our storm sewer that we

1:05:54constructed to the south connection

1:05:57point which extends past those two

1:05:59properties. Illinois law provides the

1:06:01mechanism for recouping costs associated

1:06:04with a public infrastructure improvement

1:06:06and that's exactly what this is. So

1:06:08while this it might be specific to storm

1:06:11sewer, this is a public infra

1:06:12infrastructure improvement. When

1:06:15something like this is extended and

1:06:16somebody else can benefit from that

1:06:18improvement, we have the rights to try

1:06:20to recoup those costs in the future if

1:06:23those property owners are seeking to

1:06:25benefit from the improvement. So just in

1:06:28that case, uh these are the approved

1:06:30engineering plans. We uh wanted to see

1:06:33that the work could be done while the

1:06:35road was torn up because the sanitary

1:06:36stew sewer was being replaced. Wanted to

1:06:39be cognizant of the neighbors. Uh the

1:06:41sanit I'm sorry the storm sewer ended up

1:06:43going in from 623 Willow extending south

1:06:46across 633 and then 639 Willow to that

1:06:50connection point that exists. Um

1:06:52ultimately this fulfills the obligation

1:06:55of the gap sewer system. This fulfills

1:06:58this helps provide continuous storm

1:07:00sewer along Willow. It provides a

1:07:02benefit to property owners to the north

1:07:04because now they have the opportunity to

1:07:06connect to the storm sewer and we're

1:07:07fulfilling the gaps in the system. Um,

1:07:10that being said, as Andy noted, uh, the

1:07:13installation of the storm sewer would be

1:07:15a condition to any redevelopment of

1:07:18these properties now or in the future.

1:07:20We are not seeking any payment from the

1:07:22property owners today. If the residents

1:07:24wanted to seek to connect to this

1:07:26improvement today, we would ask that

1:07:28they pay their fair share to utilize the

1:07:31improvement. So long as they don't

1:07:32connect, we don't collect. Um, same goes

1:07:36for if they were to redevelop the

1:07:38properties in the future. again, they

1:07:40would have had to install the storm

1:07:41sewer. In this instance, it's already

1:07:43put into place. So, just that's my

1:07:45overview of this whole situation. It is

1:07:47a standard recapture um covered under

1:07:51Illinois law. Um that all being said, on

1:07:54a title search, this would just come up

1:07:55as a recapture agreement. It would be an

1:07:57exception to title. um anybody who was

1:08:00buying the property would be aware of it

1:08:02and if they were buying the property for

1:08:03a tear down they would work with the

1:08:04city to pay those costs because again

1:08:06they would have to install the storm

1:08:08sewer anyway if they're going to tear

1:08:10down and redevelop.

1:08:12So the answer to the question is it's

1:08:14not a lean. It's a memorandum of

1:08:18conditional recapture.

1:08:20>> Recapture on the title commitment. Yes.

1:08:22>> And it would not prevent refi helocks.

1:08:25>> No.

1:08:25>> Anything? Okay.

1:08:28Is there a reason, and I'll direct this

1:08:30to our our legal staff. Is there a

1:08:32reason that we can't tie this to what I

1:08:36believe the spirit of what we're trying

1:08:38to do here is, and that would be if

1:08:40homeowners ever choose to sell their

1:08:42home and the buyer of that home someday

1:08:46decides to tear the house down and build

1:08:49something different, why couldn't we tie

1:08:53this to the demolition permit and the

1:08:59building permit and make it very clear

1:09:01that there's no dollars that are being

1:09:04sought from the current owners based

1:09:05upon the current use or if they sell the

1:09:08homes in their current condition to

1:09:10somebody who wants to maintain those

1:09:12homes for the next hundred years that

1:09:14they too will not have to be responsible

1:09:17for any sort of recapture fee unless

1:09:21some of those big changes

1:09:24>> and that's exactly how the agreement is

1:09:25structured right now. I think it goes

1:09:28beyond that though with the interest and

1:09:31uh I don't think it's specific to the

1:09:33tear down. I think it talks about

1:09:36additions and other things on the

1:09:37current house. So Mr. Mr.

1:09:39>> Santo mayor I believe the agreement does

1:09:42try and tie the obligation for any

1:09:44future development of the benefited

1:09:46properties the same standards at which

1:09:48they would be responsible for the sewer

1:09:50gap program. Currently, the language in

1:09:53section 4 says that uh when a benefited

1:09:56property makes use of or benefits from

1:09:58the storm, water, sewer improvements and

1:10:01as determined by the city in the

1:10:03reasonable exercise of its discretion.

1:10:05Um and that includes um uh the issuance

1:10:09of building permits related to a tear

1:10:10down and redevelopment of a benefited

1:10:12prop property, issuance of an occupancy

1:10:15permit for the benefited property, and

1:10:17the issuance of a permit to allow a

1:10:19connection of a benefited property to

1:10:21the storm sewer. That's when the

1:10:23recapture would trigger and be

1:10:24responsible. So the existing property

1:10:26owner, future property owners would have

1:10:28no obligation to pay the recapture

1:10:31unless they were benefiting from the

1:10:34sewer edition. Um, and then the interest

1:10:37is a cap. I would note that it's tied to

1:10:40an index and it's capped at 2.25%. So,

1:10:43if the interest for any given year were

1:10:45less than that, they would get the

1:10:47lesser amount and if it were more than

1:10:48that, it would be capped at 2.25% for

1:10:51the first 20 years.

1:10:54>> Council member,

1:10:56>> appreciate that. Thank you, mayor, and

1:10:58your questions there. Um, so can we can

1:11:00we say that this is not costing the

1:11:02exist the homeowners there money not

1:11:05through refi or when they sell.

1:11:07>> Correct. This is not unless they

1:11:09>> unless they connect to the improvement

1:11:11there is no collection.

1:11:20>> Okay. Well, I still if I'm in the

1:11:23homeowner's shoes, I guess I I'm not

1:11:25necessarily comfortable with the

1:11:26language that you just read. Um, Mr.

1:11:29Danto, I I think again make it very

1:11:31clear if the house is ever sold and torn

1:11:34down, there's a demolition permit, or if

1:11:37there's a new building permit,

1:11:39that's when it triggers. And charging

1:11:43the 2% interest, I I don't necessarily

1:11:45believe is is necessary, but

1:11:51I would like to make a motion with those

1:11:53modifications.

1:11:56Council Gibson. Um, if we are making a

1:11:58motion with modifications, I would um be

1:12:02in favor of getting rid of interest alto

1:12:04together. I see this as um, you know, I

1:12:07I recognize that the homeowners would

1:12:09not be paying this unless they are um,

1:12:14using that benefit. Um, which I think is

1:12:17an important distinction here. We need

1:12:19to make this isn't 11,000 that the

1:12:21homeowners need to pay unless they are

1:12:23doing the work that would have needed

1:12:25this anyway. But I'm not sure why it

1:12:28should be acrewing interest over the

1:12:30time. If we're this money is going to

1:12:31reimburse the owners of six

1:12:35>> that was part of the

1:12:36>> if we're amending it anyway I would be

1:12:38in favor of getting rid of the interest.

1:12:40>> That was part of my original

1:12:41>> that was to get rid of the interest

1:12:43together. Okay. Thanks.

1:12:47>> Is there a second?

1:12:52>> I made the motion so I need a second.

1:12:54>> A second.

1:12:57Mayor, may I try to clarify the motion

1:12:59as to what I heard?

1:13:09So, as I understand it, the motion would

1:13:11be pass the ordinance authorizing the

1:13:13execution of a recapture agreement for

1:13:16the installation of storm sewer

1:13:17improvements as part of the 623 Willow

1:13:20Road offsite storm sewer plans with the

1:13:25limitation that it be limited to

1:13:28situations where the benefited property

1:13:32pulls a demolition permit as well as a

1:13:35building permit which requires the

1:13:37issuance of an occupancy permit and with

1:13:40the elimination of the interest

1:13:42in the proposed agreement.

1:13:44>> That sounded

1:13:46property also connected to the

1:13:48improvement as well.

1:13:49>> Yes.

1:13:54>> That would be accurate.

1:13:56>> So move that.

1:13:57>> Yep. So move

1:13:59>> second. White.

1:14:02>> And just a point of order to clarify,

1:14:05Mr. S, there is absolutely no lean. This

1:14:08is just a reported as a a memo on title

1:14:11search. That's right. The agreement will

1:14:13be recorded against the uh benefit

1:14:15properties

1:14:15>> and there will be no effects on the

1:14:18current owners for the time that they

1:14:20have it until such time as they sell the

1:14:21house and somebody chooses to tear it

1:14:23down.

1:14:23>> Mayor, that's a pretty broad statement.

1:14:24I think the owners would like to say

1:14:26that it's contemplative that if it shows

1:14:28up on a title search that it may be

1:14:30valued in the assessment of the home or

1:14:31that a future purchaser could assess

1:14:34that as to the value of the home.

1:14:36to say, but there's no recovery or

1:14:39recapture of the money owed unless the

1:14:42qualifying conditions are taking place.

1:14:45Councilman Alzar.

1:14:46>> Yeah, thank you, Mayor. I was just going

1:14:47to dubtail on Mr. Danto's point. You

1:14:49know, just just to be clear, the order

1:14:52of operations is you apply for a

1:14:54refinancing or helock, a title search is

1:14:58run, it's up to the lender what they're

1:14:59willing to accept. So, this is an

1:15:01incumbrance. This will make it harder to

1:15:03get a refire loan potentially or cause a

1:15:05higher rate you have to pay or whatever.

1:15:07So, I'm not comfortable putting a

1:15:09potential incumbrance on on um the

1:15:11homeowners. Thank you, Mayor.

1:15:15>> Thank you. So, we have a motion in a

1:15:16second.

1:15:18Roll call

1:15:20>> Jane.

1:15:22>> No.

1:15:23>> McBroom.

1:15:25>> No.

1:15:26>> Say,

1:15:27>> no.

1:15:28>> White.

1:15:30>> No.

1:15:30>> Wilson,

1:15:32>> no. Worley,

1:15:35>> yes.

1:15:37>> Gibson, no.

1:15:40>> No.

1:15:42>> Motion fails.

1:15:44One 17.

1:15:47I'm sorry. Yeah. 17.

1:15:54I 11.

1:15:57>> Item I 11 is a recommendation to pass

1:15:59the ordinance amending sections 3-3 and

1:16:02of the Neighborville Municipal Code to

1:16:04prohibit the retail sale of cratom.

1:16:07There are 17 written comments that have

1:16:09been posted to the website and there are

1:16:11seven speakers. The first three speakers

1:16:13are John Doyle, Brittany Septton, and

1:16:16Dr. Heidi Sakura.

1:16:18>> And if you heard your name called,

1:16:20please move to the front row. We we do

1:16:22have several speakers on this topic.

1:16:24Thank you.

1:16:25>> Right. John Doyle, Nville resident.

1:16:27Thank you again. Now, I have never

1:16:28personally consumed, nor has anybody I

1:16:30know shared with me that they have as

1:16:32well. So, I don't have any personal skin

1:16:34in this. I also have no problem

1:16:36admitting that I'm in no way qualified

1:16:37to say if retail cratom sales should be

1:16:39banned or not. And I wish the city would

1:16:41feel comfortable saying the same thing.

1:16:43This is a public health issue, just like

1:16:45our police chief said last session. And

1:16:47we do not have a department of public

1:16:49health. As amazing as our staff is, this

1:16:52is simply out of their wheelhouse. So,

1:16:54I'm asking for a motion to table this

1:16:55tonight until you're prepared to bring

1:16:57in domain experts who can properly

1:16:59advise the council on action to take. In

1:17:01the meantime, the DEA has instituted

1:17:03temporary rules and Springfield has

1:17:05multiple bills in play. I don't

1:17:06understand why that can't be enough. If

1:17:08you are going to insist on restricting

1:17:10our personal and economic freedoms

1:17:12beyond what the federal and state

1:17:13governments are already doing, I think

1:17:15you owe us a better justification than

1:17:16what you have provided so far. Thank

1:17:19you.

1:17:20>> Thank you. Next speaker. The next

1:17:22speaker is Britney Septton.

1:17:26>> Next speaker.

1:17:27>> The next speakers are Dr. Heidi Sakura,

1:17:30Michael Pasano, and Allison Smith.

1:17:37>> Good evening, mayor and members of the

1:17:39city council. My name is Dr. Heidi

1:17:42Sakura. I'm a doctor of nursing

1:17:43practice, retired nurse practitioner,

1:17:46and tonight I am speaking in my personal

1:17:48capacity. First of all, I want to thank

1:17:50council members Gibson, Jane, and

1:17:52McBroom for taking the time to listen to

1:17:55all sides of this issue.

1:17:58Natural cratom is the only thing that

1:18:00has restored my functional ability um

1:18:03after a lifetime of painful congenital

1:18:05neurological conditions. Pharmaceuticals

1:18:08cause life-threatening side effects.

1:18:11Nature does not intoxicate me or impair

1:18:13me. It simply reduces my pain enough

1:18:16that I can exercise and stretch. For

1:18:18people with chronic pain and

1:18:20disabilities, that's the difference

1:18:21between maintaining years of life or

1:18:24losing them.

1:18:29This is why

1:18:32the mayor's Facebook video calling gas

1:18:36station heroin is so hurtful. What I

1:18:40take is nothing like heroin.

1:18:43The mayor is describing synthetic

1:18:45laboratorymade

1:18:47products. not natural leaf. On that

1:18:50point, we agree those synthetic products

1:18:53are dangerous. The DEA agrees and is

1:18:56placing them on schedule one. The DEA

1:18:59memo is clear. The scheduling action

1:19:02targets manufactured synthetic

1:19:05compounds, not traditional botanical.

1:19:09But the video branded people like me who

1:19:12rely on natural to function as heroin

1:19:15users.

1:19:16That is not just inaccurate. It's deeply

1:19:19stigmatizing.

1:19:22The alcohol commission um uh used the

1:19:26360 report that says 1.2% of teenagers

1:19:30have tried and argues that that warrants

1:19:34the ban. The same report shows 40% of

1:19:38teenagers have tried alcohol. Alcohol

1:19:40causes approximately 170,000 deaths

1:19:44every year in the United States. Serious

1:19:47harms from are rare.

1:19:51Neighborville saw an 11% increase in

1:19:53alcoholrelated DUIs last year. Each one

1:19:57putting innocent lives at risk. I put no

1:20:00one at risk for taking natural.

1:20:04I fully support banning the synthetic

1:20:06products that are truly gas station

1:20:08heroin, but natural leaf is not that. I

1:20:12urge you to regulate responsibly so

1:20:15adults who benefit from it, including

1:20:17people like me, are not harmed by

1:20:19misinformation or denied access to the

1:20:22only safe option that improves our

1:20:24lives.

1:20:26Thank you so much.

1:20:28>> Thank you. Next speaker.

1:20:29>> The next speaker is Michael Fisano,

1:20:31followed by Allison Smith, Marilyn

1:20:33Schwitzer, and Jim Zurich.

1:20:38>> Hello, my name is Michael Fano. I'm a

1:20:41cratom tea leaf consumer mo mostly for

1:20:44insomnia. Um I spoke here last time but

1:20:47uh I think I want to come here to

1:20:48discuss what it seems like the issue is

1:20:50is the regulatory approach. Now I'm not

1:20:53a regulator but I was trying to look in

1:20:56digging in what other towns have done

1:20:58and I've noticed that there are plenty

1:20:59of towns that have done a route of

1:21:02regulation where they don't sell it at

1:21:04gas stations that they require a

1:21:06licensing permit. Um, some of the

1:21:08examples I believe I read was um,

1:21:11Aurora, Downer's Grove, um, what else

1:21:15was there? Bowling Brook, I believe.

1:21:17And, um, I'm thinking maybe we come to a

1:21:20compromise where we go a route of

1:21:21regulation where there's a licensing fee

1:21:24and a licensing permit for 21 and older

1:21:27specialty shops to be behind the counter

1:21:30to run, you know, to do um, random

1:21:33compliance checks. um and um you know

1:21:38set those guard rails in place as

1:21:40opposed to just all out banning it. Um

1:21:43and too I want to echo the the days of

1:21:46the burdening of having to

1:21:48differentiate. We don't know how to

1:21:49differentiate between the natural and

1:21:52the synthetic is coming to an end. Um,

1:21:55just recently, last week of August, the

1:21:57DEA put in effect the ban, the schedule

1:22:00one ban on synthetics and which is

1:22:04schedule one now. So, I can guarantee

1:22:06you that no distributor or no company

1:22:08retailer is going to take the risk of of

1:22:11selling a schedule one substance. This

1:22:13is no longer a civil fine. This is their

1:22:16this is an arrest. This is jail. This is

1:22:18prison. So, and let's just get back to

1:22:22natural leaf whole brown tea creative. I

1:22:26mean, even if it's proposing the idea

1:22:28that the only type that is sold is just

1:22:32the powdered leaf, the leaf that the

1:22:34people in Southeast Asia have consumed

1:22:36for energy and for pain relief for

1:22:38thousands of years and never had a

1:22:40problem until we came here and people

1:22:42had to make strong semiynthetics and

1:22:44ruin it for everyone. So, let the DEA do

1:22:47their job. Let's come hopefully come to

1:22:49a sensible approach where we do a the um

1:22:53you know regulation. Don't have it sold

1:22:57in gas stations. Put it in a 21 and

1:22:59older shop. Um and let let's come to a

1:23:03compromise. And if and let's just say

1:23:05that doesn't even work or there's too

1:23:06many violations. We can always come back

1:23:09and re re-evaluate the situation. So,

1:23:12um, I also want to say the state of

1:23:14Illinois has a Creative Consumer

1:23:16Protection Act and you know how bills

1:23:17move in Illinois. So, Illinois, if

1:23:19you're here, I mean, let's work

1:23:20together. Let's get the Creative

1:23:21Consumer Protection Act passed in this

1:23:24state. Let's not do prohibition because

1:23:26that only leads to criminalizations that

1:23:29puts me that, you know, that punishes me

1:23:32that punishes people like hiding that

1:23:33thought have benefit for their chronic

1:23:35pain. Regulation, not prohibition. Thank

1:23:38you for allowing me to speak tonight.

1:23:40>> Thank you. Next speaker. The next

1:23:42speaker is Allison Smith followed by

1:23:44Marilyn Schwitzer.

1:23:50>> Good evening.

1:23:52My name is Allison Smith and I serve as

1:23:54the director of government affairs for

1:23:56the global coalition. We are a nonprofit

1:23:59organization that is dedicated to

1:24:01advancing responsible science-based

1:24:03public policy on while working to

1:24:05eliminate um dangerous high potency

1:24:08synthetic products. I've sent you all

1:24:10emails. I have the to meet with a couple

1:24:12of the council members. Um, so thank you

1:24:14for taking the time. Um, but I you have

1:24:17emails from me as well in your inbox if

1:24:18you'd like to review this information.

1:24:21Traditional cratum is the leaf is from

1:24:24the leaf of metroinus viosa tree which

1:24:26has been used for centuries in Southeast

1:24:28Asia. As these leaves oxidize a small

1:24:31portion of metroinine which is the

1:24:33primary alkaloid in craven will break

1:24:35down into seven hydroxy metroin which is

1:24:38also known as 70.

1:24:40only in trace amounts and is not to the

1:24:42level that would cause opioid like

1:24:44effects that concentrated products

1:24:46cause. The industry industry standard

1:24:49for um differentiation is 2%. Anything

1:24:52with less than 2% 70 is considered

1:24:55natural or botanical. Anything higher

1:24:57than 2% is considered synthetic or

1:25:00adulterated. And the reason why is

1:25:02because in nature if you go and find a

1:25:04cratom tree big giant massive tree pluck

1:25:07the leaf and let it dry you will and

1:25:09test it you will never find a leaf that

1:25:11has a 70 concentration of greater than

1:25:132%.

1:25:15Um,

1:25:17excuse me. These concentrated 70

1:25:19products are considered adulterated and

1:25:20violate federal law as set forth by the

1:25:23Dietary Supplement Health and Education

1:25:24Act, otherwise known as the SHA. Um, in

1:25:27recent years, manufacturers have prod

1:25:29begun producing these highly addictive

1:25:31substances for financial gain. And

1:25:33instead of the and in is in the interest

1:25:35of these drug manufacturers to confuse

1:25:37and conflate both regulators and

1:25:39consumers despite these products bearing

1:25:42little resemblance to traditional all

1:25:44aspects, marketing, packaging,

1:25:46pharmacological makeup. Manufacturers

1:25:48market these products as quote unquote.

1:25:51Please make no mistake, concentrated 70

1:25:54products, which are driving the public

1:25:56safety concerns that local governments

1:25:57are now confronting, is not the same as

1:25:59natural.

1:26:01Recognizing this distinction, the US

1:26:02Drug Enforcement Administration issued a

1:26:04notice of intent to temporarily place

1:26:06concentrated 70 along with several other

1:26:09synthetic compounds into schedule one.

1:26:11Importantly, the DEA's action does not

1:26:14apply to traditional botanical cratom

1:26:16products. The NOI explicitly states that

1:26:18the scheduling is above a specific

1:26:20threshold. Um, this move is made to

1:26:22target synthesized and highly

1:26:24concentrated products. Um, and as of

1:26:26last week, I believe August 26, three of

1:26:28those derivatives were scheduled and are

1:26:30now a schedule one substance for sale,

1:26:32distribution, and possession. Natural

1:26:34cratom has been consumed for centuries

1:26:36in Southeast Asia. As I said earlier,

1:26:37the leaf did not suddenly change in

1:26:392026. What changed was the market. So my

1:26:42request and I'm trying to wrap this up

1:26:44is simple. Regulate. Amend the existing

1:26:47ordinance ordinance to distinguish

1:26:49between traditional and synthetic

1:26:51products. Implement age gates packaging

1:26:53requirements is done. Um and then

1:26:56finally I ask

1:26:57>> your time's up ma'am.

1:26:58>> Just write a resolution urging the state

1:27:00to act. Thank you.

1:27:02>> Next speaker.

1:27:04>> The final two speakers are Marilyn

1:27:05Schwitzer followed by Jim Shurik.

1:27:13Uh good evening. Uh so no plant that has

1:27:17been used for centuries as a natural

1:27:19remedy should be turned into a form that

1:27:22creates a public health threat. However,

1:27:25the argument that its benefits as a

1:27:27natural remedy are unproven or that

1:27:29alternatives exist and therefore should

1:27:32be prohibited fails when we consider

1:27:34that we do not prohibit the sale of

1:27:36tobacco in all forms. Instead, we

1:27:38regulate it. Ohio appears to have

1:27:42successfully legislated prohibitions on

1:27:44synthetic metagycine related compounds

1:27:47and concentrated derivatives such as 70

1:27:51without prohibiting natural cratom leaf

1:27:53or ground natural cratom leaf. I

1:27:56previously sent you information about

1:27:58Ohio's regulations and guidelines.

1:28:01A retail ban may provide a sense of

1:28:04having taken decisive action, but as

1:28:06people suffer withdrawal because of this

1:28:08lack of access or simply obtain these

1:28:10products elsewhere, little has been

1:28:12accomplished. The underlying problem is

1:28:15more complex than what is available in

1:28:17local retail shelves. A ban may also

1:28:20make it more difficult for people

1:28:22already using such products to reduce

1:28:24their use gradually and in a controlled

1:28:26manner. For those who are able to safely

1:28:30reduce or taper off of their youth on

1:28:32their own, that effort should be

1:28:33encouraged and supported rather than

1:28:35automatically treating them as addicts

1:28:38and directing them into traditional

1:28:40addiction treatment. At the same time,

1:28:42people who need medical or substance use

1:28:45treatment should have access to

1:28:46appropriate nonjudgmental care. So

1:28:50please support an ordinance that

1:28:52prohibits the sale of synthetic mitocine

1:28:54related compounds and conservated

1:28:57derivatives such as 70 but does not

1:29:00prohibit the sale of natural cratom leaf

1:29:02or ground natural cratom leaf. Please

1:29:05also prohibit all advertising ofratom

1:29:07products. Finally, recommend that staff

1:29:10work with appropriate health, public

1:29:13safety, and medical professionals to

1:29:15develop a broadly and broadly distribute

1:29:18better local education about the risks

1:29:20of creative products, including 708 and

1:29:24in cases where needed safer ways to

1:29:27reduce or discontinue

1:29:29their use. Thank you.

1:29:32>> Thank you. Next speaker.

1:29:34>> The next speaker is Jim Shurik.

1:29:40Okay. Um, council, there's another

1:29:42speaker who arrived at 6:20 and

1:29:45apparently drove a couple hours to

1:29:49testify here tonight. Um,

1:29:52and was not aware of our sign up rules.

1:29:54I would need a council action

1:29:58by voice vote to determine whether or

1:29:59not we want to allow him to speak.

1:30:03All those in favor of

1:30:04>> Mayor a question if that's all right.

1:30:07>> Go ahead.

1:30:07>> Um boy, I hate to be the jerk in this

1:30:10situation, but I do have to ask um has

1:30:13it happened in the past that people have

1:30:16not known about our electronic signup

1:30:19policy and then not been allowed to

1:30:21speak

1:30:23is

1:30:24>> I don't know the answer to that. Um

1:30:27would perhaps

1:30:30uh

1:30:32know the answer to that? Do you know if

1:30:35uh we've had people that have not signed

1:30:38up electronically wanted to speak at the

1:30:40meeting and then um and then basically

1:30:44they haven't been allowed to speak?

1:30:46>> Not that I know of at least in the past

1:30:47three years.

1:30:48>> Okay, then I'm I'm comfortable. Thank

1:30:49you, mayor.

1:30:51So, is there a motion to allow the

1:30:55speaker

1:30:56who u didn't sign up prior to 6:30 to

1:31:00speak?

1:31:03Seeing none,

1:31:09Councilman White, you want to make the

1:31:10motion? Yeah,

1:31:11>> I'll make the motion to allow this uh

1:31:13the speaker to uh to address the

1:31:15council. Is there a

1:31:16>> second? Councilman

1:31:18>> secondar.

1:31:20>> We have a motion and a second.

1:31:23All those in favor sign I

1:31:30not very loud. So uh let's do a division

1:31:32here. Let's do a roll call vote.

1:31:36>> Is there a moment for comment?

1:31:39>> Go ahead.

1:31:40>> Thank you. Um in the past I've advocated

1:31:43for no 6:30 sign up. So, this feels like

1:31:46a good opportunity to throw that out

1:31:47there again. I think we should be able

1:31:49to sign up up until 7 o'clock when the

1:31:51meeting starts.

1:31:53>> Let's do a quick roll call vote just to

1:31:55make sure we got it right.

1:31:56>> Mc Broom,

1:31:58>> hi.

1:31:59>> Sed.

1:32:00>> I

1:32:00>> White

1:32:01>> I.

1:32:02>> Wilson.

1:32:02>> Hi.

1:32:03>> Worley.

1:32:04>> Yes.

1:32:04>> Gibson.

1:32:05>> I

1:32:07>> Jane.

1:32:07>> I.

1:32:09>> Okay. Call the speaker.

1:32:12Craig Katz.

1:32:17>> Good evening, uh, Mr. Mayor and members

1:32:19of the council. I appreciate the fact

1:32:21that you're giving me the opportunity to

1:32:23speak. Um, I am the, uh, government

1:32:26relations and compliance manager for a

1:32:29company called MNG Brands. Uh, we

1:32:31operate as a distributor, a

1:32:33manufacturer, and we have uh, 55 retail

1:32:37stores in five states operating under

1:32:40the uh, name

1:32:43We are the largest distributor of

1:32:46natural leafratom in the United States.

1:32:49Uh that gives me a really good uh

1:32:51viewpoint as to what goes on in terms of

1:32:54regulation and not regulation because I

1:32:56testify all across the country. Um I I'd

1:33:00like to point out a couple of things.

1:33:01First of all, as a company, uh we have

1:33:04self excuse me, self-regulated since

1:33:072014 when we opened up as our first

1:33:10store in Chicago.

1:33:11Um, and now we've grown to 55 stores. We

1:33:15agegate at the door. We test independent

1:33:18third party testing. Generally speaking,

1:33:20DEA certified or ISO certified labs.

1:33:24Every item that we sell has a QR code on

1:33:28it that leads to a certificate of

1:33:30analysis so that everybody can see

1:33:32exactly what's in our products. We are

1:33:34not an outlier in the industry. We are

1:33:37the standard of the industry. Uh,

1:33:39generally speaking, the people who are

1:33:41selling natural leaf products do exactly

1:33:44what we do. To call the products that we

1:33:48sell, gas station heroin, is frankly

1:33:50insulting uh to everybody in the

1:33:53industry because that's just not what it

1:33:55is. Um, I I'd like to point out that uh

1:33:59as other people have pointed out that

1:34:01the DEA has taken a very firm stand on

1:34:04this. They have gone after uh 70 and

1:34:07other synthetic synthetic products. Uh

1:34:10Commissioner Mackery last year in J uh

1:34:12July of 25 came out with a public

1:34:15statement that said that they were not

1:34:16going to uh attack natural leaf products

1:34:20because they did not think that it was a

1:34:21problem. Uh acting commissioner

1:34:24Diamantis who is taken over for uh

1:34:27Commissioner Mery has uh reiterated that

1:34:30uh position. uh the FDA and the DEA are

1:34:33in lock step on this issue that natural

1:34:36leafratom is not considered to be a

1:34:39danger to human beings. There has been a

1:34:42movement to start a trial uh on testing

1:34:47natural leafratum effect on human

1:34:49beings. There would not be a trial that

1:34:52was proposed by the government on live

1:34:56human beings if they thought that there

1:34:58was going to be an adverse or dangerous

1:35:01on those people. This does not make

1:35:04sense. So, I'm asking you to regulate.

1:35:07Do not ban natural leaf cratom products.

1:35:10We do not like the synthetic product

1:35:13products and we need them off the

1:35:14shelves and out of the marketplace.

1:35:16Thank you.

1:35:18>> Thank you. Any more speaker?

1:35:21Seeing none council discussion.

1:35:25Counciloman Jane.

1:35:27>> Thank you, Mayor. Um so as of like a

1:35:30month ago I didn't know much about so I

1:35:32I seems seem to have learned a lot about

1:35:34it over the past month had some

1:35:37wonderful discussions with some of the

1:35:39speakers today um and like all issues

1:35:42have come to the conclusion that this

1:35:43issue too is not either black or white

1:35:47or clear-cut that it's far more nuanced

1:35:50um generally principally speaking I'm

1:35:53always hesitant to issue any kind of a

1:35:56ban

1:35:57um especially when we have individuals

1:36:00who seem to have um benefited from some

1:36:04form of it. However, there's a couple of

1:36:07things that give me pause. Uh one was

1:36:11the testimony of uh Miss Ashley Wear who

1:36:14spoke last time who talked about um the

1:36:18negative impact of

1:36:22the substance in its natural form. And

1:36:25second was testimony from Chief Aries

1:36:28who spoke of uh how cumbersome and

1:36:32sounded like almost very difficult to

1:36:35enforce and regulate

1:36:38um based on a distinction of synthetic

1:36:41versus natural. Um so for those two

1:36:45reasons

1:36:46uh I will be supporting the ban because

1:36:50it is limited to the retail sale of it

1:36:53not the consumption. I want to that I

1:36:56empathize with the members who spoke

1:36:58about the benefits of it. But we as

1:37:01council, I see one of my primary duties

1:37:04as uh protecting our most vulnerable

1:37:07population, which are our students who

1:37:10um are not able to distinguish between

1:37:13what is harmful um because the federal

1:37:17regulations haven't got up to speed.

1:37:19It's not to say what our our last

1:37:20speaker said that there are tests

1:37:22coming. So once that those tests are

1:37:25done and we have more information,

1:37:27perhaps we could revisit the ban. But

1:37:29until then, we have a duty to our most

1:37:32vulnerable population right now. And um

1:37:36when I weigh the costs and benefits in

1:37:38this particular matter, the costs just

1:37:40outweigh some of the benefits for the

1:37:43retail um retail sale of this product.

1:37:47So that's why I will be supporting the

1:37:49ban. Thank you.

1:37:50>> Thank you, Councilwoman Gibson. Thank

1:37:53you, mayor. I was hoping either um Chief

1:37:55Aries or the city attorney could talk to

1:37:59um the impact of the DEA

1:38:02making this a synthetic a schedule one

1:38:06ban. I mean, does that that effectively

1:38:08means what? As of now, anybody selling

1:38:11synthetic 70

1:38:14is selling an illegal drug. But

1:38:17>> Mr. Santo, I'd have to look into that.

1:38:20I'm not fully aware of the ramifications

1:38:22of that schedule.

1:38:26>> Um, can we ask I guess just generally

1:38:31and maybe this is a question for the

1:38:32chief then if somebody in Neapville, a

1:38:35retailer in Neapville was selling a

1:38:37schedule one substance, what how would

1:38:40we handle that?

1:38:42>> Chief Aries, I'll do my best with that

1:38:45with the hypothetical. I think I'd

1:38:46rather point to what we've learned and

1:38:48was in the memo. the testing of the

1:38:51substance. So if council says just ban

1:38:5470, the labs are not going to test

1:38:57something that is an ordinance ban. So

1:39:00it would be difficult and we heard some

1:39:02of the testimony the last time from some

1:39:04of the folks in the crowd that said they

1:39:06were upset with the packaging because it

1:39:07really doesn't distinguish that this is

1:39:09a 70 product. So we did a partial ban.

1:39:12The lab wouldn't even test that for us

1:39:14to do that at this point. I think the

1:39:16key would be to go back to them uh as

1:39:19Our city attorney said when it is a

1:39:22schedule one because other schedule one

1:39:23substances are tested by the lab. But

1:39:26when we called because the police

1:39:28department assisted our our detective

1:39:30that works with the mayor on the liquor

1:39:31commission made some phone calls and the

1:39:32lab told us right now they will not test

1:39:35something as part of a city ordinance

1:39:36investigation which you would need to

1:39:38prove or disprove what is in that

1:39:40substance for us to crimally charge.

1:39:42>> Sure.

1:39:42>> Does that help?

1:39:44>> Absolutely. So, I think to me that's a

1:39:46key distinction because if it is a DEA

1:39:49identified schedule one drug, presumably

1:39:52the lab would test it. Presumably the

1:39:55ramifications of a retailer selling this

1:39:58in our community would be much different

1:40:00than violating an ordinance. Um and if

1:40:04it is a schedule DEA schedule one drug

1:40:07our ban a

1:40:10whole ban of cratom would effectively

1:40:13just be banning the natural leaf because

1:40:16at a federal level synthetic's already

1:40:19banned.

1:40:21So um that's what I'm struggling with. I

1:40:23would like to know more if the synthetic

1:40:27is a illegal drug now.

1:40:31um

1:40:33because if it is I think that t um

1:40:35changes the testing and our ability to

1:40:38enforce it. Um one of the reasons I was

1:40:40hoping we could get synthetic and

1:40:42natural leaf separated

1:40:45in the first reading.

1:40:48>> Councilwoman Jane second round.

1:40:50>> Yeah. I my understanding and and maybe

1:40:54this is something that we can seek more

1:40:56clarification on is that only three

1:40:59synthetic forms have been identified and

1:41:02that there are could be other synthetic

1:41:04forms or the 70 concentration in itself

1:41:09has not been identified as schedule

1:41:12schedule one um and then again

1:41:16anyway so that's my understanding and I

1:41:18you know we could see clarification on

1:41:20that, but I I I think there are still

1:41:22gaps.

1:41:26>> Councilman Hzar,

1:41:27>> thank you, Mayor. Um,

1:41:30uh, to Chief's point, I mean, so I like

1:41:32I have the experience of having

1:41:34prosecuted cases like this before,

1:41:35right? And, um, synthetic cannabonoids

1:41:39were like a big thing 15, 20 years ago.

1:41:42And it started out with there were three

1:41:44or four or five of them. I think it was

1:41:46a a chemistry professor at Clemson who

1:41:49got fired and started making these just

1:41:51as a hobby. Um, but just looking at Chad

1:41:54GBT right now, there's over 500 strains

1:41:56that are out there right now. And it's

1:41:58not like you can test unless it's a

1:42:01known like this chemical compound. We're

1:42:05going to test for it. It's gonna it's

1:42:07going to come back as a negative on a

1:42:08test. So the vast majority of like even

1:42:12these compounds which have been known

1:42:13about since 2010 that they can't catch

1:42:16on a drug test. Um and the people who

1:42:19make these know you know you can lace

1:42:21what seems to be a good product with

1:42:23something that's not. Um I will say you

1:42:27know in the time since the last meeting

1:42:28I've spoken with mental health

1:42:30professionals who do referrals. Um I

1:42:34think their message has been very very

1:42:35clear to me on this. Um I you know I've

1:42:40spoken with people who who have abused

1:42:42drugs who know people that abuse drugs.

1:42:44Um you know on the level of mushrooms,

1:42:47cocaine um you know other serious heart

1:42:51drugs and I know people in that

1:42:54community that say that they are afraid

1:42:55of like that is how how seriously they

1:42:58take this. Um I hear Mr. Doyle's point

1:43:02about there are higher authorities out

1:43:04there than the Neighborville City

1:43:05Council

1:43:06when it comes to public safety. However,

1:43:09you know, we were not um we've not been

1:43:12afraid in the past to step in when it's

1:43:15public safety that's an issue and um so

1:43:17I I'm going to be supporting the

1:43:19ordinance. Thank you, Mayor.

1:43:21>> Thank you.

1:43:23I want to thank I'm sorry, Councilman

1:43:25White.

1:43:27>> Yeah. Thank you. Um, as I stated before,

1:43:30um, you know, our our top priority as

1:43:35far as I'm concerned as a council

1:43:37councilman here is is public safety,

1:43:40public health of our community. Um,

1:43:43so that's that's always where I kind of

1:43:45lean go back to. Uh, and I first of all

1:43:47appreciate all the uh the everyone who

1:43:50came up here to speak and u um I feel

1:43:54for you for a lot of the conditions that

1:43:56you're deal with. But right now, at

1:43:59least in the city of Neighborville, we

1:44:02we can't really distinguish between the

1:44:04two. Uh, and until we there's a process

1:44:08in place that would allow us to do that,

1:44:10I think it's I I've got to lean on the

1:44:12side of public safety until we can

1:44:14figure out the difference between

1:44:17the cell of synthetic and the natural

1:44:20leaf so that the public is is very well

1:44:23aware of it. I was even sitting here

1:44:25thinking a moratorum and then we come

1:44:27back and revisit it. I don't know if we

1:44:30need to do that or we just come back and

1:44:32bring it they can come back to the table

1:44:34and we can revisit it a year from now. I

1:44:36don't I don't know. And again, it's been

1:44:39stated up here.

1:44:42People who are taking the natural leap

1:44:44can continue to do that. We're not

1:44:46saying you can't have it, but until we

1:44:49can distinguish between the two, I I

1:44:52just can't approve um

1:44:56I just can't approve it at this point

1:44:58just for those reasons. I would have

1:44:59liked to have uh heard from some folks

1:45:03uh that actually that live here in this

1:45:05community that are are taking them and

1:45:08they can experience give us that. Last

1:45:11time we came up here, I didn't have one

1:45:14speaker

1:45:15from Neighborville get up here and speak

1:45:17about it. I wanted to know what it's

1:45:18like buying it here as an example, not

1:45:22necessarily taking. So, if you like

1:45:24cratom, you want to continue to take it,

1:45:26you can you can do that, but as far as

1:45:29buying it here in Neighborville, we need

1:45:30to

1:45:32we need to get a handle on that before

1:45:34we can we can go forward. If you want to

1:45:36revisit it, I'm absolutely I'm fine with

1:45:39that. Councilman McBroom.

1:45:42>> Thank you, Mayor. Um,

1:45:44I I'm curious. I I thought Councilwoman

1:45:47Gibson's motion was to bring back the

1:45:49two options. Wasn't that

1:45:54>> a reason why those options

1:45:59option?

1:45:59>> There was a discussion about having

1:46:01alternate options, but the actual motion

1:46:02is just to bring back this.

1:46:05>> Just want to clear that up. So, um, you

1:46:08know, like my colleagues,

1:46:10like Councilwoman Jane said, I I didn't

1:46:12know what Kraton was. I' I've spoken to

1:46:14more people about it and learn more

1:46:16about this topic than I'll ever need to

1:46:18know. Um, and I still don't know, right?

1:46:21And I think Mr. Doyle's right. Like,

1:46:23none of us are scientists up here. Um,

1:46:26you know, we're uh I think it's it's

1:46:29beyond our purview. And um, you know, so

1:46:32if I have to vote on a ban or not, I

1:46:34don't have another option here.

1:46:36you know, I I can talk myself into the

1:46:38van. You know, I I'm hearing from our

1:46:40chief. I'm hearing from uh you know,

1:46:43some of the things that Councilman White

1:46:44said. I apparently we can't tell the the

1:46:47difference. Um I I have to believe that.

1:46:50Um you know, I it part of this seems a

1:46:54little symbolic. I don't I don't like to

1:46:56support things that that don't actually

1:46:58do something and and I fear that uh you

1:47:01can set a precedent by doing that. Um

1:47:04you know, that I think we all agree on

1:47:06and there's no discussion on is is the

1:47:08synthetic form, but I'm being told that

1:47:10we can't tell the difference in the

1:47:12store. So, um you know, um and I I I

1:47:18along with Councilman White, if I had

1:47:20some business owners in Neighborville

1:47:21that sold it and came in here, I haven't

1:47:22had that. Um you know, uh for the most

1:47:27part, it's been uh neighborville

1:47:28individuals that have, but I I have

1:47:30talked to some people. I've talked to a

1:47:32lot of people. I tend to believe this

1:47:34powder form that people put in the tea

1:47:36is is harmless and uh you know but again

1:47:39I'm I'm not a scientist. I it's it's a

1:47:41difficult thing. So um you know I would

1:47:45have preferred to to regulate it than do

1:47:47the allout ban but um you know it's if

1:47:51this is the vote tonight ban or not I

1:47:53mean I'm not not a sort of die on

1:47:56either. it doesn't sound like there's a

1:47:58huge amount of, you know, local business

1:48:01advocates that are telling us that we we

1:48:03serve customers here and we need to be

1:48:05able to serve our customers and help

1:48:06people. Um, so it's a tough one, but um

1:48:10I I think I I'll be supporting the the

1:48:13ordinance.

1:48:15I do think that whoever suggested um you

1:48:19know, send a letter and ordinance to the

1:48:20state of Illinois to you know, step in

1:48:23would would be nice.

1:48:26Councilman Wson.

1:48:28>> Thank you, Mayor. Um I I I guess I had

1:48:30similar comments as far as getting uh

1:48:33receiving two options here, but uh

1:48:37fortunately, we didn't really uh get

1:48:39that. But I guess for similar reasons as

1:48:42others have said, the it's hard to make

1:48:45a distinction, I suppose. Um

1:48:49I I I guess Councilman White had brought

1:48:52up perhaps doing a moratorum or a pause

1:48:55on this for a year or something till it

1:48:57comes back, but I I suspect that uh

1:49:01um others might not have a desire for

1:49:05that. Um so I I don't know. I I

1:49:08struggled with this. I I also see other

1:49:11things that are harmful to individuals

1:49:15in the community which we're not banning

1:49:17as well um that are completely legal

1:49:20right now. So uh I have a lot of uh

1:49:25struggle with supporting this um as it's

1:49:29written right now um and without looking

1:49:32into further options that we could that

1:49:34we could possibly do. Thank you.

1:49:38Councilwoman Gibson, second round.

1:49:41>> Thank you. Um I will echo what my

1:49:44colleague said. Thank you to everybody

1:49:45who came out today. It does um the

1:49:48consistent thread I've heard is that

1:49:50there is a difference between synthetic

1:49:52and natural.

1:49:53Um

1:49:55and I I we have what sounds like a very

1:49:58dangerous product and these synthetics

1:50:00um that is widely available in our

1:50:02community. And I think um while I would

1:50:06love to you know, how the DEA and the

1:50:09state regulate. I do recognize that we

1:50:11need to get these dangerous products out

1:50:13of our stores um in a more timely

1:50:17fashion as it seems as the trajectory

1:50:21the DEA um starts to address the

1:50:23difference and hopefully there are ways

1:50:26to test it and maybe the state of

1:50:28Illinois put some guardrails on there. I

1:50:30would absolutely be open to bringing

1:50:32this back

1:50:35that point if there are guardrails

1:50:37against synthetic at the DEA and state

1:50:39level our ban would effectively just be

1:50:42addressing natural leaf cratom and in

1:50:44that case I would be open to readressing

1:50:47this but at this time for the more

1:50:49immediate public safety aspect of

1:50:52synthetic I'll be supporting this

1:50:54council say

1:50:56>> thank you mayor

1:50:58so as an elected official as a council

1:51:00member as a community it is our

1:51:02responsibility public that Public safety

1:51:05is the top priority. We all have been

1:51:08talking about this but practically we

1:51:12have to it should not be a lip service

1:51:14but practically we have to implement and

1:51:17I've been seeing some certain figures

1:51:19from poison control centers in the

1:51:22United States received more than 3,400

1:51:25reports about use of grant from 2014 to

1:51:302019

1:51:32and this includes death

1:51:35this includes weight loss This includes

1:51:38liver damage. There have been many many

1:51:40high blood pressure. So this is scary.

1:51:43You know when you read, when you talk to

1:51:46people and listen about this scary

1:51:49things, you don't want to, you know, get

1:51:52into that trap. So I will definitely

1:51:55support this planning of this thing

1:51:57based on all this issues and critical

1:52:00things which we can have an impact on us

1:52:04our next generation. Thank you.

1:52:08I want to thank everyone who is engaged

1:52:10on this. You've been heard and you are

1:52:12all part of the public record. The

1:52:15mayor's office and the city council has

1:52:17received impassion communications on

1:52:18both sides of this issue and I do not

1:52:21doubt the sincerity of anyone who

1:52:23testified at the liquor commission or

1:52:25before this council or even back before

1:52:26the city council in 2019. But our charge

1:52:29here is the health, the safety, and the

1:52:31welfare of this community, our families,

1:52:33and our young people. We've heard from

1:52:36neighbors who bravely shared what

1:52:38happened to them. A product marketed as

1:52:40natural and harmless

1:52:43did terrible things to their lives.

1:52:46Local nonprofits and health experts

1:52:48testify to the harm these unregulated

1:52:51products are causing. And our own police

1:52:53chief and the Dwage County Coroner's

1:52:55Office have informed us of fatal

1:52:57overdoses in our community associated

1:52:59withratom.

1:53:01Mitroinine is the main psychoactive

1:53:04agent in naturalratom plant. In

1:53:06Neapville alone, we are aware of one

1:53:09Mitroinine death and four overdoses in

1:53:13this year.

1:53:15And folks, one Mitrogyny death in our

1:53:17city is too many.

1:53:21These are facts and they come from our

1:53:22own community. I've also heard the

1:53:24argument tonight and and last time that

1:53:27natural leaf and concentrated synthetic

1:53:29products are different and that we

1:53:30should treat them differently. But

1:53:32here's the difficulty. Telling them

1:53:34apart requires somebody with the

1:53:36authority to check. It requires testing.

1:53:38It requires labeling and potency limits.

1:53:41It requires compliance for the

1:53:43businesses selling it. And it requires

1:53:45regulation. And in Illinois today, none

1:53:48of that exists. There's no license to

1:53:50make, package, distribute, or sell them.

1:53:52There's no standard for what goes in the

1:53:53container. There's no one confirming

1:53:55that what's in on the package is what's

1:53:58actually in the product you take home.

1:54:01And Neighborville can't build a

1:54:02laboratory to verify the purity of

1:54:04what's sold here. And even if we could,

1:54:07the overdose risk would still be there.

1:54:11What this council can decide is what

1:54:12gets sold in our city. And to me, it's

1:54:14simple. We do not need a product that

1:54:16has nicknames like gas station heroin on

1:54:18our shelves. And to the industry

1:54:20advocates and users who have written and

1:54:22testified, I want to be clear that this

1:54:24is not new. Back in 2019, this council,

1:54:28long before me, gave theratom industry

1:54:30room to operate in time to develop its

1:54:32own standards and consumer protections.

1:54:35Seven years later, it is worse, not

1:54:37better. And we have tragic local record

1:54:39of addiction, overdoses, and now death

1:54:42to show for it. The products reaching

1:54:45consumers are still unlicensed,

1:54:46untested, and unregulated. They are

1:54:48reaching young people and should not who

1:54:50should not have access to them. That's

1:54:52what brought families forward alongside

1:54:54our addiction treatment professionals

1:54:56and our nonprofits. Their clarity and

1:54:59their courage are why we scheduled the

1:55:02hearing before the tobacco and liquor

1:55:03commission in July where the commission

1:55:05voted unanimously to recommend that we

1:55:08act. Now, this is a chance for

1:55:10neighborly use its voice to build a

1:55:12safer Illinois. local government has to

1:55:14step up and push the state to do its

1:55:16part like we have done before. And I'm

1:55:19not going to ask our families to wait it

1:55:22out again. I hope my colleagues will

1:55:24support this ban tonight and stand on

1:55:27the side of safety in our city.

1:55:30Councilman White, may I have a motion?

1:55:41Mayor, I move to pass an ordinance

1:55:42amending sections 3-3

1:55:46and 3-6 of the Neighborville Municipal

1:55:48Code to prohibit the retail sale of

1:55:50Creek.

1:55:51>> Housew old tower.

1:55:55>> We have a motion and a second on I1.

1:55:57Roll call.

1:55:58>> Mc Broom.

1:56:00>> I sed.

1:56:02>> White.

1:56:03>> I.

1:56:03>> Wilson.

1:56:04>> I Orley.

1:56:06>> Yes.

1:56:06>> Gibson. I

1:56:09>> Jane. I

1:56:11>> motion passes 8 Z.

1:56:18>> Item I 12.

1:56:19>> Item I 12 is a recommendation to wave

1:56:21the first reading and pass an ordinance

1:56:23amending sections 3-3-3 and 3-3-12 of

1:56:27the Neapville Municipal Code to allow

1:56:29happy hour specials consistent with

1:56:30state law while adding a local

1:56:32restriction to prohibit such specials

1:56:34after 7 p.m. There are four written

1:56:37comments and three positions of posted

1:56:39to the website and there are five

1:56:40speakers signed up on this item.

1:56:45The first speaker is John Doyle followed

1:56:48by Neil Malone and Marilyn Schwitzer.

1:56:50>> And if you heard your name called,

1:56:51please move to the front row.

1:56:55>> John Doyle, Neighborville resident.

1:56:56Thank you. You know, I always thought it

1:56:58was oddly puritanical for Neighbor Rail

1:57:00to have a ban on happy hour. So, I was

1:57:02glad to see it being lifted, but then I

1:57:04noticed we're still pushing for a

1:57:05seemingly arbitrary cut off time of 7

1:57:07p.m. Uh, so I'm again asking for a

1:57:10motion to to amend to remove the 7 p.m.

1:57:12restriction and allow state defaults.

1:57:14The the agenda item presented provides

1:57:17justification for lifting the ban, but

1:57:19does not provide any justification for

1:57:20recommending the 7 p.m. cutoff. And the

1:57:23justifications for lifting the ban such

1:57:25as digital ID scanners and rid share

1:57:27apps, well, they don't stop existing at

1:57:297 p.m. So, I'm I'm not understanding

1:57:31your logic train here. You know, at the

1:57:34end of the day, just like with I'm going

1:57:36to say if you're going to insist on

1:57:37restricting our personal and economic

1:57:38freedoms beyond what the federal and

1:57:40state governments already doing, I think

1:57:42you owe us a little bit better

1:57:43explanation than because of it feels

1:57:45right. And that's basically what this

1:57:47agenda item says about that 7 p.m.

1:57:48cutoff. Uh, so no issues with removing

1:57:51the ban. Um, but don't make it

1:57:54arbitrary. Make it make it purposeful.

1:57:56Thank you.

1:57:59>> Thank you. Next speaker.

1:58:00>> The next speaker is Neil Malone followed

1:58:02by Marilyn Schwitzer.

1:58:09>> We need the microphone answer.

1:58:12>> Thank you. Um, thank you, Mr. Mayor,

1:58:15members of council. My name is Neil

1:58:17Malone. Um, and for the record, I

1:58:19represent the Neighborville Area Chamber

1:58:21of Commerce where I serve as uh,

1:58:23director of criminal affairs. And on

1:58:25behalf of our organization and the

1:58:28businesses we represent, we would

1:58:29respectfully ask that you do lift the

1:58:31ban and allow for happy hours to occur

1:58:34within this limited framework that

1:58:36you're discussing. Um, and give our

1:58:40businesses an opportunity to to host

1:58:42these events. Basically, we have u five

1:58:44points. one um it offers our business

1:58:48owners some flexibility. Uh it allows

1:58:51them to bring in new customers

1:58:53specifically during non- peak times and

1:58:56be able to introduce them their their

1:58:58restaurants or bars to their to these

1:59:00new customers in a in a more

1:59:01cost-ffective sort of way. Uh it also

1:59:05provides for consistency. In many cases

1:59:08our businesses are located in close

1:59:10proximity to areas in which happy hour

1:59:13is allowed and so literally competing

1:59:16with a business across the street that

1:59:17is allowed to uh offer these lowcost

1:59:21options that when they're not able to.

1:59:24Um

1:59:25obviously there's economic impact not

1:59:28just for the restaurants or bars but a

1:59:30lot of cases you'll get a situation

1:59:32where you may come down for happy hour

1:59:33have a a der and a drink and maybe mill

1:59:37around some of the shops surrounding the

1:59:39restaurants or or establishments. And so

1:59:41that will also create additional

1:59:43economic um impact. Uh it also provides

1:59:47for additional employment for by by

1:59:50having more peak hours in which

1:59:51restaurants are busy. It allows staff to

1:59:54also benefit from additional hours uh

1:59:56that they're able to work and earn

1:59:58money. And then finally just the the

2:00:02modernization aspect uh of this. The

2:00:05existing state law has has been in place

2:00:07now for over 10 years. they've not seen

2:00:10a an uptick in any negative consequences

2:00:14of being able to have happy hours

2:00:16return. Um I think there's been a number

2:00:20of lifestyle changes and uh

2:00:23transportation options and strengthening

2:00:25of things like DUI laws that uh have

2:00:28kind of would mitigate any any negative

2:00:30consequences of this decision. Um, and

2:00:34so I will be here and available for

2:00:36questions, but I will return the rest of

2:00:38your time to you and just ask that you

2:00:40respectfully ask support the uh the lift

2:00:43lifting of the band. Thank you.

2:00:45>> Thank you. Next speaker.

2:00:47>> The next speakers are Marilyn Schwitzer

2:00:49followed by Monica Connors and Christina

2:00:51Kaitton Kell.

2:00:55>> I think it's on. Good evening. I agree

2:00:58that the ordinance should be amended to

2:00:59be more consistent with state law.

2:01:02However, I do not agree that the only

2:01:04differences should be 7 pm cut off for

2:01:07drink specials. There are two existing

2:01:09prohibitions that I believe should be

2:01:11retained. First, section 3.2.2.1

2:01:16prohibits serving two or more drinks of

2:01:19alcoholic liquor at one time to one

2:01:21person for consumption except for the

2:01:23sale or delivery of wine by bottle or

2:01:26karaf. Second, second section 3.2.23.

2:01:312.3 prohibiting selling, offering to

2:01:34sell or serving any drink of alcoholic

2:01:36liquor to any person at a price reduced

2:01:39by more than 50% of the scheduled price.

2:01:42I believe the heart of the problem with

2:01:44the current ordinance is that all day

2:01:46discounts on alcoholic beverages are

2:01:49allowed, but hourly discounts are not.

2:01:53For example, Rosebud currently offers

2:01:5550% off of select wines all day on

2:01:58Tuesdays. Meanwhile, St. Rosy's cannot

2:02:01offer a 50% off margaritas between 3 and

2:02:046 pm as it does at other locations.

2:02:08The staff notes to the commission

2:02:10meeting did not recommend deleting the

2:02:12restrictions I mentioned and the draft

2:02:15ordinance provided to the commission

2:02:17retained them. The public did not

2:02:19specifically request that their removal

2:02:22and the commission did not discuss them.

2:02:25I believe staff struck these provisions

2:02:27from the ordinance presented to city

2:02:29council tonight simply because the focus

2:02:31at the liquor commission meeting was on

2:02:33the 700 p.m. limit and it consistency

2:02:36with state law.

2:02:38Requiring an establishment to serve one

2:02:40drink at a time to a patron is a minimal

2:02:43burden on the business while pro

2:02:45promoting responsible service. Allowing

2:02:48a discount up to 50% is still permits a

2:02:51substantial happy hour discount. In

2:02:54conclusion, I recommend that the

2:02:55proposed changes to the ordinance be

2:02:57adopted with the exception of sections

2:03:003.2.2.1

2:03:02and 3.2

2:03:05three be retained. Thank you very much.

2:03:09>> Thank you. Next speaker.

2:03:10>> The next speaker is Monica Connors

2:03:12followed by Christina Kaitton Gel.

2:03:14>> Good evening, mayor and members of city

2:03:17council. Monica Connors with the

2:03:18Neighborville Development Partnership.

2:03:20Uh on behalf of Doug Gerald, our

2:03:23chairman of the board, who couldn't be

2:03:24here tonight, I'd like to reiterate a

2:03:26few points that were included in our

2:03:29letter of support. The Neighborville

2:03:31Department Partnership has three areas

2:03:33of emphasis: economic development,

2:03:36tourism, and restaurant marketing.

2:03:38Ordinance 261012

2:03:41would allow for happy hour in

2:03:43Neighborville, which would have a

2:03:45positive impact on many of our 400

2:03:48restaurants who support the employment

2:03:50of over 8,000 people in the

2:03:53accommodation and food industry. We

2:03:56respectfully request that the ordinance

2:03:58be passed. Dine Neighborville, an

2:04:01established brand of NDP, promotes the

2:04:03restaurant industry in the city. We

2:04:06frequently hear from business owners and

2:04:08operators that not having happy hour is

2:04:12detrimental to their competitives

2:04:14competitiveness, detrimental to their

2:04:17bottom line, and also has a negative

2:04:19impact on their employees.

2:04:22The city stands to gain additional

2:04:24revenue in the form of sales tax,

2:04:26alcohol tax, and food and beverage tax

2:04:29during the hours of happy hour, which

2:04:31are typically the slowest hours of the

2:04:33day. Businesses will gain incremental

2:04:36revenue during these slower times and

2:04:39employees of these establishments will

2:04:42gain additional income in their pockets

2:04:45as new incremental sales will be

2:04:47generated from the hours of 300 p.m. to

2:04:49700 p.m. for a total of 15 hours a week

2:04:52which follows state law. When new

2:04:55restaurants pursue a location in

2:04:57Neighborville and learn that they cannot

2:05:00have a traditional happy hour, it

2:05:02creates challenges from a marketing

2:05:04perspective.

2:05:06Many of our restaurants are part of

2:05:08larger business groups and they have

2:05:11multiple locations throughout

2:05:12Chicagoland and Illinois. And these

2:05:15businesses must create a

2:05:16Neighborvilleonly menu, modify their

2:05:19websites, and even change advertising

2:05:21that must exclude Neighborville from

2:05:23promotions. Most of our major restaurant

2:05:26groups have cited frustration over this

2:05:29because it creates both compliance

2:05:31issues and a potential for lost

2:05:33business.

2:05:36NDP supports a safe, happy hour that

2:05:39will allow Neighborville restaurants to

2:05:41be more competitive. If we understand

2:05:43that ride sharing and car pooling are

2:05:45more established today when than when

2:05:47this issue was originally considered

2:05:50many years ago. The 700 p.m. cutoff in

2:05:54in part was because for safety reasons

2:05:58and again that was unanimously voted by

2:06:00the liquor commission. So it's for these

2:06:02reasons that we support the passage of

2:06:04ordinance 261012. Thanks for your time.

2:06:09>> Thank you. Next speaker. The final

2:06:10speaker on the site up is Christina

2:06:12Kaitton Kitchell.

2:06:15>> Hi. Um Christina Kitell with Kaitton

2:06:18Commercial Real Estate Group. Um as many

2:06:19of you know, I do a lot of real estate

2:06:22transactions in downtown Neighborville,

2:06:24specifically with restaurants. Um what I

2:06:26want to speak on going a step further

2:06:29from what Monica covered is really what

2:06:31the purpose of happy hour is in terms to

2:06:34these restaurants. Our real estate here,

2:06:37as you all know, is some of the most

2:06:39expensive real estate outside of

2:06:42Chicago. And in order to make the

2:06:44dollars that they need to make, they

2:06:46have to get butts in the seats Monday

2:06:48through Thursday. There's no problems

2:06:50with the successful restaurants in this

2:06:52town filling Friday, Saturday, Sunday,

2:06:54Thursday nights in the summer. What

2:06:57happy hour does is it helps entice and

2:06:59give those incentives to people on, you

2:07:01know, fixed incomes, people with

2:07:03multiple kids and younger that want to

2:07:05come out earlier and fill those time

2:07:07slots. We are in a tight competition as

2:07:10our surrounding

2:07:12uh communities have way lower rental

2:07:15rates. They have a lot of incentives

2:07:17that they're throwing at these

2:07:18businesses. And for us to then not allow

2:07:22for those off- peak hours to bring in

2:07:24additional income to cover that rental

2:07:27is really detrimental to these

2:07:28businesses. So for that reason I hope

2:07:31you guys do refill it. Thank you.

2:07:34>> Thank you. Any more speakers?

2:07:38>> Okay. council with regard to the

2:07:40proposal before us. Uh, one of the

2:07:42things that

2:07:44Miss Schweitzer brought up and I had

2:07:46also noted with our professional staff

2:07:49is there are three sections from the

2:07:52current liquor code that I believe were

2:07:56intended to be included uh, but during

2:07:59the motion at liquor commission were

2:08:01were likely um, accidentally omitted.

2:08:04And those are related to the number of

2:08:08drinks that can be served to a person at

2:08:10one time. And that would be in

2:08:18section 3.2.23,

2:08:27I'm sorry, 3.2.2.1,

2:08:29uh, which would require service of two

2:08:32or more drinks of alcohol.

2:08:35I'm sorry. Prohibit the service of two

2:08:36or more drinks of alcoholic liquor at

2:08:38one time to one person for consumption

2:08:40except selling or delivering wine by the

2:08:42bottle or cor. So um

2:08:46I believe u

2:08:49we need to keep that in as well as the

2:08:5350% discount

2:08:573.2.2.3 23

2:08:59which is prohibit selling offer uh to

2:09:02sell any drink or alcoholic liquor to

2:09:04any person at a price reduced by more

2:09:06than 50% of its scheduled price. Then

2:09:09there's one other nuance here. It's

2:09:113.2.2

2:09:16what is it Mike one? and that would be

2:09:20to uh have the liquor license

2:09:23establishment post their prices so we

2:09:25know what a 50% discount looks like. Um

2:09:28just a little bit of of history

2:09:30regarding Mr. Doyle's comment earlier

2:09:33back when the state adopted the happy or

2:09:37changed their their their stance on

2:09:38happy hour um years ago the city c the

2:09:43liquor commission looked at that but we

2:09:45were also dealing with a lot of late

2:09:47night related violence in downtown

2:09:50specifically

2:09:51and the liquor commission back then

2:09:54voted to keep things as is. Obviously

2:09:56those things have uh not continued. The

2:09:59city's made great strides in improvement

2:10:01to guarantee the safety of our patrons

2:10:04in the downtown. And the liquor

2:10:06commission felt that a 7:00

2:10:09cut off for happy hour would be

2:10:11appropriate so as to not have people

2:10:15over consuming right before late night

2:10:17hours start. If that clarifies anything.

2:10:20Um, and obviously there was never any

2:10:23intent to have people u, you know,

2:10:26served a bucket of beer by themselves or

2:10:28or anything else like that. So with

2:10:31that, uh, seeing no other discussion,

2:10:34Councilman White or Councilman Wilson,

2:10:36you have a question?

2:10:36>> Uh, just a quick question for either

2:10:39staff or Monica or Christina. um

2:10:44anyone really I guess. But uh would

2:10:48was the intention of

2:10:52business owners

2:10:54uh restaurants

2:10:56to have the wording as it if if you

2:10:59happen to know as it as it's written or

2:11:03what was talked about at the Liquor

2:11:06Commission meeting?

2:11:15I guess more succinctly are are

2:11:18restaurants in support of this as it is

2:11:21or or was was this what they desired or

2:11:24was it something different?

2:11:25>> So one of the things that did come up

2:11:27was when it was the discussion of the

2:11:29time. There was only one gentleman that

2:11:31wanted it to go later into the evening

2:11:33which was interesting. Um, but the

2:11:35majority of the restaurant tours that

2:11:37came up here and spoke really were

2:11:39speaking to kind of what I mentioned

2:11:40earlier, which is this is meant to bring

2:11:42in people during their off hours. Most

2:11:45of them don't even offer this Friday,

2:11:46Saturday, or Sunday because to their

2:11:48point, they don't need to. So why would

2:11:50they discount, you know, where they can

2:11:52collect at full price? This is to bring

2:11:54people through the door, you know. So

2:11:56most of them said that they were

2:11:58completely fine with the 7 PM because

2:12:00there's no way that they would actually

2:12:01probably most likely offer it past 6 PM.

2:12:04Um, so it's really that 2 to six, 3 to 7

2:12:08hours and it's really more like Monday

2:12:10through Wednesday, Monday through

2:12:12Thursday. It's definitely not a weekend

2:12:14thing again. It's to drive more patrons

2:12:16through the door. So everybody outside

2:12:18of one individual that wanted to

2:12:20extended it beyond midnight um everybody

2:12:23else was like yeah we we wouldn't offer

2:12:26it past that time because that's our

2:12:27peak hours and why would we discount our

2:12:29product when we have rising costs across

2:12:32the board.

2:12:33>> Thank you.

2:12:36>> Councilman White, may I have a motion?

2:12:42Mayor, I'm I'm going to uh incorporate

2:12:45what you mentioned um and amend the

2:12:48order, amend the original

2:12:53ordinance. Um so I move to wave the

2:12:56first reading and pass the ordinance

2:12:57amending sections 3-3-3

2:13:00and 3-3-12

2:13:02of the Neighborville Municipal Code to

2:13:04allow happy hour specials consistent

2:13:06with state law with a local restriction

2:13:09prohibiting such specials after

2:13:12and retaining sections 3-3-1

2:13:17or make that 3-3-12

2:13:203.2.1

2:13:243.2.2.1

2:13:26and 3.2.2.3

2:13:2823 requiring a posted drink price

2:13:31schedule prohibiting service of two or

2:13:33more drinks at one time to one person

2:13:36except wine by the bottle or car and

2:13:39prohibiting a discount greater than 50%

2:13:42of the scheduled price.

2:13:46Second. Old Tower.

2:13:47>> We have a motion and a second on I12.

2:13:53>> Roll call.

2:13:54>> Sed.

2:13:56>> I.

2:13:56>> White.

2:13:57>> I.

2:13:58>> Wilson.

2:13:59>> I.

2:13:59>> Worley.

2:14:00>> Yes.

2:14:00>> Gibson.

2:14:01>> I.

2:14:01>> Holer.

2:14:02>> I.

2:14:03>> Jane.

2:14:03>> I.

2:14:04>> McBroom.

2:14:05>> I.

2:14:06>> Motion passes. 8 Z.

2:14:09>> Okay. We're going to take a 7 minute

2:14:11break. We will be back at 911.

2:14:33How are you?

2:18:45She seems okay.

2:18:49doesn't

2:19:16Uh

2:19:40second.

2:20:35You've been working so hard tonight.

2:20:56Okay, folks. It's 911. I'd like to get

2:20:58everybody back in their seats so we can

2:21:00start.

2:21:16Item J1.

2:21:18>> Item J1 is recommendation to receive a

2:21:20staff report and conduct a public

2:21:21hearing to consider an amendment to the

2:21:23annexation agreement for Monarch Landing

2:21:25and related ordinances for the property

2:21:27located at 2255 Monarch Drive. There are

2:21:30two speakers on the item. The first

2:21:33speaker is Vince Rosenova representing

2:21:35the petitioner.

2:21:40>> Good evening, mayor, city council.

2:21:42>> Uh, hold on. We need to open public

2:21:44hearing first. Public hearing for the

2:21:46property located at 2255 Monarch Drive

2:21:48is now open. We will start with the

2:21:50petitioner presentation. They're allowed

2:21:5110 minutes now. Mr. Rosenova.

2:21:54>> Good evening. Good evening, mayor, city

2:21:57council. I'm Vince Rosenova with the law

2:21:59firm of Rosenova and Whitaker here.

2:22:01behalf of the petitioner which is MI

2:22:04Homes of Chicago. Also with me this

2:22:06evening and certainly available for

2:22:08questions we have Zack Kenner along with

2:22:10our entire design team. Uh by way of

2:22:14background MI homes is a very

2:22:16wellrespected home builder been building

2:22:18homes since 1976

2:22:20and MI is certainly proud to be part of

2:22:22the Neapville community. They have their

2:22:25corporate headquarters in Neapville in

2:22:27the city gate center just south of Ferry

2:22:29Road where they employ over 140 people

2:22:32in their Midwest division. Uh they're

2:22:35also very proud to have completed many

2:22:37beautiful subdivisions in Neapville over

2:22:40the last 20 years. Uh looking at the

2:22:43subject property, you can see it

2:22:44consists of 25 acres located immediately

2:22:47to the east of Monarch Landing as well

2:22:49as to the north of Ferry Road. There's

2:22:52certainly a variety of in the area. Just

2:22:55to the north is the corporate boundary

2:22:57with Bornville where there single family

2:22:59homes. To the east is the Curry Point

2:23:02Business Park which has many businesses

2:23:04as well as many recreational uses.

2:23:07Pickle ball comes to mind. And then to

2:23:09the south we have everything that city

2:23:11gate has to offer. Awardwinning hotel,

2:23:14restaurants, service retail, and most

2:23:16notably over 2,000 jobs in that West

2:23:20Crossings uh business development.

2:23:23With regard to uh the history of the

2:23:25site, this site was originally slated

2:23:28for Monarch Landing phase two. Monarch

2:23:31Landing collectively anticipated 1,800

2:23:35assisted living and independent living

2:23:37units. That was ultimately scaled back.

2:23:41Monarch Landing exists on phase one. At

2:23:44all times, this property was actually

2:23:46zone OCI and slated for residential

2:23:49development except for a brief period of

2:23:51time.

2:23:538 when it was presented as a 200,000

2:23:56square foot hockey arena, 60 foot

2:23:59heights as well as a thousand parking

2:24:01spaces, many of which were on the shared

2:24:04property line with Monarch Landing.

2:24:06Well, I certainly can't speak for

2:24:08Monarch Landing. In my humble opinion,

2:24:10the Northgate community before you this

2:24:12evening is much more compatible with

2:24:15Monarch Landing uh than the hockey

2:24:17arena. Uh with regard to zoning,

2:24:19property always been zoned OCI. It was

2:24:22annexed in the 80s over 40 years ago.

2:24:26Always intended as I mentioned for

2:24:28residential purposes. It's very

2:24:30important to make that distinction. This

2:24:32is not zone corridor property. This is

2:24:35OCI zone uh residential property. In

2:24:39fact, the OCI zone the main purpose is

2:24:42to serve as a transition between higher

2:24:45intensity business uses which is Prairie

2:24:47Point to the east and lower intensity

2:24:50residential uses which Monarch Landing

2:24:52to the west and OCI also envisions

2:24:56residential as a conditional use. Uh we

2:25:00always look at the guiding documents

2:25:02when designing our site plan. In this

2:25:04case, it's the 2022 comprehensive plan,

2:25:08the 2020 housing needs assessment study,

2:25:11and the NDP's I8 corridor study.

2:25:15Comprehensive plan designates this as

2:25:17regional center. Specifically talks

2:25:20about the need to a variety of uses to

2:25:23really create a robust environment. Here

2:25:25we have Citygate, we have Monarch

2:25:28Landing, we have the Prairie Point. Uh

2:25:30then you bring in the town homes which

2:25:32will really spark additional interest

2:25:33and create that uh variety that the

2:25:36comprehensive plan speaks of. It's no

2:25:39mystery uh that we're facing a housing

2:25:41shortage. Neapville is not immune. Our

2:25:442020 housing needs assessment indicates

2:25:46that we're about 8600 homes short as I

2:25:49stand here today, compounding to about

2:25:5213,000 homes short uh by 2040. Then

2:25:57lastly, although not a guiding document,

2:25:59uh something that provides a good

2:26:01reference point, the IDA corridor study

2:26:03specifically speaks to the need to bring

2:26:06residential and strategic locations

2:26:07along the corridor, provide people

2:26:10working in the corridor with housing as

2:26:12well. does attract employers to the

2:26:14corridor who will then know that their

2:26:16employees will have a place to live. So

2:26:18certainly uh in alignment with the

2:26:20guiding documents which brings me to the

2:26:22site plan. Uh accordingly you can see

2:26:25that the community has been designed uh

2:26:27with 171 town homes as well as a public

2:26:31park located along the west property

2:26:33line. And something that we're very

2:26:35proud of is the landscape buffering

2:26:37along the perimeter, mature trees,

2:26:40talking about burns, setbacks. Uh, in

2:26:43fact, when we focus on the overall

2:26:45quality and site design, we come in at a

2:26:47density of only about 62% of what's

2:26:50anticipated in the OCI zoning district.

2:26:53Coming in at a lesser density,

2:26:55significantly lesser density than what's

2:26:58permitted allows us to maximize open

2:27:00space. 30% required. 42% and that

2:27:05doesn't even factor in the public park.

2:27:07That also focusing on open space allows

2:27:10us to create additional distances

2:27:12between us and our neighbors. We're

2:27:14almost 300 ft away to the nearest point

2:27:16at Monarch Landing and almost 200 feet

2:27:19away to the nearest point of the Prairie

2:27:22Park.

2:27:23Additionally, uh day one, the park site

2:27:26has been a collaborative uh process

2:27:28compliments to Monarch Landing who is

2:27:30going to be contributing 65 acres to the

2:27:33public park. MI Homes will dedicate 2

2:27:36and a half acres and then we'll have a

2:27:38nice 3.24 acre public park with Monarch

2:27:41Landing. MI Homes as well as all members

2:27:44of the community to share uh that park

2:27:47district is currently programming it.

2:27:49That's not complete yet, but the plans

2:27:51are taking shape very nicely. Certainly

2:27:54a path system, recreational features,

2:27:57exercise stations, which we think will

2:27:59be very popular for Monarch Landing,

2:28:02playground sets, as well as various

2:28:04other different features uh that'll be

2:28:06produced here shortly. Uh so the request

2:28:08from the park actually came from Monarch

2:28:10Landing residents to the park district

2:28:13and they came to us and said we work

2:28:14together on public park and they showed

2:28:16us this exhibit which shows that the

2:28:19park site is a mile and a half away. So

2:28:21certainly uh very much in need for that

2:28:25recreational opportunity. A lot of time

2:28:27and energy also went into the floor

2:28:29plans and the architecture. uh three

2:28:31different floor plans ranging from 1900

2:28:34to 2300 square feet for a lot of variety

2:28:36but most importantly we added the tailor

2:28:38floor plan which focuses on visitability

2:28:42very important from an ADA perspective

2:28:44and also a first floor primary which is

2:28:47very appealing to the active adult uh

2:28:50keeping in conformance with the OCI

2:28:53intent to provide that transition we

2:28:55provided this perspective showing

2:28:57Monarch landing towards the top left

2:28:59portion of the screen and how it

2:29:01transitioned into a very harmonious land

2:29:03use in Prairie Point. Uh so you can see

2:29:06here what it looked like when the trees

2:29:08mature. Uh here's just an elevation kind

2:29:10of showing the quality in the materials,

2:29:13the interest in the building and the

2:29:14incorporation of the tailor end unit and

2:29:17how that plays out. Very nice target

2:29:20market, very broad net, very appealing

2:29:23to everybody, in particular, active

2:29:25adults, professionals working in the

2:29:27corridor, consistent with the I88 study,

2:29:30and also family members of Monarch

2:29:32residents that want to stay close to mom

2:29:34and dad, grandma and grandpa, firsttime

2:29:37home buyers as well. Uh, compliments to

2:29:40MI, which is always the case on all

2:29:42their projects. Great collaboration,

2:29:44inclusive process, worked with Monarch

2:29:47Landing, senior care development,

2:29:49attended resident meetings with Monarch

2:29:51Landing, information Q&A, worked with

2:29:54the park district, worked with the

2:29:56Neighborville Development Partnership,

2:29:58uh school district has no objection,

2:30:00worked with the city of Warrenville,

2:30:02worked with Perry Point Corporate Park,

2:30:04worked with Dupage County relative to

2:30:06the existing active SSA. So, across the

2:30:09board, a great job to them on their

2:30:11outreach. Uh we're also very excited

2:30:15about the possibility of naming one of

2:30:17our main streets after a notable new

2:30:20pavilion. We've left the placeholder

2:30:22here. Very honored if the council

2:30:24selected Candace Parker Drive. That's

2:30:27totally in your purview. You tell us

2:30:29what to put here and we will put it

2:30:31there when we come back for final plat.

2:30:33And lastly, compliments to staff. Their

2:30:36involvement over the last year has led

2:30:38to a much enhanced uh site plan and

2:30:41architecture throughout the process.

2:30:43They've given us good tips, good

2:30:45recommendations. And in the final staff

2:30:47report, there's five additional

2:30:49recommendations, all of which we're in

2:30:51agreement with. Uh so we also appreciate

2:30:54your time and consideration. We're

2:30:56available for questions.

2:31:02>> We do have another speaker after

2:31:06want to go and call.

2:31:08>> The next speaker is John Doyle.

2:31:24>> All right, John Doyle, Neighborville

2:31:26resident. Thank you. You know, I really

2:31:27do like a lot of things about this

2:31:28project, especially the density and the

2:31:31visibility features in particular, but I

2:31:34can't help but question if this is the

2:31:35right target market we should be going

2:31:36after with this property right now. Uh,

2:31:39active adults are, you know, childless

2:31:40adults age 55 and up typically, and

2:31:43we're we're trying to build three and

2:31:44fourbedroom units for them. I just don't

2:31:46quite make I'm not quite sure that makes

2:31:48sense to be honest. You know, they

2:31:50comment about a population gain of ages

2:31:5350 and up. And I question if that's

2:31:55because people over the age of 50 are

2:31:57actually moving into Neapville and need

2:31:58these houses or they're just aging up

2:32:01and not moving out. The fact that our

2:32:03combined enrollment across both our

2:32:04school districts continues to decline

2:32:05year-over-year tells me it's more likely

2:32:07that people are just aging up. Where are

2:32:10the projects to bring in new families or

2:32:12are we intentionally working towards a

2:32:13more child-free neighborville?

2:32:17It would be easier to support a project

2:32:18like this if it was part of a larger

2:32:20affordable housing package like the city

2:32:22worked on for some five years and then

2:32:24largely walked away from after a 54

2:32:26vote. Maybe we need to revisit that in

2:32:28some form. You know, I very much agreed

2:32:30with the mayor about Springfield's Build

2:32:32Act package being a bad fit for

2:32:33Neapville, but at least it was a plan to

2:32:35address affordability. Our current

2:32:37tactics aren't an affordability

2:32:39affordable housing plan. They're an

2:32:40affordable housing wish. Considering

2:32:43housing affordability as our lowest

2:32:45ranked item and our lowest scoring

2:32:46cluster on the recent community surve

2:32:48survey, I'm asking you to reject this

2:32:50project and instead refocus efforts on

2:32:53real long-term solutions to bring new

2:32:55families into affordable housing in

2:32:57Neapville. Give us a version of the

2:32:59build act that works for us so

2:33:00Springfield doesn't feel forced to get

2:33:02one for us. And I know the planning and

2:33:04zoning committee approved this

2:33:06unanimously, but they also approved the

2:33:08data center management and none of us

2:33:09wanted that either. So maybe has an

2:33:11alignment issue with what they're

2:33:12approving and what Neighborville needs.

2:33:15Thank you.

2:33:17>> Thank you. Any more speakers?

2:33:19>> The petitioner now has five minutes

2:33:20available for rebuttal.

2:33:23>> I know we have a question from the

2:33:24councilman, but uh Mr. Rosenov, do you

2:33:27want to do your rebuttal?

2:33:30>> We're available for questions.

2:33:32>> Council, thank you, mayor. I uh just

2:33:34wanted to um commend um Mr. Ross Nova,

2:33:39Mr. would occur for um I mean wonderful

2:33:43project here uh on the merits um also

2:33:46you know council brought up the issue a

2:33:48few months ago about um including uh

2:33:52names of more recent neighborville

2:33:55heroes diverse uh people that have done

2:33:57things in the community um we've worked

2:33:59together uh closely on this and I I

2:34:02really thank you for your support um

2:34:04just kind of as a housekeeping matter as

2:34:06as everybody you're aware Mr. Kger, if

2:34:10you could chime in here. Um, technically

2:34:13there are streets in Neapville that have

2:34:14the word park in them. Uh, Candace

2:34:17Parker's name is is two letters above

2:34:19our typical street name. So, uh, you

2:34:21would just need that to be included in

2:34:22the plat that we vote on. Correct, Mr.

2:34:25>> Mr. Kger. Uh, that is correct. Uh, it

2:34:28would not it would not technically fit

2:34:30our um, uh, normal naming conventions.

2:34:34However, if that's included in the

2:34:35motion, um, we will see that it's done.

2:34:37Okay, perfect. And um from my

2:34:39conversations with you, this dialogue is

2:34:41enough that if they include in the P

2:34:43plat, that's not an issue for you.

2:34:45>> Uh it is not.

2:34:46>> Yep. I appreciate that. And I also note

2:34:48that plenty of streets like Royal St.

2:34:49George are way way way over um that uh

2:34:52number of letters. Um just to talk a

2:34:55little bit about process and thank you

2:34:57so much for participating in it. um

2:34:59Neighbor Settlement, the good folks at

2:35:00Neighbor Settlement put together a list

2:35:03of names of um you know kind of diverse

2:35:06Neapville heroes and um submitted that

2:35:09our transportation engineering

2:35:11development department um Miss Lden,

2:35:13Director Lowden and her staff took a li

2:35:15look and narrowed it down to names that

2:35:18could fit and um Mr. Ross Nova indicated

2:35:22that they are very um interested in

2:35:24including some of these names in the

2:35:25next developments that come up before

2:35:26council um which I think is awesome.

2:35:29Just to give a preview, obviously

2:35:30Candace Parker would be for tonight. Um

2:35:32Tom Lei, a Chinese American business

2:35:35owner. He owned a business in downtown

2:35:37Neapville in 1860s. Was pretty not

2:35:39notable. Uh Dominique Rocka, so Raqqa

2:35:42Drive. Uh she's an immigrant from

2:35:44Tunisia, founded Source Books. It is the

2:35:46largest womanowned publisher in America

2:35:48still here. Peg Price, first female n

2:35:51mayor of Neapville. Dr. Raja, crucial

2:35:55researcher at Fermy Lab, worked in cork

2:35:57subatomic particle research, Jamali

2:36:00Drive, um Janal Jamali, recent winner of

2:36:03the West Suburban Philanthropic Network

2:36:05Business of the Year, Mesa Tabika, and

2:36:08so many others. So just really looking

2:36:11forward to um seeing those names

2:36:12implemented. And uh Mr. Ross, I don't

2:36:14know if you wanted to say anything, but

2:36:15thank you.

2:36:16>> Absolutely. Thank you and we appreciate

2:36:18the opportunity to participate and thank

2:36:20you for bringing this to our attention

2:36:21early where we could leave that

2:36:23designation on the platform.

2:36:27>> Is there anybody else wishing to speak

2:36:28on this particular issue?

2:36:31Come forward now. Seeing no one.

2:36:34Councilman White, may I have a motion to

2:36:35close the public hearing?

2:36:37>> Mad comment.

2:36:39>> Go ahead, Councilman.

2:36:41>> Yeah. Uh just a couple questions. Great

2:36:43briefing by the way. Um But I I would uh

2:36:47if you could comment maybe on our

2:36:50seniors. I know Mr. Doyle brought up a

2:36:52point um on the housing affordability

2:36:56and so on, but um and know last time I

2:36:59looked that uh at some of the data that

2:37:02our seniors were of our fastest growing

2:37:05population. So from a targeting the

2:37:08group that you're targeting, I think um

2:37:10it seems to be on point. Um, and with

2:37:13that said, where where do you see these

2:37:15homes kind of averaging from a price

2:37:17standpoint? Where do you see that the

2:37:19houses falling into? I

2:37:21>> I believe you're you're absolutely

2:37:22correct. Our fastest growing age

2:37:25demographic is the baby boomers. When we

2:37:28design any community, a lot of uh

2:37:30research goes into it and one of the

2:37:32main data points is always our census

2:37:34data. And our census data shows that

2:37:36between 55 and 75 that continues to grow

2:37:41rapidly.

2:37:42any other cohort. So that's why we

2:37:44believe this will be very appealing to

2:37:46that age demographic and also when we

2:37:49look at the design of the site we make

2:37:51it even more so appealing and that's why

2:37:54at staff's request we introduced the

2:37:56tailor end units which have visibility

2:37:58aspects which is very important uh and

2:38:01then also first floor primary to allow

2:38:03for aging in place and then also having

2:38:06the association responsible for exterior

2:38:08maintenance makes it very appealing as

2:38:11well. You know you can have to worry

2:38:13about mowing the lawn. Maybe you can

2:38:15leave town and you know it's taken care

2:38:16of. And then the proximity to Monarch

2:38:19and then the path and then the park

2:38:21along the shared property line is also

2:38:23very important. And then proximity to

2:38:25transportation uh open space area. So

2:38:28it's definitely appealing uh to that age

2:38:31demographic. Also uh at an introductory

2:38:34or starting price point of 575,000

2:38:37it really gives an opportunity for

2:38:39somebody to get new construction where

2:38:41you don't have to about deferred

2:38:43maintenance at a price which is

2:38:44consistent with our average household

2:38:46incomes which are over 150,000. Uh so

2:38:50although it doesn't meet IDA's uh

2:38:52classification for affordable, it's

2:38:55575,000

2:38:56which ties into our household income and

2:38:59we're all firm believers. And anytime

2:39:01you increase supply and you increase

2:39:04competition, you increase opportunity

2:39:07and that's what we're doing here. And

2:39:08then we tie that into our 2020 housing

2:39:11needs assessment where we see that we're

2:39:1313,000 homes short. that's going to

2:39:15drive prices up unless we do a good job

2:39:18putting the inventory out there.

2:39:20>> Thank you.

2:39:21>> Thank you. And the uh just to add one

2:39:23name to Councilman Towers, uh I think uh

2:39:28talking with Candace Parker, but we we

2:39:31realize our first Hall of Famer is

2:39:33actually NBA referee Danny Crawford who

2:39:36actually went to NBA Hall of Fame last

2:39:40year. So add him to the list as well.

2:39:42Thank you.

2:39:42>> That's awesome. Thank you.

2:39:44Okay, Councilman White, may I have a

2:39:46motion to close the public hearing?

2:39:48>> Mayor, I move to close the public

2:39:50hearing.

2:39:50>> Council,

2:39:52second old tower.

2:39:54>> All those in favor of closing public

2:39:55hearing, sign I

2:39:57>> opposed. Public hearing is now closed.

2:40:00J2.

2:40:01>> Item J2 is a recommendation to pass an

2:40:03ordinance authorizing the fifth

2:40:04amendment to the annexation agreement

2:40:06for Monarch Landing to release the age

2:40:08restriction for lot 1B and establish a

2:40:10process for lot 2 for North Gate

2:40:12Neville. White. May I have a motion?

2:40:15>> I move to pass the ordinance authorizing

2:40:17the fifth amendment to the annexation

2:40:18agreement for Monarch Landing to release

2:40:20the age restriction for lot 1B and

2:40:23establish a process for lot two. Council

2:40:27>> Miller

2:40:27>> second tower.

2:40:28>> Motion second on J2. Roll call.

2:40:31>> Wilson.

2:40:33>> I.

2:40:33>> Worley.

2:40:34>> Yes.

2:40:35>> Gibson.

2:40:36>> I.

2:40:36>> Holer.

2:40:37>> I.

2:40:37>> Jane.

2:40:38>> I.

2:40:38>> Mc Broom.

2:40:39>> I.

2:40:39>> Sed.

2:40:40>> I.

2:40:41>> White.

2:40:41>> I. Motion passes 8 Z J3.

2:40:45>> Item J3 is a recommendation to pass an

2:40:47ordinance approving a major change to

2:40:49the Monarch Landing plan unit

2:40:50development, a preliminary plan unit

2:40:52development flat with a deviation and a

2:40:54conditional use for single family

2:40:56attached dwelling units from North of

2:40:57Neville. Councilman White. May I have a

2:40:59motion? I move to pass the ordinance

2:41:02approving a major change to Monarch

2:41:04Landing Plan Unit development, a

2:41:06preliminary plan unit development plat

2:41:08with a deviation in a conditional use

2:41:11for single family attached dwelling

2:41:13units for Northgate of Neighborville.

2:41:15Council Holder

2:41:16>> second tower a motion and a second on

2:41:19J3. Roll call.

2:41:20>> Worley,

2:41:21>> yes.

2:41:21>> Gibson, I

2:41:24>> Jane, I

2:41:25>> McBroom,

2:41:26>> I say, I

2:41:27>> White,

2:41:28>> I. Wilson.

2:41:29>> Hi.

2:41:30>> J4.

2:41:31>> Item J4 is a recommendation to pass an

2:41:33ordinance approving a preliminary plate

2:41:35of subdivision for Northgate of

2:41:36Neighborville.

2:41:38>> And item J3 passed 80. Item J4,

2:41:42Councilman White, may I have a motion?

2:41:44>> I move to pass the ordinance approving a

2:41:46preliminary plat of subdivision for

2:41:48North Gate of Neapville and authorizing

2:41:52a naming of street to of Candace Parker.

2:41:59Councilar

2:42:00>> second. Old Tower.

2:42:01>> A motion and a second on J4. Roll call.

2:42:04>> Gibson.

2:42:05>> I.

2:42:06>> Holer.

2:42:06>> I.

2:42:07>> Jane.

2:42:07>> I.

2:42:08>> McBurn.

2:42:09>> I.

2:42:09>> Sad.

2:42:10>> I.

2:42:10>> White.

2:42:11>> I.

2:42:11>> Wilson.

2:42:12>> I.

2:42:13>> Worley.

2:42:13>> Yes. Motion passes 80. J5.

2:42:16>> Item J5 is a recommendation to pass the

2:42:18ordinance granting a temporary use for

2:42:20marketing signs for Northgate of

2:42:21Neighborville.

2:42:23>> Councilman White. I move to pass an

2:42:25ordinance granting a temporary use of

2:42:27marketing signs for Northgate of

2:42:29Neapville.

2:42:30>> Hold second. Hol.

2:42:31>> We have a motion in a second on J5. Roll

2:42:33call.

2:42:34>> Holer.

2:42:35>> I.

2:42:35>> Jane.

2:42:36>> I.

2:42:36>> McBroom.

2:42:37>> I.

2:42:37>> Sad.

2:42:38>> I.

2:42:39>> White.

2:42:39>> I.

2:42:40>> Wilson.

2:42:40>> I.

2:42:41>> Worley.

2:42:41>> Yes.

2:42:42>> Gibson.

2:42:43>> I.

2:42:43>> Motion passes 800. Councilman White. M1.

2:42:48I move to approve the award of bid

2:42:5026-124

2:42:5334.45-12.47

2:42:59power transformer to WG Transformer USA

2:43:03LLC for an amount not to exceed

2:43:05$4,96,000

2:43:09$400 plus a 3% contingency. Councilman

2:43:13>> second tower.

2:43:14>> Okay. We do have one speaker on this.

2:43:16Yeah, I see you. We do have one speaker,

2:43:18Mr. Doyle.

2:43:34>> All right, John Doyle, Neighborville

2:43:36resident. Uh, you know, I didn't put

2:43:37this agenda together, but it's quite a

2:43:38juicy one, as you can see. Um, so I'm

2:43:40asking tonight for a motion to table

2:43:42this item until the financial operations

2:43:44of our utility can be better understood.

2:43:46We have been told repeatedly that the

2:43:47reserve draw downs went to stocking

2:43:49transformers and here we are buying

2:43:51another transformer. So I couldn't help

2:43:53but dig a little deeper into not only

2:43:54our budgets but the utilities checkbook

2:43:56and I believe there's evidence that the

2:43:58situation is not being properly

2:43:59represented to the council or to the

2:44:01public and further investigation is

2:44:03needed before approving any further

2:44:04requisitions.

2:44:06Starting with the claim that the reserve

2:44:07spending that occurred between 2022 and

2:44:092024 went to increase spending on

2:44:10inventory stock. The budget books

2:44:12certainly don't tell that same story. In

2:44:152022, postcoavid delays spending only

2:44:17caused an increase of $480,000. 2023 is

2:44:21quite explicit that only $2 million of

2:44:22the increased spending is attributed to

2:44:24warehouse inventory. In 2024, the

2:44:26purchase budget is is more than half as

2:44:28the city moved to capitalize warehouse

2:44:30stock. Not only does this not explain

2:44:32the $30 million draw down, 2024's

2:44:35situation is especially troublesome

2:44:37because when the council voted on the

2:44:38rate plan in 2021, what we were sold and

2:44:41what was approved is a plan that fully

2:44:43paid for capital through rates, not

2:44:45through reserve spending. I can't find

2:44:47where that strategy change was discussed

2:44:49with the council anywhere during those

2:44:50years publicly. Were any of you honestly

2:44:52aware that this was happening with our

2:44:54reserves?

2:44:56Then there's the explanation that the

2:44:57growth forecasts were wrong, which is

2:44:59true. problem is a we provided the

2:45:02growth forecasts and b the consultant is

2:45:05quite explicit that they don't evaluate

2:45:06the forecast nor do they endorse them.

2:45:08They simply do the revenue requirement

2:45:10analysis based off of the data that we

2:45:11provide. This quote from them is on the

2:45:13last page of the 2021 rate study right

2:45:15before the impedex stating that very

2:45:17fact.

2:45:19One more example. In 2018 the cost of

2:45:22service study said rates needed to go up

2:45:243.7%.

2:45:25But the proposed rates cut revenue by 2%

2:45:28instead. On top of that, the PPA base

2:45:30change, quote, after review with

2:45:32management, took off another 2%, netting

2:45:35a 3.9% cut below current rates, which

2:45:38was eight points below what the cost of

2:45:39service study recommended.

2:45:42Even though the cost of service study

2:45:44very clearly suggests a rate increase,

2:45:46what was ultimately asked of the council

2:45:47was passing a 2% decrease year-over-year

2:45:50for three years in a row and a change of

2:45:52PPA knowing that it would result in a

2:45:53revenue below what was required to cover

2:45:55costs. This pattern repeats year after

2:45:58year after year. The consultant says XYZ

2:46:00and then after quote review with

2:46:02management out pops ABC instead.

2:46:05Something here does not pass the sniff

2:46:07test. And so again, I'm asking you to

2:46:09table this motion for $4 million until

2:46:12you can explain what's going on with the

2:46:13financial operations of our utility and

2:46:15it rate setting practices. Thank you.

2:46:22Thank you. Discussion.

2:46:25We have a motion and a second on the

2:46:26table.

2:46:29Roll call.

2:46:30>> Jane.

2:46:32>> Yes.

2:46:32>> McBroom.

2:46:34>> Hi.

2:46:34>> Say

2:46:35>> hi.

2:46:36>> White.

2:46:37>> I.

2:46:37>> Wilson.

2:46:38>> Hi.

2:46:39>> Worley.

2:46:39>> Yes.

2:46:40>> Gibson.

2:46:41>> I.

2:46:41>> Holer.

2:46:42>> I.

2:46:43>> Motion passes. 8 Z. Councilman White.

2:46:46M2.

2:46:48I move to approve the award of RSP25-03

2:46:54citywide camera access to SDI Presence

2:46:56LLC for an amount not to exceed

2:46:58$8,293,111

2:47:02plus a 3% contingency and for a

2:47:05three-year term.

2:47:08Second old tower.

2:47:12>> We have a motion and a second on M2.

2:47:16Roll call.

2:47:19>> There are speakers. Mayor,

2:47:21>> I'm sorry about that. Um, Mr. Doyle

2:47:23again.

2:47:25>> All right. John Doyle, last time

2:47:27tonight. Uh, I have two main issues with

2:47:29this item. You know, first of all, is it

2:47:32really needed? Our safety scores are

2:47:35already world class and for violent and

2:47:37property crime in particular ratings are

2:47:39significantly higher than national

2:47:41benchmarks.

2:47:43Our safety score is also above our our

2:47:46quality score above our important score

2:47:48indicating that we are already exceeding

2:47:49expectations here. So I have to question

2:47:51if this should be a financial priority

2:47:53at all for the city right now. seems

2:47:55like it would be much more impactful to

2:47:57invest in mobility like what we're doing

2:47:59with the bike plan or ironically with

2:48:00our utility rather than spend this money

2:48:03on safety.

2:48:05I also have issues with the scope of the

2:48:07project and honestly lack of

2:48:08transparency in the request. This isn't

2:48:10just a maintenance and upgrades. It's

2:48:12adding an additional 270 cameras to the

2:48:14network. Is that really necessary for a

2:48:16community like Neapville? Current safety

2:48:19ratings and crime stats would indicate

2:48:20no. Then there's the transparency issue.

2:48:23Where are these additional 270 cameras

2:48:25going? And what kind of cameras are

2:48:26they? Genitech sells automated license

2:48:28plate reader cameras, too. How many of

2:48:30new cameras will will those be? How do

2:48:32we know they won't be pointed at private

2:48:34property? You know, no, no offense to

2:48:36Chief Aries, but I've seen enough

2:48:37shenanigans going on with our electric

2:48:39utility that I'm in trust, but verify

2:48:41mode. The justification for this system

2:48:43is a report from a third party

2:48:44consultant. But that report has not been

2:48:46attached to any agenda item on this

2:48:48topic. I don't think it's unreasonable

2:48:50to expect third party reports to be

2:48:52attached to agendas when said reports

2:48:54are used for justification in the

2:48:55passing of ordinances. I'm all for I

2:48:58mean I'm going to get it via foyer

2:48:59either way. So you're just putting in

2:49:01you know more work on the admins. I'm

2:49:03seeking table to I'm seeking a motion to

2:49:06table this until the kafari needs

2:49:08assessment that the city paid for in

2:49:102024 that justifies the supposed

2:49:12expansion of police surveillance is

2:49:14shared with the public and can be

2:49:15reviewed. Thank you.

2:49:19Thank you. Next speaker.

2:49:20>> The next speaker is Kevin G, followed by

2:49:22Chief Aries.

2:49:28>> Chief Aries.

2:49:45>> Before I begin, I did want to do an

2:49:46introduction because she's going to the

2:49:48attention. Uh with me tonight is IT

2:49:50project manager, Kelly Neil, who is the

2:49:52IT project manager uh for the city on

2:49:55this camera project. She'll help a lot

2:49:56more if there's questions that get

2:49:58pretty far in the weeds on the project.

2:49:59So, good evening and thank you for the

2:50:02opportunity to speak on this agenda

2:50:04item. I want to start by saying that

2:50:06while I'm the one presenting, there are

2:50:08a number of directors who could also be

2:50:10standing in front of you about this

2:50:12particular project because this system

2:50:14impacts and involves multiple

2:50:16departments throughout the city. Our

2:50:18conversation tonight is about

2:50:20modernizing, updating, and expanding

2:50:23citywide cameras and building access for

2:50:26the entire employee base. We intend to

2:50:28how explain how we got here and what's

2:50:31being proposed as well as to respond to

2:50:34some questions we've heard from

2:50:35citizens.

2:50:37Residents have understandably asked what

2:50:39the system can do, who can use it, how

2:50:42long information is retained, and what

2:50:45happens if someone misuses it. These are

2:50:48important things that we owe them

2:50:49answers to. A healthy conversation is

2:50:52important to transparent government and

2:50:54maintaining the public's trust in us and

2:50:57any technology or tool we're

2:50:58implementing as a city. So that's what

2:51:00we're going to try to do tonight.

2:51:04Before explaining what is being

2:51:05proposed, I want to give council some

2:51:07context about what exists today. The

2:51:10city currently operates 442 cameras

2:51:13across a number of departments. Most are

2:51:16located in or around city buildings,

2:51:19utility facilities, and other critical

2:51:21infrastructure.

2:51:23Our water and electric utilities use

2:51:25cameras to protect facilities and

2:51:27infrastructure that are essential to the

2:51:29community. Transportation uses cameras

2:51:32to evaluate resident concerns, confirm

2:51:35that signals and related equipment are

2:51:37operating properly, and assess the

2:51:39effects effect of changes to signal

2:51:42timing. The police department uses

2:51:45cameras primarily for event safety and

2:51:47to recover evidence when an incident

2:51:50occurs in an area covered by a camera.

2:51:53These cameras do not replace police

2:51:55work, but footage can help us determine

2:51:57what happened, identify involved

2:51:59individuals, and just as importantly,

2:52:02eliminate people who are not involved.

2:52:04With regard to building access, the city

2:52:07currently uses electronic access readers

2:52:09to control who can enter particular

2:52:11buildings, doors, and restricted areas.

2:52:14It allows the city to limit access based

2:52:16on employee, contractor, and volunteer

2:52:18responsibilities,

2:52:20documents use of the access credentials,

2:52:22and also allows the city to deactivate

2:52:24or modify credentials when needed. Our

2:52:27current systems have served the city

2:52:29since 2013. Tonight's proposal involves

2:52:32replacing aging equipment, consolidating

2:52:35disparit systems, and adding new

2:52:38coverage.

2:52:41The city currently operates three

2:52:43separate systems, one for the security

2:52:45cameras, one for traffic cameras, and

2:52:48one for building access control. These

2:52:51systems operate independently, require

2:52:54separate administration, and have

2:52:56different support and storage needs.

2:52:58Much of the hardware is now at or

2:53:00nearing the end of its useful life, and

2:53:03the existing systems have significant

2:53:05storage limitations with little or no

2:53:07capacity for growth. A significant

2:53:10portion of this project involves

2:53:12replacing equipment that the city

2:53:13already owns. Without replacement, this

2:53:16equipment will become increasingly

2:53:17unreliable.

2:53:19This proposal also adds cameras and

2:53:22access control points and consolidates

2:53:24the systems to improve safety for our

2:53:26employees in our buildings, better

2:53:29protect our public buildings and

2:53:30critical infrastructure,

2:53:32continue to assist with criminal

2:53:34investigations, and give staff a

2:53:36centralized system rather than require

2:53:39them to work across multiple

2:53:40disconnected platforms. I should add it

2:53:44also upgrades servers for on premise

2:53:47storage of the camera footage.

2:53:54The city hired a well-known security

2:53:56consultant, Gafari Associates, via RFP

2:54:00in 2024 to conduct an independent

2:54:02assessment of our existing camera and

2:54:05building access systems. Gafari examined

2:54:08the condition of the current technology,

2:54:11assessed city facilities and security

2:54:13needs, gathered feedback from employees,

2:54:16and recommended both the system design

2:54:18and the areas where additional coverage

2:54:20was warranted. City staff reviewed and

2:54:23refined Gafari's recommendations before

2:54:25incorporating them into a competitive

2:54:27request for proposals. Eight firms

2:54:30responded and a multi-EP department city

2:54:32team evaluated the proposals.

2:54:35staff selected SDI presence as the

2:54:38preferred vendor to build, maintain, and

2:54:41technically support the city system,

2:54:43excuse me, which they have also notably

2:54:46done for large clients like O'Hare and

2:54:49Midway airports.

2:54:51SDI does not independently decide where

2:54:54cameras or access points are located,

2:54:56who can access them, how recordings are

2:54:59used, how long they are retained, or

2:55:02when they are shared. Those decisions

2:55:04remain with the city and will be

2:55:06governed by city policy. The consultant

2:55:08made the recommendations. SDI will help

2:55:11implement them and the city remains

2:55:13responsible and accountable for how the

2:55:16system is ultimately used.

2:55:20From an access control standpoint, this

2:55:23slide shows that the city currently

2:55:25covers 89 locations with 404 access

2:55:29readers. Across those 89 locations, the

2:55:32consultant is proposing 98 additional

2:55:35access readers, most around our water

2:55:38and electric utility infra

2:55:39infrastructure as well as at the police

2:55:42department.

2:55:46The city currently operates 442 cameras.

2:55:50Under the consultant's recommendation,

2:55:52approximately 200 of those existing

2:55:54cameras would be replaced because they

2:55:56have reached or approaching the end of

2:55:58their natural life, their useful life.

2:55:59Excuse me, not natural.

2:56:04The project would also add approximately

2:56:07270 cameras primarily to improve

2:56:10building and infrastructure security.

2:56:12You'll see notable increases at the

2:56:14municipal center and Naper settlement.

2:56:17These recommendations were based on the

2:56:19consultants facility by facility

2:56:21security assessment. To be fully

2:56:24transparent, the proposed system also

2:56:26has capability to incorporate the use of

2:56:28automated and AI functionality which

2:56:30will be strongly governed in accordance

2:56:33with city policy.

2:56:36As we expand this technology, we also

2:56:39have a responsibility to establish clear

2:56:41limits on how it can be used. Residents

2:56:44should expect that from us. We are not

2:56:46asking council or the public to simply

2:56:48trust that misuse will never occur. A

2:56:50responsible system should limit access,

2:56:53require a legitimate purpose, create an

2:56:56audit trail, and allow us to identify

2:56:59and address improper activity.

2:57:01First, cameras will be used for defined

2:57:04city purposes, covering what I mentioned

2:57:07earlier, protecting buildings and

2:57:08critical infrastructure, supporting

2:57:10traffic operations, maintaining safety

2:57:13at city facilities and events, and

2:57:15investigating incidents that occur in

2:57:17areas covered by a camera.

2:57:20Second, access to these systems will be

2:57:23based on an employees department,

2:57:25responsibilities, and operational need.

2:57:28Investigative retrieval or export of

2:57:30footage will require a documented reason

2:57:33and when applicable, an incident or case

2:57:35number. Third, the default retention

2:57:38period will remain the same as it is

2:57:40today, and that is 30 days. Footage will

2:57:43be automatically deleted unless it has

2:57:46been preserved for a documented

2:57:47evidentiary, legal, public records, or

2:57:51other authorized purpose.

2:57:54Fourth, activity within the system will

2:57:56be logged and reviewed. That includes

2:57:59employee use and vendor access,

2:58:01specifically SDI, for technical support.

2:58:04We will establish routine auditing

2:58:06procedures rather than waiting for a

2:58:08complaint before reviewing system

2:58:09activity. Additionally, the storage of

2:58:13video and access control logs will begin

2:58:15again as I mentioned earlier maintained

2:58:16on premises on city servers which are

2:58:20also included included in this proposal.

2:58:23SDI will help maintain and technically

2:58:25support the system, but it will not

2:58:27independently determine how cameras are

2:58:29used, who receives access, how long

2:58:32footage is retained, or when it can be

2:58:34shared. Again, as I mentioned earlier,

2:58:35those remain with us as the city.

2:58:37Finally, and probably most importantly,

2:58:40misuse will have consequences.

2:58:43Unauthorized access or use can result in

2:58:46immediate sus immediate suspension of

2:58:48access and discipline up to and

2:58:50including termination while also

2:58:52reviewing any misuse with the

2:58:54appropriate states attorney's office for

2:58:55appropriate criminal charges. The

2:58:58objective is straightforward. This

2:59:00system should help us protect people,

2:59:02facilities, and infrastructure. and

2:59:04we're committed to putting the

2:59:05governance in place to make sure that's

2:59:07done responsibly. With that, all the

2:59:10directors tonight, Miss Neil and I will

2:59:12take any questions.

2:59:16>> Council

2:59:18Council McBrroom.

2:59:21>> Thank you, Chief. Excellent. um you know

2:59:25uh we've all had a lot of questions and

2:59:28the topic of cameras

2:59:30been out there and um you know fair

2:59:33amount of misinformation out there and I

2:59:34think there's a fair amount of rational

2:59:36concerns too and um you know when I sat

2:59:40down and talked to you it made me feel

2:59:42more comfortable and we've had talks

2:59:44about this it's like that's great but

2:59:46then I can't just go out to the public

2:59:47and say I talked to the chief that's

2:59:49fine right um you know I know you uh

2:59:52department with integrity and um you

2:59:56know I I think everybody does I think

2:59:58our our police are great. Um so I I

3:00:01guess some some questions here about

3:00:06well first the the governance um and

3:00:10maybe this is a question for legal. I

3:00:11mean is this something that we we

3:00:14codify? You know I I don't you know Will

3:00:17County I saw you were quoted in the in

3:00:18the article about the what Will County

3:00:20did. They did an ordinance. I didn't

3:00:21read the ordinance but they did

3:00:22something right. Uh

3:00:25>> they approved the request all the IGAs

3:00:27for request of placement of LPR cameras

3:00:29on Will County roadways.

3:00:32>> They are talking about

3:00:33>> they're talking about doing an

3:00:35ordinance.

3:00:35>> Yes.

3:00:36>> Um so I don't maybe that's something for

3:00:38council to consider or legal weigh in.

3:00:40Um doesn't make sense because um you

3:00:44know I I just don't I don't think we've

3:00:47done a good job and I don't want to beat

3:00:48a dead horse and just making the case

3:00:49for it. Right. So, there's a certain

3:00:51amount of public that's just like, I

3:00:53don't like these. I don't trust them. I

3:00:54don't understand. I don't know uh you

3:00:56know, where my data is going. Um is

3:00:58there abuse going on? And you know, at

3:01:01the minimum, uh you know, publishing

3:01:04this this information um you know, this

3:01:07this presentation we'll put out and um

3:01:09you know, getting the stuff this you

3:01:11know, having a link on our website. I

3:01:12know we have a link like about body cams

3:01:14and you know procedures around that but

3:01:17um you know at the very minimum having

3:01:19um you know something on our website but

3:01:22um you know perhaps considering an

3:01:24ordinance um and then I I'd like to

3:01:27maybe see in the future um you know just

3:01:31some some real data behind you know

3:01:33these these are the results you know

3:01:35this is who we caught you know this is

3:01:37the the stolen car that we found this is

3:01:40and these are these are real tangible

3:01:43things we can tell you about that that

3:01:44this tool or these tools and you know I

3:01:47know we're not talking about u

3:01:49specifically um license plate readers

3:01:51tonight but um I think we're in the same

3:01:54sphere right and the same concern so um

3:01:59as far as as the proposal tonight you

3:02:01know I I look at that that general fund

3:02:03all the time and and I think the council

3:02:06that's that should be the fund they they

3:02:07look at the most and I do think it's

3:02:09tight um you you know, we we have a

3:02:12tough time uh adding, you know, new

3:02:14public safety, whether it's fire and and

3:02:17police each year. It's a battle of like

3:02:19we could use more cops, right? But we

3:02:21can't I mean, council last year kind of

3:02:23we had to add to the budget to add more

3:02:25police officers. So, uh I do that the

3:02:278.3 like pops out at me and it's like I

3:02:31do think, you know, do we need all the

3:02:34the 200 replacement that's to me that's

3:02:36kind of like a no-brainer. We've had

3:02:37them a long time, but the 270 extra um

3:02:41it's it sounds like a shocking number to

3:02:43me. Um you know, 8.3 whatever it is. Is

3:02:47that $4 million? Is that $5 million? And

3:02:49and I get a lot of that is temporary,

3:02:51right? It's a three-year contract with

3:02:53an extension, but is there room in there

3:02:55to um

3:02:58use some of that money to instead uh put

3:03:00some more boots on the ground? So, those

3:03:02are just kind of some of the thoughts

3:03:03that I've I've been thinking about and I

3:03:06know you the rank and file do want this

3:03:09tool, right? Um, but you know, what's

3:03:11the ROI? You know, I I I hear a lot of

3:03:14neighborhoods in town and I I don't

3:03:15think it's because our cops aren't doing

3:03:17their job, but you know, maybe we don't

3:03:19have enough cops. I mean, I hear a lot

3:03:20like I never see a cop in my

3:03:22neighborhood. I never see um you know,

3:03:24someone patrolling through my

3:03:25neighborhood and it just makes me think

3:03:27like maybe we need another car and

3:03:28another cop instead of another um

3:03:31camera. So, anyway, those are just kind

3:03:34of my my high level thoughts. Um,

3:03:37turn it over.

3:03:38>> Councilman Wilson.

3:03:39>> Thank you, Mayor. Um, yeah, I guess I

3:03:42guess I had similar thoughts and I know

3:03:44Chief, we've talked about similar uh

3:03:48security or privacy

3:03:51concerns or issues and whatnot in the

3:03:54past about various things that have come

3:03:55up with regard to cameras and whatnot.

3:03:59And I I guess myself too had similar

3:04:02concerns. Um, I guess you know out of

3:04:04the million here. The the big number

3:04:08that stands out is 6.6, which is for

3:04:11construction and implementation.

3:04:13Um I I guess without getting too much

3:04:16into the weeds here, I was wondering if

3:04:19it can speak because I know some of it's

3:04:23for labor, there's licensing. Um you

3:04:28know, obviously the the additional

3:04:30cameras are going to cost some amount.

3:04:34um hardware. Is there like

3:04:38some percentage as to where this is

3:04:42majority of it's going

3:04:45or is it evenly distributed?

3:04:49>> Um because this is a complete um new

3:04:52network. So it's complete fiber network,

3:04:55complete storage, um all servers,

3:04:58everything. So that is your base

3:05:00infrastructure that needs to be built

3:05:02out. So that really doesn't even include

3:05:04the camera part. That's really the base

3:05:06infrastructure.

3:05:07>> Okay.

3:05:10Thanks. Yeah. I I guess you know just

3:05:13similar comments to Councilman McGroom.

3:05:15I'm just hearing from residents where

3:05:18you know they

3:05:21contact you know me and others here

3:05:23about speeding or obviously the ebikes

3:05:26and you know we've had conversations

3:05:28about you know trolling 16-year-old kids

3:05:31or whatever but at the same time you

3:05:34know just in my head I'm wondering if

3:05:35there's a way to reduce some of this

3:05:39cost to allocate to other potential

3:05:43officers despite uh

3:05:45you know

3:05:48what people say against you know bikes

3:05:50or ebikes or whatever. So um yeah I mean

3:05:55those are some of my you know initial

3:05:58thoughts. But I I will say too, sorry to

3:06:01cavitate this too, it's I I will say

3:06:03it's obviously

3:06:05certainly important to uh

3:06:08you know have security around our

3:06:10infrastructure. You know obviously

3:06:12water, electricity, the municipal

3:06:15centers too. So I'm not discounting that

3:06:18at all.

3:06:19>> Thank you Councilwoman Jane.

3:06:22>> Thank you mayor. Um thank you chief for

3:06:25the presentation and

3:06:28um contextualizing

3:06:30um the asks, right? You know, 2013 was

3:06:34where when we had the system

3:06:36implemented. So, I can certainly

3:06:38understand the update. I think for me

3:06:41there I have few more questions that

3:06:45kind of echo some of the concerns

3:06:47already thought uh brought up. Number

3:06:49one, um the expansion of 270 cameras. Um

3:06:55primarily for building and

3:06:57infrastructury infrastructure security

3:07:00needs.

3:07:01I I kind of would like to have more

3:07:03information like you mentioned neighbor

3:07:06settlement as one of this um infrastruct

3:07:08like what is the background around that?

3:07:11What are the needs? If there could be

3:07:12some more detail about that I I would

3:07:15appreciate that. try to start from the

3:07:16high level and if I miss anything. So

3:07:18Neighbor Settlement hosts a lot of I

3:07:20mean I'm I'm going to clue you in on

3:07:21what you all know but I think it's

3:07:22important to verbalize there's a lot of

3:07:24fests now that happen in Neighbor

3:07:26Settlement. There's a lot of field trips

3:07:28with our children and folks throughout

3:07:29it. So the ask was to have the cameras

3:07:32are a force multiplier for people. You

3:07:34know you have x amount of people keep

3:07:36keep an eye on things. God forbid

3:07:37something happens. The cameras are a

3:07:39great resource to retrieve that. So it

3:07:41would be securing those facilities for

3:07:43our youth that are attending there

3:07:45regularly as well as all the festivals

3:07:47that are hosted at the neighbor

3:07:48settlement. I don't think that was the

3:07:50bulk of the ask for that.

3:07:52>> Okay. And and um the the breakdown of

3:07:56how that would be distributed. Do you do

3:07:58you have those numbers? I apologize if

3:07:59you shared that.

3:08:01>> Is that right? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

3:08:04Great. Um the second question I had was

3:08:08with regard to the new tools of these

3:08:11cameras to be automated and AI

3:08:13governing. Can you elaborate what that

3:08:16means?

3:08:16>> Absolutely. So let me start with the

3:08:19context of because this would be

3:08:21predominantly a police related function

3:08:24I think is fair to say.

3:08:26for me to speak to this. Police, whether

3:08:28it's a missing person, a suicidal

3:08:30person, a crime in progress, we're

3:08:32chasing seconds, minutes, and hours. And

3:08:35sometimes we get information. So the AI

3:08:37tool that we're talking about here, uh,

3:08:40let's go worst case scenario. There's a

3:08:41kidnapping that happens in Neighborville

3:08:43and it's in a green pickup truck. So the

3:08:46ability would be to type into this

3:08:48system, green pickup truck. that would

3:08:51search the security cameras that you see

3:08:54up on the screen here to pick up any

3:08:57green pickup trucks that came across the

3:08:59security cameras. something that would

3:09:00take human eyes probably weeks to go

3:09:04through all of these cameras and all

3:09:06these times, at least the ones on public

3:09:08ways to really search and was there a

3:09:10green pickup truck? And when we're

3:09:12chasing, especially with the horrific

3:09:14example I gave of a kidnapping, seconds

3:09:16and minutes matter. But even a missing

3:09:18person, u whether it's a dementia

3:09:20patient or someone that's suicidal,

3:09:21those seconds and minutes matter. So, it

3:09:24allows the system to quickly comb

3:09:25through the footage. Is there even a

3:09:27green pickup truck? the example that I

3:09:29said on our security cameras. That alone

3:09:32doesn't independently give the police

3:09:34department cause for action. We still

3:09:36have to verify that like any system that

3:09:39we currently use. So, it may create a

3:09:41lead for us. We may be able to check an

3:09:43area, but that does automatically we're

3:09:45going to stop that car. We're going to

3:09:46arrest the driver, right? We have to do

3:09:48it. We have a threshold that we have to

3:09:50meet as part of our So, it's it's really

3:09:52a tool to help us close that gap that we

3:09:55lose after a crime occurs or a missing

3:09:57person occurs. things of that nature.

3:09:59>> Yeah, that makes sense. Thank you. Now,

3:10:00would only certain authorized

3:10:02individuals have access to the ability

3:10:04to do those searches?

3:10:06>> Yes. And in the system, that would

3:10:08require a case number. Um, I can't speak

3:10:11too far in the weeds yet to what

3:10:13Genitech offers, but every system I've

3:10:16seen, at minimum, you have a case number

3:10:18and a reason that you have to enter for

3:10:20those types of searches. So, I don't

3:10:21know if we can get that far in the weeds

3:10:23with this system.

3:10:26>> Yeah. And I know I don't I don't know if

3:10:28you're curious about that. Now, I'm sure

3:10:29there's a security control built in

3:10:31there um that we would have for those

3:10:33types of searches. That's why I

3:10:34referenced case numbers and types of

3:10:37incident earlier in the presentation.

3:10:40>> Okay. And you know, while I agree that,

3:10:45you know, the reputation of our city um

3:10:48is held high, you know, um I'm also

3:10:52thinking of those worst case scenarios

3:10:54where there could be abuses, right? And

3:10:56so I do appreciate the monthly review

3:10:59and the annual review and the audits

3:11:01there, but are there any models out

3:11:03there for third party third party

3:11:06audits? You know, where there there's an

3:11:08an independent body reviewing.

3:11:13>> The only thing I can speak to is if the

3:11:15different product I have, I do have a

3:11:17third party company putting together and

3:11:19working on an audit for one of our

3:11:22different systems that I don't want to

3:11:23get into tonight. Um, but because of the

3:11:26capabilities of that company and what

3:11:28I'm asking them to do them to do and the

3:11:30realization that they may be able to, I

3:11:32don't want to completely speak for them,

3:11:33but it would be the same ask that I'm

3:11:36asking this other company. So, I would

3:11:37say anything's possible. I just haven't

3:11:39identified that company yet that does

3:11:40those independent audits.

3:11:42>> It's an area I'm interested in

3:11:43investigating more in

3:11:45>> and I am too,

3:11:46>> right? Because abuses can happen

3:11:48internally, right? And then if those are

3:11:50the same people doing the audits, then

3:11:52that's when we can run into some

3:11:53problems.

3:11:54>> So can I can I answer that real quick? I

3:11:56think it's really important for this and

3:11:57and you know something I promised five

3:11:59years ago and many of you on the DIS

3:12:01spoke to me about was absolute integrity

3:12:04and accountability. Um and that's

3:12:07something that if you look at what I've

3:12:09I cannot promise you that we will be

3:12:11perfect. I I think 99.9% of the time,

3:12:14but I will never give you an absolute

3:12:16absolute. But what I can control and I

3:12:18promise and I have a track record in

3:12:20five years of demonstrating if you make

3:12:22a mistake of this magnitude and abuse

3:12:24this system, you won't work for the city

3:12:26anymore. And I will go to what I said in

3:12:28that in the presentation. We will work

3:12:30with the state's attorney's office to

3:12:32seek criminal charges for that. That's

3:12:34what we can control on that. We can

3:12:36never control. I I don't want to put a

3:12:38misnomer out there that we have absolute

3:12:40control over everyone, but we have

3:12:41absolute control on our actions, which

3:12:43is why that audit you brought up is done

3:12:46by a commander with our police

3:12:47department who is our internal affairs

3:12:49commander. That's who would help take

3:12:51this responsibility on because it can't

3:12:53be it's I'm not going to put that on an

3:12:54end user. It's going to be with

3:12:55responsible management staff of the

3:12:58police department.

3:13:00>> Thank you,

3:13:02>> Councilman Sed.

3:13:03>> Thank you, Mayor Chief. Great

3:13:05presentation. Thank you for this and as

3:13:07you know Deville is one of the best

3:13:11police in the country and we all proudly

3:13:15talk about this thing you know how do we

3:13:17justify this 8.2 2 million expenses on

3:13:22cameras and my followup question is that

3:13:25do we have any other cities who are

3:13:27having this cameras and uh how much they

3:13:31have spent did we have some record of

3:13:34this thing and my third question is as

3:13:37my colleague has said hiring boots on

3:13:40the ground will that help us more you

3:13:44know

3:13:45>> so I will use our benchmark cities as a

3:13:47comparison

3:13:50Almost, if not all of them have similar

3:13:53camera systems. Overland Park, Kansas,

3:13:54who I've seen firsthand, has more

3:13:57cameras than we do. Almost every

3:13:58intersection has traffic cameras. Other

3:14:01areas are have city cameras everywhere

3:14:03for the exact reasons. And not just,

3:14:05again, I know I'm answering a lot of

3:14:07questions, so I'm sure my colleagues

3:14:08appreciate that, but every one of them

3:14:10could speak to the needs that other

3:14:12departments have in this space. Um, and

3:14:14there's probably success stories. I know

3:14:16I spoke to the electric department um

3:14:18earlier today via email and you know

3:14:21part of this is we have had a substation

3:14:23broken into um and that was a big push

3:14:26for adding cameras throughout the

3:14:27substation. So think about um the

3:14:30concerns we would have with substation

3:14:31or water treatment facilities being um

3:14:35burglarized or potentially um

3:14:39vandalized or worse. um success stories.

3:14:44I I'll give you three and I don't know

3:14:45that you can put a dollar amount. I

3:14:47think you'd all agree on these. Uh there

3:14:49was a shooting in the downtown a few

3:14:51years ago. The cameras greatly aided in

3:14:52our follow-up investigation to that. Um

3:14:55many of these teen takeovers have fights

3:14:57where suspects run. The cameras

3:14:59absolutely which we are admittedly

3:15:01monitoring during these teen takeovers

3:15:03aided us in suspect apprehension. We've

3:15:06had a a young man run from us that we

3:15:08used the cameras to follow in a backpack

3:15:10and a gun retreat from him uh once we

3:15:12stopped him. So there's just three off

3:15:14the top of my head. Um I hate bring you

3:15:16know here's a fourth. I I hate bringing

3:15:18up the riots because of how difficult a

3:15:20night that was for the city. But I can

3:15:22tell you firsthand as someone that was

3:15:23in the command post as a deputy chief

3:15:26watching the cameras. I guided

3:15:27detectives that were out there working

3:15:29on the street to two individuals that

3:15:31had burglarized one of our jewelry

3:15:33stores. So there's firsthand I witnessed

3:15:35it. I guided our people to those um that

3:15:38were responsible for that and they were

3:15:40apprehended as a result of us using

3:15:42those cameras. So it's just having that

3:15:44extra view and that force multiplier um

3:15:47for our eyes out there. And I said this

3:15:50the councilman admittedly we talked

3:15:51earlier today and he brought up the

3:15:52police officer thing. Cops will always

3:15:55say yes, we want more cops. But if it

3:15:57was at the expense of the cameras, you

3:15:59you would get some real pause because of

3:16:03the benefits we have reaped from this

3:16:05system and the bene uh and what they can

3:16:07do for us from an investigative

3:16:09standpoint in terms of I think I missed

3:16:12or we one other question in there.

3:16:17>> Councilman, your speaker, you want to

3:16:18push your button?

3:16:20>> Sorry. What are the other cities who are

3:16:22using this and asked was, you know,

3:16:25hiring more police officers will help us

3:16:28to, you know, add this thing. Yeah.

3:16:32>> So, I think I just answered the police

3:16:33officer. Of course, having more police

3:16:35officers would be great. One, to your

3:16:37point about the neighborhoods isn't

3:16:39going to help. What we need minimum four

3:16:41and I don't know at that point where

3:16:43that ROI really benefits for this

3:16:44neighborhood presence that we're talking

3:16:46about in that a lot of those cases, we

3:16:48do go back and are able to prove we're

3:16:50in those areas. It's just if you're not

3:16:52looking, we may have driven by. So, I

3:16:55hate to say no cops right now, but the

3:16:58cameras are very important. And I did

3:17:00talk to our staff today to make sure I

3:17:01wasn't misquoting. Again, everybody

3:17:03would like more police officers, but not

3:17:06at the expense of the benefits we reap

3:17:07from the camera system as well.

3:17:09>> Okay, one last follow-up question. Go

3:17:11ahead.

3:17:12>> So, what are the risk we as a city will

3:17:14carry and what will be the liability on

3:17:17the city for this?

3:17:18>> I'm sorry, I hear them. what what are

3:17:20the risk as a city we will have it and

3:17:24what liability we will carry on this any

3:17:27challenges

3:17:29Mr. D you want to try that

3:17:32>> could you repeat that for me council

3:17:33>> the risk

3:17:36>> he's asking about liability that would

3:17:38be potentially attributed to having a

3:17:39system like this

3:17:41>> well it's a lot about the policies that

3:17:43we implement and and how we protect and

3:17:46follow the statutes that are out there

3:17:47already existing arch of statutes which

3:17:50require um you know municipalities to

3:17:53retain records and to um you know

3:17:56participate with transparency laws. And

3:17:59so I think our biggest liability is when

3:18:01we deviate from the um protections that

3:18:03are already put in place and I know that

3:18:05in the contracts that we have and the

3:18:06applications and the training about how

3:18:08we implement these things we follow all

3:18:09of those rules and so I believe that we

3:18:11are well protected from a liability

3:18:13standpoint.

3:18:14>> Thank you Mr. D. Maybe I'll ask the

3:18:16contrasting question. um what liability

3:18:20do we have if we don't implement some of

3:18:22these security protocols in say our

3:18:24parking garage and somebody gets

3:18:27assaulted or or something? You know, you

3:18:30know, I can't say necessarily that our

3:18:31liability is increased. However, our

3:18:34ability to carry out the

3:18:36responsibilities that are the

3:18:37expectations of the community uh can be

3:18:39minimized. If there's opportunities for

3:18:42us to do better and we don't take

3:18:43advantage of those, that's subject to

3:18:45criticism.

3:18:47There's also communities and protections

3:18:49that don't require this, but it's also

3:18:51out there as an available available

3:18:53resource. And so, um, it's really a

3:18:56policy decision about the breath of

3:18:59which we access. Chief, you're you're

3:19:01requesting

3:19:0323

3:19:05cameras in the downtown business

3:19:08district, CBD. Most of those in in the

3:19:10parking decks. Um,

3:19:13my understanding is we still have a high

3:19:16level calls for service in those parking

3:19:18garages. Can you give us some feedback

3:19:20on will these cameras potentially help

3:19:24curb some of that? What those stats

3:19:25currently look like and what we might

3:19:27see if we have any additional cameras.

3:19:30The additional cameras in there from the

3:19:31obvious standpoint would give us the

3:19:33ability to see when crowds start to

3:19:34gather in there where problems are there

3:19:35and we can get an earlier intervention

3:19:37in there um to start enforcing the

3:19:39trespassing and and break up the groups

3:19:41that are causing problems at the uh in

3:19:44the parking decks because there were a

3:19:46lot of blind spots. Again, this is these

3:19:47were Gafari's recommendations as they

3:19:49assess the city to help us where where

3:19:51we could use those extra cameras. So, it

3:19:53was nice to get that independent view um

3:19:55of it. So, I absolutely think these

3:19:57would help us in the parking decks. Do

3:19:58you have an idea how many calls per

3:19:59service we get in the park index?

3:20:04>> You never ask a numbers guy to be exact

3:20:06on numbers without it in front of them.

3:20:07It's hundreds.

3:20:09>> That's notation.

3:20:11>> Yes.

3:20:13>> Counciloman Gibson.

3:20:15>> Uh thank you mayor and thank you chief

3:20:17for the presentation. Um you and I and

3:20:20the whole team that has worked on this

3:20:21project. I know it's been

3:20:24team effort across the city. Um, you and

3:20:27I have talked about this topic for the

3:20:29last year and a half. Um, and just kind

3:20:31of where on the spectrum of public

3:20:33safety and privacy

3:20:36lay. My guess is if we ask everybody in

3:20:38this room, everybody in the city,

3:20:39everybody has a different comfort level

3:20:41of what amount of privacy we're willing

3:20:44to give up for public safety. Um, I'm a

3:20:49parent. I could track my kids all the

3:20:51time, make a GoPro. I don't track their

3:20:55That's a decision I make for my family.

3:20:57It's a lot different when we're up here

3:20:59as decision makers. Um, and we do

3:21:02obviously have, you know, a big

3:21:04obligation for public safety. Um,

3:21:06especially for some of these, you know,

3:21:09public works department, water

3:21:11infrastructure, electric infrastructure.

3:21:13Um, and there's no doubt, you know, if

3:21:15we put up a camera on every street

3:21:17corner

3:21:18that police would be able to, you know,

3:21:22keep us safer. Um, but where that line

3:21:24is is what I'm struggling with and I

3:21:26don't know if I've seen enough. I I

3:21:28recognize that this is what the

3:21:29consultant recommended these cameras in

3:21:32these locations.

3:21:34For example, 60 at the municipal center

3:21:36stands out to me because we've done a

3:21:37lot at the municipal center over the

3:21:39last couple years to actually

3:21:43I don't know block it down is the right

3:21:44word but you know we controlled access.

3:21:47We now have security guard here at

3:21:49night. We've limited public access to

3:21:52the building. Um, so I would like to see

3:21:55more information about, you know, some

3:21:58of these locations and the justification

3:22:00and where we're drawing this line. Um,

3:22:03also I I hear a lot about policies and,

3:22:07you know, controlled access um, AI and

3:22:11the cameras. I'd like to see the

3:22:13policies on the front end before we

3:22:16approve contract of this size both in

3:22:18monetary value and, you know, scope of

3:22:23number of cameras.

3:22:25So, um I'd like to pause on this until

3:22:29we get more clear answers on that. I

3:22:31also think, you know, that gives the

3:22:32community um the opportunity to learn

3:22:36more about this. I think it's a good

3:22:37opportunity to build trust um between

3:22:40city and the community. So, I I think

3:22:43this warrants a larger conversation and

3:22:46some policies on the front end. I do

3:22:48recognize that there's things in this

3:22:49contract that might be timesensitive. I

3:22:52This is bundled together with key card

3:22:54access. I don't know how

3:22:56easy it is for things like that to be

3:22:58separated out. I I I do hear that it's

3:23:01lined and the big bulk of the contract

3:23:03is wires and infrastructure. Um so if

3:23:07it's all bundled together, I'm still a

3:23:09pause. If there's parts that staff feels

3:23:11comfortable bringing together um sooner

3:23:14later, that's fine. Um but I will be in

3:23:16no time.

3:23:19Okay, we have a motion and a second on

3:23:21M2. Roll call.

3:23:24>> McBroom,

3:23:26>> no.

3:23:27>> Say,

3:23:28>> no.

3:23:29>> White,

3:23:31>> no.

3:23:32>> Wilson,

3:23:34>> no.

3:23:35>> Worley,

3:23:36>> yes.

3:23:37>> Gibson,

3:23:38>> no.

3:23:39>> I

3:23:40>> Jane,

3:23:41>> no.

3:23:45>> Motion fails.

3:23:49New business.

3:23:54As a reminder, new business for items

3:23:56this council is asking staff to bring

3:23:57back on a future agenda or for motions

3:23:59to reconsider past city council votes.

3:24:00Councilman Mcru.

3:24:06>> Okay, seeing none, may I have a motion

3:24:07to adjurnn?

3:24:08>> Motion to adjurnn. Is there a

3:24:10>> second?

3:24:12Second holder.

3:24:13>> All those in favor say I.

3:24:16We're return. Thank you.

```*