Call a committee of the whole meeting for the Elgin City Council for October 8th, 2025 to order.

Will the clerk please call a roll?

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Here.

Dixon?

Here.

Good.

Here.

Martinez?

Here.

Ortiz?

Here.

Powell?

Here.

Stefan?

Here.

Thorne?

Here.

Mayor Hampton.

Here.

Approval of the minutes of the previous meeting of September 24th, 2025.

Move for approval.

Second.

It's been moved and second for approval.

Any corrections or additions.

Hearing none, please call a roll.

Councilmember Zalparo?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Campton.

Yes, the motion is approved nine zero.

We have uh one person signed up for public comment this evening.

Carol Bailey.

Good evening.

My name is Carol Bailey.

I live in Elgin.

Uh, and I came here this evening to remind everyone that Martin Luther King Jr.

prayer breakfast is on.

So I have a little bit of a thing I'm going to read for you.

Uh we're looking for volunteers, basically.

It is with great pleasure that I come to you with updates concerning the MLK Committee for the City of Elgin and the LG ML Cal MLK celebration for 2026.

The theme for this year is as you lift every voice, let freedom ring.

The events will be Saturday through Monday, January 17th through 19th, 2026.

And each pillar needs volunteers for the event, the part of the event that they're going to be in charge of.

So Janice Hare will be doing the prayer breakfast.

So for information on volunteering and to sign up to volunteer, please go to the Elgin City of Peace Facebook page where I posted this entire letter with uh emails and phone numbers so you can reach these people and sign up to volunteer.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

You got a good group.

Um, Mr.

Manager.

Thank you, Mayor.

We have one item this evening on both agendas, and this is the staffing for adequate fire and emergency response, sometimes often called the safer grant with the federal emergency management agency.

Last year, the fire department administration conducted an analysis of EMS call volume and the fire department's reliance on mutual aid for EMS response.

The study confirmed a significant increase in EMS call volume since 2012 and a disproportional reliance on mutual aid to assist the city's fire department with covering its increased EMS demand.

The minimum staffing requirements for adding a sixth full-time ambulance necessitates hiring nine full-time firefighter paramedics.

To reduce the city's financial burden for this initiative, the fire department applied for the safer grant.

The city's safer grant application has been approved by FEMA in the amount of just over three million dollars.

This grant award offsets the city's total cost of just under five million dollars for hiring the nine firefighter paramedics for the next three years.

The city will only be responsible for about two million dollars of those fees.

After the three years, the firefighters go uh are fully um staffed by on the city payroll, but it gives a great step into the uh full-time service with the sixth ambulance.

Chief Sogan and assistant uh chief Dan Rink are here to answer any questions that the council may have before voting on this on the regular agenda.

No motions necessary, but anybody have any questions?

Mr.

Ortiz.

Uh have one for the fire chief.

Thank you for joining us today.

Our pleasure.

Um would this ambulance help with some of the calls that South Elgin comes and helps us with, like down on the south under town?

Absolutely.

So as the manager stated in his uh summary of the grant, one of the big things that we noticed in addition to just the nine consecutive years of run volume increase the fire department has seen.

And remember, about 77 percent of our call volume is EMS.

So we're just over 16,000 calls a year total.

That puts us a little over 12,000 calls a year are EMS alone.

So we've had that significant increase.

What that's also done to your point is it's brought our reliance on mutual aid to the forefront.

South Elgin has a tremendous working relationship with the Elgin Fire Department, where we share resources more readily than I think we would do with other communities.

We may send them more units than we would typically send another community, and they do the same for us.

So it's been a very reciprocal arrangement that we have.

So this should, and I and I because I don't have the crystal ball that I wish I did, to be able to say definitively that yes, this will reduce our reliance on mutual aid, sp particularly South Elgin, but every indication is we should definitely see a reduction in that.

It will not eliminate that.

Okay.

And how did you come across finding this FEMA money, which I'm glad they're giving us three million dollars?

So Safer has been around a long time.

And in fact, in 2007, the fire department received another safer grant.

That grant was only for two members, two people at the time.

So it's it's been around a long time.

Over the years, the parameters have changed.

So the funding that we're at today, the 7575 and 25 over the three years changes from time to time, but Safer's been around a long time to help fire departments with particularly this type of situation.

Bringing back units that were out of service because of funding issues, whether it be um well, whether it be a budgetary issue or economic issues with the you know the the larger uh budget problems within the government.

So all of these different reasons can are why FEMA is there to help support local fire departments in in building up or rebuilding their staffing.

Okay.

And uh when the money runs out risk absorbing the payroll?

That's correct.

Okay.

That's correct.

And there's and there's parameters that we're under as a city that we can't lay any of these people off.

We can't lay off anybody related to the safer grant during those three years.

Uh that would totally defeat the purpose of why we're doing this anyway.

And then once that three years is up, we then absorb the full cost.

All right.

Thank you.

Sure.

Anything else?

Mr.

Dixon.

Uh thank you, Chief.

Um, you and I had a chat about this um well some months ago now, you know, four or five months ago, maybe about this.

So I'm happy to see this come down the pipeline.

Um I do have a question about the legacy costs.

Um, you know, and maybe it's just an estimate at this point.

You don't know exactly what that's going to be beyond those three years, but could you ballpark what the expenses will be for adding on these additional bodies?

Well, if you look at the information that was in the in the memo where it talks about FEMA's portion.

Well, this whole grant is about four, just under five million dollars.

So our portions and then the FEMA portion.

And off top of my head, and I don't have it in front of me.

It's we're we're somewhere in that range of I want to say it was like 1.6 million-ish.

And then that would be however, the one thing that's important to understand is the numbers that we submitted and that they have approved are fixed.

So regardless, regardless of any sort of increases that the local may receive through negotiations, that will not increase that number.

So that number stays constant, and then at the end of the three years, that number will have increased because of increases in the collective barding agreement.

Okay, yeah, it's 1.8 million.

So the granted for three million, uh three million, a little over three million dollars.

FEMA portion.

The female portion, yes, right.

Um so that the so the so the the expenses beyond the three years is we don't know exactly what that is going to be yet, is what I'm it's what I'm hearing.

Not exactly.

We don't we don't know what the collective barding agreement is going to say all those things.

Okay.

All right, that's my only question.

Well, other than that, I mean, good job.

You know, you always are finding money, finding creative ways um to take care of.

I'm glad that we're adding this this vehicle because I know that our uh our men and women are our taxed too as well, so I have an additional bodies.

Um I hope helps with overall morale uh too as well.

So thank you for continuing to do a good job.

Well, absolutely.

My my role in this was simply to shepherd this through the process.

The real work was done, assistant chief rink here was instrumental in in obtaining the data that was necessary to put in.

This was a very data-heavy uh submission because we had to put in all sorts of of different response data, staffing data, just a tremendous amount of work that would have to be done to get this submission put together.

So assistant chief rink has done a tremendous job in collecting that data, as well as two members of our union, one Captain Mike Prisbilski was another individual who assisted the assistant chief here with getting that data, reviewing the data, making sure it's accurate, which is always uh an important concept when you're using when you're talking about data and data mining.

And then uh Lieutenant Josh Smith from the local also was truly really I would say the tip of the spear on getting this thing submitted.

Uh Josh has been hoping to get a safer grant for many, many years.

This has been a passion of his for us to try to do this, and he was the one who wrote the narratives who was able to paint the picture that FEMA needed in the way they needed it to be able to approve this grant and and give us such a large uh award.

So if it what this really shows is a continued collaboration between the local and the fire department administration in the last you know five, six years that that collaboration has just been uh unprecedented, let me say, and it's been phenomenal that we can come together and we're coming together for the same reasons, the same goals, driving in the same direction, and this is one more example of where we can be where we've been successful collaborating together.

Yeah, thank you.

And I and I just want to point out for the public um since 2012, there's been a 40 percent increase in call value.

Yes, that's substantial.

Yes, that's a lot of calls.

Yes, right.

So thank you to South Belgian for coming to our aid.

And too, we you know, we have agreements with uh a lot of our surrounding communities, so they have all pitched in, they have all helped uh to make sure that we're covered, and so I think all of them, and not just South Belgium for for everything.

And I also want to point out that over the first two years of the grant just for the public, um, this grant, the safer grant will cover 1.2 million each year while we're only paying a little over 400,000.

Correct.

And uh and it increases on the third year, kind of flips around 500,000 from from uh FEMA uh from the safer grant, then a little over a million dollars for us.

So it's a good deal across the great deal for us.

So yes, yeah, that's all thank you.

Thank you.

Anything else?

Uh Ms.

Powell.

Yes, thank you.

Thank you, Chief and Assistant Chief.

Um, this is a long time coming.

Yes.

And as uh some of my colleagues have have mentioned, we have seen a substantial increase.

And yes, the majority of our calls that your department responds to are paramedic calls.

So I I'm definitely in support of this.

I know uh we have had SAPER grants in the past.

I remember former council member Dunn being a big proponent of these in the past.

So um and kudos to your staff because they are pretty I've seen some of that process uh a lot of data.

There's a lot to it, but obviously they're giving us a lot of money, so uh they have they have a lot of requirements.

So um thanks to uh your team for uh their patience and and in putting all of this together, it certainly has paid off.

Um yes, we will have some legacy costs, but in the long run, I mean this is a one of our core services.

Yes.

So we we have to make sure that um our response times uh to folks they need in this community.

This is one of the primary things that that that folks you know look at that they pay taxes for.

So absolutely.

O'Farrell thank you mayor um and uh city manager correct me if I'm wrong I just wanted to share for full transparency that this was something that was in the budget and the fire department was able to find a grant opportunity to cover some of these expenses so that I've gotten questions like well what happens if the federal government doesn't release these funds this was already budgeted within our budget this is now gonna give us an opportunity to use that money for something else once they actually do release the funds to us so thank you to the fire department to all staff for finding this grant opportunity.

Thank you.

Okay anything else okay thanks chief thank you very much thanks guys yeah Mr.

Manager thank you mayor uh item B is an agreement with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois for the city's 2026 health insurance program cities been contracting with Blue Cross Blue Shield since 2007 on a fully insured basis for one HMO and three PPO programs.

As part of the annual renewal process the city solicits bids for health insurance programs and Blue Cross Blue Shield is once again the most viable provider based on cost and program offerings.

Blue cross Blue Shield initially proposed a 21 point two percent increase but the city's consultant along with human resources director Tim Bennett negotiated the premium increase down to 11.19% which also includes a one point uh one and a quarter percent discount for the city renewing the dental accident and critical critical illness policies move for approval second move to second for approval any discussion Mr Ortiz uh I think it's for Mr.

Bennett thank you for joining us thank you uh I try to be my best behavior so I don't go no HR violations since you're down here um for I know there's some other municipalities I have blue cross and blue shield and if their employees do like a yearly physical with their doctors they get like a $50 discount a month is that something the city does also we don't we don't currently do that that would be a an initiative that we'd have to put forward put some funds uh set aside for it we just haven't um developed that it's something that we could certainly look into but um a lot of that would also entail um talking having discussions with the union because um anytime there would be some discounts we would want to uh get get the buy in from the union which they probably wouldn't necessarily disagree with but um before we can move forward we would have to uh open up contract negotiations and talk about it okay all right that's all I have thank you anything else Mr Dick Mr.

Dixon thank you uh thank you Mr.

Bennett for coming up I I actually um I want to give city staff uh some praise here uh because um I'm one of the people up here that always says well you know we should you know put it out and and see what what you know what what are the offers we can get out there let's you know when we contract with someone let's try to get the best deal possible you know I've said that on several occasions and in this instance uh we did as a matter of fact like the market is so bad the expenses are going up so high so that 21% increase that was originally uh been uh proposed was negotiated down to the 11% so thank you to the person who we hired to do that on our behalf uh number one but um united health care etna and cigar all declined yeah they didn't even want to counter offer uh because it it was so can you talk a little bit about that because I I thought I I found that really surprising yeah it is it it was a little surprising um a lot of times when um we have the other the the other companies want to throw in a bid um the drug costs are very are very substantial and uh the cost of just medications and um and claims it it uh it adds a lot to their their bottom line and we're we're a municipality that um unless they could give us a counter offer that really reduced benefit I mean uh increased benefits um they knew they couldn't compete with blue cross bouchio so that's one of the reasons why they just kind of dropped out because in order to uh to get some of the benefits we have as low of uh um uh deductibles and um and out of pocket costs it just would they they know that they didn't want to get in the market of uh having to fund those and uh you know uh the reduced amount that they would have to offer wouldn't wouldn't be uh you know viable for the market right and I I just want to point out too this um this plan also covers um retirees too as well and keeps the program that they have going alive and well so I know that we're gonna continue to to monitor that so we we got a little bit of a deal here I think um you know looking at the landscape of things

Right.

And I just want to point out too this um this plan also covers um retirees too as well and keeps the program that they have going alive and well.

So I know that we're gonna continue to to monitor that.

So we we got a little bit of a deal here, I think.

Um, you know, looking at the landscape of things, and so um and just to you personally, you know, congratulations on your recent promotion and thank you for all which returned in my emails very promptly.

I appreciate that.

You're welcome.

Yeah, anything else.

Clerk please call the roll.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes, Dixon?

Yes, good, yes, Martinez?

Yes, Ortiz, yes, Powell?

Yes, Stefan?

Yes, Thorne?

Yes, Mayor Captain.

Yes, motions approved nine zero.

Item C is a proposed management pay plan and benefits ordinance.

This is the result of the implementation.

Uh this is uh implementation coming from recommendations on the classification, compensation and benefits study conducted by the HR group.

The city's been contracting with the HR group since 2024 to develop a comprehensive classification and benefits plan for all its full-time non-union employees to support the city's efforts to remain competitive in the labor market.

The HR group conducted a classification, compensation and benefits study.

The study was used to develop the proposed management pay plan and benefits ordinance being considered tonight.

Implementing this new management pay plan and benefits ordinance will help the city remain competitive in the market, align current positions with market standards, and establish a strong foundation for transitioning to a ranged pay structure based on performance and merit as opposed to the step increase system that has been a part of the city for at least a generation.

Move for approval.

Second, move them second for approval.

Any discussion.

Thank you for coming back up.

Um can you just explain a little bit for clarity?

Um how there'll be some checks and balances, right?

Um not all managers are created equal, and so some have much higher standards when people are meeting expectations, etc.

So if you could just walk us through a little bit with checks and balances.

Sure.

Um the city uh just just recently uh uh got the approval for the our new UKG system, and that new UG UKG system will allow us to do a lot of HR functions that we haven't been able to do before.

And one of those things is a performance management system that's more robust, and it allows us to have the checks and balances that you're asking.

Um when people do per, well, I should say when managers or supervisors do performance reviews, they're gonna be able to see a certain criteria, whether it be uh a we haven't completely um decided if it's gonna be a five five-point system or ten-point system, but they're gonna be able to see the different um levels of what a one um if someone is given a one or a two, uh a three or a four, they're gonna have um an outline of what the expectation is in those, and then uh once they uh have uh uh given the employee those grades, they'll uh then move to the next level, which would be the director, the director approves it after reviewing the the uh the uh performance review, and then the last check would then come to human resources.

And as the director, I would make sure that when people are doing checks uh are putting their uh their scores on the performance, I would be able to see it and go, well, if you put a five on a five-point scale, but you didn't put anything down on why someone should be at a five-point scale, you have those parameters to know what a five is, then I would go back and say, well, you need to do that, and then they once they do that, I can evaluate it further.

And if I see a supervisor who's giving everyone fives in their department, I would probably have a conversation with them to wonder why they have such outstanding employees uh at every single level.

Um, and the same same in reverse.

If you have an uh an employee who gets um low scores, um I would ask, you know, where's their performance reviews, uh, what what kind of uh conversations you have you had with them.

Um the idea behind it is to have a more interactive approach to the supervisor and and get them involved so that they can um you know back up the reason for those scores.

The other thing that's gonna be available in the new system is the employee is gonna be able to um have a uh a uh comment section to um outline the reasons why they feel maybe their score wasn't where it needed to be, and they feel it should be higher, and that's something that once again the director, the supervisor, and HR will be looking at, and then we can make an evaluation from there.

And that's something that once again the director, the supervisor, and HR will be looking at, and then we can make an evaluation from there.

I appreciate that because that gives the employee an opportunity to indicate if they do or don't agree with their manager and why and state the facts.

So I appreciate that.

And I appreciate that there's this three-level of oversight.

Um so thank you for sharing that.

I also um thank you for adding a bilingual pay in there.

Um I think that is super helpful, given that a number of our staff who use their bilingual skills or multilingual skills to assist the community are now compensated for that.

So I am hoping that will give us some data that would be able to be utilized to see how many are using it, how often are they using it, etc.

And so um kudos for having that.

Thank you.

Okay.

Anything else?

Ms.

Paul.

Yes, thank you.

Um kind of piggybacking on Councilwoman Alfaro's question about the discretion, and I know this has more to do with the UKG system, but it all ties in.

Um what's the upper limit in terms of the annual pay raise since we're moving away from the step raises?

If someone gets a five or a 10 or whatever it is, would they be eligible for like a 10% raise or 20%?

I mean, where what's the what are the ranges?

Sure.

We um that's one of the things that we're going to be um ironing out with our new system to figure out um, you know, if it's on a five-point scale, what percentage they should get.

Um my recommendation is going to be at the highest level is a five percent.

Um it falls in a little bit in line with our step system because normally right now our step system is a five percent increase.

Um, but that would be for an exceptional employee who who you know excelled at their position.

Um we would want to put some um if you're an employee who has an average rating, you're doing your job, you're not doing anything more, you're not really doing anything below average, but you're just that employee who's putting in the work but not much, then we probably would look at um you know, potentially like a two percent raise so that you know if you're doing your job, you're gonna be getting um some compensation because you know you're contributing to the city.

Uh if somebody is doing a little bit more, we would look at a higher percentage.

I wouldn't want to go any higher than uh five percent, but I would be open to you know looking looking at that.

But um 5% is what I would feel would be a comfortable way for people to move within the steps.

Um, just from brief history, one of the reasons why we're moving away from the step system is because uh a newer employee will will come on board and they'll be in the step system, and regardless of whether they're uh an exceptional employee or just an average employee, they go to the next step, which is five percent.

And then in the and in the past, we give a cola, which typically is around three percent.

So someone's starting out their their career here and then first you know, four years, they're getting an eight percent raise every single year.

And it's just not sustainable, and that's one of the reasons why we want to go to a range system.

So when someone does uh come up for the review, they are going to be um uh evaluated and given a raise that's more equitable to the market, say a two percent, a three percent on average would be what they would move to.

Right, and that's total not COLA and step.

Correct.

One of the things we're gonna do with the COLA is um every two years we're gonna be looking at the pay plan to see where the pay grades are at.

And uh when we look at the market, if the market has improved in those pay grades, then we'll move that that particular pay grade up, maybe two, three percent, whatever the market says.

So if it goes up one percent, then we'll move that pay grade up potentially one percent.

If it goes up higher, um then we would certainly do that.

Um so then when you have a range system, people would be able to move and um as the range went up, they did their performance review and they got um you know a satisfactory or higher, they would then get a percentage to meet that what the what the market's asking.

Now, would that also affect employees that were effectively redlined through this this new process?

Well, the employees that are redlined would would be red lined until the market caught up to where their position or to where their salary is at.

So if someone is um say a thousand dollars or two thousand dollars above what the maximum is, they would be redlined until the market moved and we would evaluate it and say the the maximum went up two thousand dollars or three thousand, they would then now be in line with where the market is, and they would then start getting raises as the market increased.

So the memo outlined that employees transitioning into the new program on average would see about a 2.8% increase.

Did how many employees or what percentage of our employees were redlined as part of this process?

We have about 145 full-time management employees.

So less than maybe 10%.

Yeah.

Were they disproportionately represented in certain areas or departments or levels of the organization?

I would say one of one of the departments that maybe had more red lines than others was the parks and recreation department.

Other does tend to pay those positions a little bit lower than we were.

So they tend to be a little more just disproportionate.

But when we're talking about the red lines, keep in mind that most of those people that I was talking about that are redlined aren't aren't off the maximum by that much.

They're only off by maybe say a thousand or two thousand dollars from that.

There's some that are a little bit higher, obviously, but some are only off that probably when the next call of adjustment comes in place, they probably would be in line.

Okay.

So I mean, we obviously we just went through this process um evaluating our our city managers um salary and which hadn't been done in a in a very long time.

And you're aware, obviously, because you were part of that process.

Did we use the same comparables that we used when we were evaluating the manager?

Were those same cities?

Yeah, we did use the same comparables, but we actually even use more.

Um one of the things that we uh used is we use the private sector as well.

You know, because when our when we're trying to compete for positions within the market, it's not always just you know the public sector.

So if we have an accountant and the private sector is paying accountants more than what we're paying, then we have to make sure that we do that so we can make sure we get you know qualified candidates that are exceptional and and can add to our you know our city.

Um benefits are also taken in consideration.

Sometimes you know, we might go to the private sector and the private sector might pay a little bit more, but their benefits aren't as strong as ours.

So there's a comparison between the two, but yeah, we used all of our comparables.

Um we used um probably more comparables across the public sector because we private we we took into account even some of the um municipalities that uh uh aren't our comparables because once again we're we're evaluating the entire market.

So we and then we took the private sector into account as well.

So obviously, and you kind of spoke to this a little bit when we're comparing ourselves to other communities, you know, disproportionately here in Illinois, a lot of other communities have park separate park districts, separate um, and in some cases separate uh fire protection districts.

Did you find that the the salaries in those districts it sounds like was lower than ours and kind of skewed you know the results of it?

Um I don't believe so.

Um yes, they have um park districts were were used for comparison purposes, but when you're comparing a uh a park district to a municipality, there are benefits that a park district may not have the luxury of of uh of giving.

Um they sometimes uh don't have the same um uh medical medical uh deductions that we do.

Uh you know, we we do 20 15 or 20 percent.

They may they they may be higher, 30 or 40 percent because they're a park district, they're smaller, they have less ability to go into the market and and get uh better rates.

You know, there's a lot that goes into it, it's not just saying it's a park district, um, they pay less because their benefits may be slightly different than ours.

They're um when you're evaluating it, sometimes they uh don't have the same um programs that we do, so we may be more um specific to uh certain certain jobs.

Um maybe you know, we have a youth teen um supervisor, uh part districts may not have a youth teen supervisor, they may have somebody that does multiple multiple jobs because they don't have the staff to uh to hire um every single position that they want.

And that's why we have the consultant who can come in and look at it, evaluate where the benefits are, where the uh where the salary is, and then make a uh an informed decision on where they should play be placed.

Okay.

I didn't because I didn't see the like the detail and I didn't get a chance to uh talk to the manager.

Um that was on my part um to kind of get some more information prior to the meeting, but you answered all my questions.

I I was just curious about the different, you know.

I I know a lot of times when when we're comparing ourselves, you know, our our our park employees, parking parking rec employees being compared to park district employees, and the same with the fire protection district employees to our fire department employees, there's there's differences, and it doesn't always bode well for our folks.

So I was just curious if you know those 10 percent or less than 10 percent of folks that were kind of redlined, if they disproportionately fell in those areas.

So kind of answered my question.

Okay, good.

Thank you.

Mr.

Dixon.

Thank you.

Um I have a question.

We haven't done a um done a study since 2012.

So um I believe you're around in 2012.

Maybe you do or do not know the answer to this question, but it will you know, was there any reason in particular of why we have waited so long, 13 years to do this?

Um I think one of the reasons it's it's a very in-depth process, and um I think now was the time where we can make a cultural change that we weren't maybe ready to do in 2012.

Um sometimes when you do these studies, you come back and you say, well, this position should be higher, this position should be higher, but not really holistically look at all the positions together.

So I'm not um I I'm not fully um aware of exactly everything that was done in 2012, but many times when uh we did do those studies, it was just making sure that our positions were paid correctly rather than paid correctly within the market.

You know, sometimes they say, well, you know, this position should be should go up or go down, but it really didn't take the market into consideration for uh holistic approach like we're doing now.

Okay.

And you know, as I was reading through the materials, um, I made a note to say we should probably do this every one to two years.

That was my note.

And then I kept reading in the materials, and that was actually um the suggestion um of the company we were working with that did the evaluation for us to do this every two years.

And so I guess my question, it may not necessarily be to you, Mr.

Bennett, but to city manager, um, for us to stay on top of this so that we can retain talent and also continue to recruit talent, you know, based on the market.

Is there any action that we need to take as a council to kind of bake this in so that we're doing this at least every couple of years as the uh HR farm suggested?

You can keep me working for you because I'd want to get it to the finish line.

So um the two years that you're talking about, there's an analysis of the pay of the of the ranges.

I want to make it clear that we're not doing a whole scale revision every two years of the plan.

It's just gauging the the market to make sure that all the positions match on that.

And it's but again is Mr.

Bennett said, uh it's there's a belief within the organization that we have right now, we're making the sometimes difficult changes that are necessary to make sure that we can maintain uh competitiveness in the market, but also be fiscally responsible with what we're doing to keep a top roster of talent, but make sure that everybody who's doing the best work is is paid for compet is is paid for consistent with the market and um and at the proper rate.

It's been a it's a great organization to work through, particularly when you come in at the bottom level because what what Mr.

Bennett said.

You come in at at an entry-level position and you're getting eight percent increases every year.

It's wonderful.

We love holding on to those employees, but we're just in a time period right now where in the burden I think I know you've been on the dice for a long time.

Employees are the most expensive component of this organization, and we're doing what we can to ensure that we have the top talent and at a level that the city is willing to and able to afford the community.

Understood, understood.

Um for the uh for the 18 month that we paid this company.

I didn't see that in the materials.

It's not in the materials, it was part of additional initiatives.

My sense is was a little bit over 100,000 over that time period.

Okay.

All right.

Um City Council, we approved that, did we not?

Yes.

We did that, right?

And amendments.

Okay.

All right.

Um another question.

Trying to get to it.

Mr.

Bennett, can you explain what uh the adjustment of pay grades in reference to the city manager's discretion?

Um can you explain that in layman's terms?

Um yeah, if uh we look and we find that um there is a uh the market has excelled faster than we go and evaluate a position, and maybe all of a sudden we don't have any more accountants, and we need to adjust uh where they're at on one pay grade.

He has the discretion to move uh someone from one paid grade to the other for purposes of making sure that we're remain competitive within the market.

So it doesn't typically happen, um, but you know, he he's given that discretion in the event that we need to hire somebody because the market is showing that that position is a little bit more um desirable and needs to be compensated as such.

So what you know there's a check on that though.

I have to report back to the council at the end of the year if any of that happens.

Yes, yes, so it's not just in isolation.

It was a lot of it was a lot of uh that was a lot of HR uh, you know.

I'm not gonna call it mumble jumble, but it was a lot.

I was like, uh, what is exactly me?

So I just wanted to hear that from you.

Um but I did see that it it does have to come back to the city council uh anyways.

So that that's fine.

One more question, too.

And I think you kind of hit on this with council member Powell's question.

Um, but that two point on average at least the 2.6 increase uh that's going to that's recommended to uh be to occur come January across the the entire organization.

That's the uptick on average, which is right.

Um and we're gonna continue that increase until we get people up to par.

Is that the way that that would work?

Or no, actually uh moving into uh 2026 is when we're gonna start implementing the system to start evaluating when someone comes up to uh a uh anniversary.

We're going to make sure that before they move on and get any kind of compensation, we make sure that they're meeting their standards and you know continue to make sure we're fiscally responsible by saying um we're gonna give you a certain percentage.

Okay, and just so that I'm I'm clear.

I'm doing the this is for me, just so that I'm clear.

All non-union positions will fall under this new position.

So I shouldn't say all non-union management positions, yeah.

Yeah, okay.

All right, thank you.

All right, very good job.

Thanks, Tim.

And uh, I think just uh it's noteworthy right now.

Uh the first two items that we talked about, B and C.

You see the uh issues that we face trying to keep up with rising costs, and it becomes a real moving target.

How fast we do studies is really something that's difficult for us to deal with.

You know, do we do once every year or once every two years?

But uh this really becomes a moving target.

Congratulations and uh good work.

Mr.

Manager.

Thank you, Mayor.

We have to have a vote.

Oh, that's right.

Oh, yes, yeah.

Councilmember Galfaro?

Yes, Dixon?

Yes, good, yes, Martinez?

Yes, Ortiz?

Yes, Powell, yes, Stefan?

Yes, Thorne?

Yes, Mayor Captain.

Yes, motions approved nine zero.

Item D is a contract with delivery concepts incorporated for a food truck design and build for the Wing Park Golf Course.

The new golf course clubhouse will be combining the historic charm of the course with the cutting edge golf simulators and a modern food and beverage experience anchored by the Chip Shots whiskey and golf simulator bar.

That didn't count out right anyway.

There's a bar and a simulator, they're not combined.

To combine compliment this concept, the addition of a food truck will broaden service option not only for golfers but for residents and park patrons while providing flexibility and innovation and hospitality offerings.

Uh Mike Lehman, golf operations director, tour delivery concepts incorporated and engage subject matter experts to ensure that the food trucks layout will be maximizing efficiency for both food prep and customer service.

While the food truck will be based permanently at the Wing Park Clubhouse, it will be open, as I said earlier to all visitors, extending the reach and visibility of golf operations.

The final design uh process for this truck will be proceeding through the city zoning and land use permitting process.

Move for approval.

Second.

Move and second for approval.

Any discussion.

Mr.

Ortiz.

We're maintaining ownership of this vehicle, no matter who the operator is.

That is correct.

Okay, I just want to make sure we're not going to give it away after we buy it.

All right, thanks.

You don't want me to cook unless there's a microwave in there.

Anything else?

Okay.

Clerk, please call a roll.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good?

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Captain.

Yes.

Motions approved nine zero.

Item E is a contract renewal with the state of Illinois for the fuel card services that the city uses through part of the state.

City has 700 vehicles and pieces of equipment ranging from police cars and fire apparatus and snowplows all the way down to utility trucks.

Support these operations, five hundred and twenty-nine fuel cards are assigned to specific vehicles across the fleet, allowing employees to refuel efficiently at nearly any commercial gas station.

The city participates with the state's joint purchasing program because it can leverage the state's collective purchasing power with all of the other local participating local governments.

It's expected that public works director Aaron Neal will be bringing back another proposal at that time for continuation of the program.

Move for approval.

Second.

Move to the second for approval.

Any discussion.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Captain.

Yes.

Motions approved nine zero.

Announcements from the council.

Mr.

Ortiz.

I just want to uh thank Mr.

Jones back there, training uh Miss Melody.

I got your name right.

All right.

Sometimes I forget names, so I'm glad I remembered it.

So I was want to welcome you to the council, come to our meetings and uh holding the door down for us.

I really appreciate it.

And Ken's a good trainer, so he's a good dude back there.

Any other analysis from the council?

Announcements from staff.

None, Mayor, thank you.

Okay, entertain a motion to adjourn.

So moved.

Second.

Move and second to adjourn.

Clerk, please call a roll.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good?

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Captain.

Yes, we are adjourned.

We'll reconvene at the regular city council meeting at 7 p.m.

A regular meeting for the Elgin City Council for October 8th, 2025 to order.

Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Pledge of Allegiance is applied to the United States of America.

And to the Republicans under God with liberty and justice for all.

Councilmember Zalfaro.

Here.

Dixon.

Present.

Good.

Here.

Martinez?

Here.

Ortiz?

Here.

Powell?

Here.

Stefan?

Here.

Thorne?

Here.

Mayor Captain.

Here.

Approval of the minutes of the previous meeting of uh September twenty-fourth.

Move the second for approval.

Any corrections or additions?

Hearing none, Clerk, please call the roll.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good?

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Campton.

Yes, the motions approved nine zero.

Will Joanne Stingley please meet me at the podium?

How are you?

I'm doing great.

Whereas domestic violence continues to be a prevalent problem and is not confined to any group of people, regardless of gender, race, religion, ethnicity, or economic class, and is supported by societal indifference.

And whereas the crime of domestic violence violates an individual's privacy, dignity, security, humanity through this systemic use of physical, emotional, sexual, psychological, and economic control and abuse.

So first of all, I'd like to thank City Council for giving us the opportunity to provide the service to the community.

It's vital and it's amazing the work that we do.

I just want you to know that just this month, we had 67 referrals for the best of violence from our detectives.

So that's one month.

And it has been seemed to be rising since April with our count.

So just want you to know that the work we do is vital to the community, and we thank you for doing that, but allowing us to do that.

Do either of you have anything you'd like to say?

I don't say it all, they do talk.

Thank you so much.

And I did bring ribbons and ribbons.

I think we have enough ribbons for people who are in the audience as well.

So please grab a ribbon and bring awareness.

You all are part of this.

We are all a part of this.

Thank you so much.

Oh, yes.

She whispered.

Invite them to the walk.

Yes.

Our domestic violence awareness walk is this Saturday.

Hope to see your face in the place.

Okay, this I won't be here.

Saved me from having to call your name.

Thank you.

Gives me great pleasure to read this proclamation in honor of the late uh Denise Haben, who obviously so many of us knew, uh worked with, collaborated with in this community.

Uh Denise was a personal friend, um, and just a just a warrior and good person in our community.

She loved Elgin and was just committed to so many causes.

Whereas Denise Haven was an integral part, a member and devoted citizen of the City of Algin.

Denise was deeply committed to helping create the beloved community so often envisioned and spoken of by Dr.

Martin Luther King Jr.

And whereas she faithfully served on the Elgin Human Relations Commission, the Reverend Dr.

King Celebration Committee, the YWCA Boy Board of Directors, and actively devoted her time in support of the Open Door Health Clinic, Elgin Pride, and the African American Coalition of Kane County, contributing to programs that strengthen equity, justice, and inclusion.

And whereas Denise also dedicated her service to the Hanover Park Mental Health Board as both an employee and board member, along with the community crisis center and Elgin Township Mental Health Board, where she consistently worked to protect mental health services, and whereas she continued her service on the City of Elgin's Community Task Force on Policing between 2021 and 2022, always working towards fair and just practices in law enforcement.

And whereas Denise consistently held individuals and institutions accountable, including the Elgin Police Department and City Hall, with the goal of ensuring Elgin would be a safer, warmer, and more welcoming community for all people.

And now, therefore, I, Tish Powell, on behalf of Mayor David Captain of the City of Elgin, do hereby recognize and honor the life and legacy of Denise Haben, expressing our deepest gratitude for her tireless commitment to justice, equity, and community.

And here, accepting the proclamation today is her dear friend, Carol Ann Bailey.

Carol.

This is hot.

This is hard.

I would like to express my gratitude to Mayor Captain and City Council members for this recognition of our dear friend, sister, and warrior for peace and justice, Denise Hammond.

Haben, I am an honor to accept this proclamation on behalf of Denise's family.

There will be a life celebration for Denise at the Highland Avenue Church of the Brethren on the 19th of October at noon.

Then we're all going to the crop walk.

I hope to see you there.

Be safe.

Thank you.

I'm the public comment, so I'm not staying up here.

Oh brings us to the portion of the council meeting where we allow people to speak on issues that may not be on the uh city council or the uh council agenda.

The first to sign up is Carol Bailey.

This is like Karma did this earlier.

Okay.

It is with great pleasure that I come to you with updates concerning the Martin Luther King Committee for the City of Elgin and the Elgin MLK celebration for 2026.

The theme for this year is as you lift every voice, let freedom ring.

We recently, the city council and the mayor recently appointed seven members to the MLK subcommittee.

I'm one of them.

We have Carol Bailey, Winfried Cooper, Janice Hare, Janie McCutcheon, Micah Montgomery, Tina Ragland, and Deborah Wills.

These seven members are going to have uh we're going to have five different pillars that cover the five different event parts of this program.

So the Sunday prayer breakfast, or excuse me, the Saturday prayer breakfast will be taken care of by Janice Hare.

The Sunday program will be Deborah Willis, Wills, rather, no Willis, the food drive will be Michael Montgomery, the scholarship team is going to be Tina Ragland, and we have a Monday program that Winifred Cooper is going to oversee.

I'm telling you about it because we're trying to find volunteers for this event.

So I posted the entirety of this letter on the Elgin City of Peace Facebook page, which has phone numbers and email links to the different people doing the different parts of this event.

We would love to have some of you come and help us volunteer and make this even more successful than it has been in the past.

I guess I should tell you when it's going to happen, right?

It's going to be January 9th, 7th through 19th, 2026.

And I hope to see you all as volunteers.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

We have two people signed up.

Also wish to speak.

Linda Searcy.

Good evening.

I'm Linda Searcy, known as Lynn.

I'm a former school district U46 educator of nearly 40 years.

I spent my entire career at Elgin High School.

And I live at 1223 Robin Hood Drive here in Elgin.

I would like to begin by thanking you, Honorable Mayor and esteemed City Council members for having taken the time to read countless and hundreds of pages of proposals, text messages, and emails, and hours of transcripts surrounding the 890 Galt Boulevard project.

It may have read like a bad novel at times, but when you continued reading, because at some point, like a book club member, you knew you'd be required to discuss it.

Originally, the land known as Oak Ridge Subdivision was purchased to be a two-phase subdivision.

It never got past phase one, leaving the 34 acres at 890 Galt Boulevard vacant.

That parcel of land has remained unsailable and unbuildable for good reason.

A lack of suitability because of traffic flow.

That acreage is zoned light industrial, and Elgin's comprehensive growth plan states the same, with only the possibility of it being residential.

So I have a thought.

And be familiarized with Elgin's planning and zoning provisions, which state in part, and I quote, that the future owner may be required to show that a zoning change would not significantly impact traffic.

Let me say that again.

That it would not significantly impact traffic.

And that having, excuse me, and that they might have to also obtain special permits addressing concerns relating to traffic, noise, parking, and other impacts.

Unquote.

This begs the question, rhetorical.

Why purchase Walt Boulevard property knowing that number one, the land is zoned, light industrial.

Number two, there is a consent decree from 1967, which prohibits the construction of residential homes and apartments, and places of worship, which includes temples.

Dating back for more than 50 decades, public dissent for rezoning has been formidable and continues to be.

Three neighboring subdivisions will be greatly impacted.

Should rezoning changes be made.

Finish up as quickly as you can.

Okay.

But in epic concern, it it is uh okay.

So the three places that would be impacted would be Oak Ridge, Sherwood Oaks, Castlewidge.

But the epic concern in the it would be the increase in traffic proposed by this potential mixed use enclosure along the Route 20 corridor as it swells to an even greater vulnerable level.

So basically, just to end, I would like to say if in essence, even after you've viewed the revisions that will be coming to you, if there's any reservations at all.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Jane Lampkin.

Hi.

I'm Jane Lampkin.

Um we are on the Calder Crossing North Condominium Association Board, and I'm um calling to ask or here to ask if the city council and the city of Algern would consider uh passing some type of rules and ordinances about the e-bikes and e-scooters, mainly because we have very young grade school children.

One of the little boys is like kindergarten age that go blowing down the road in an e-scooter as fast as he can go.

He can hardly see over the handles, and it happens regularly with a group of kids in our neighborhood.

So obviously that's scary for the drivers.

He was almost hit twice this summer.

And um I'm not sure why the parents aren't out there supervising, but they're not, which is kind of scary for all of us.

Sandy, you want to add anything?

Um we do have signage, you know, to say slow down children in a plane, so we do have the signage out there, but then we still see like a handful of children.

So we decided it would be nice for the city of Eldon to take a look at some sort of ordinance for either e-scooters and e-bikes.

Okay.

Thank you.

That brings us to bids.

First item is uh uh number one is the Edward Shock Center of Elgin Carpet Replacement Source Well Joint Purchasing Agreement.

Mr.

Mayor, I recommend that we award the contract to Shaw Industries in the amount of 155,426.

Second.

Been moved to second for approval.

Any discussion?

Mr.

Ortiz.

I have a question for the city manager about uh the agreements or the cooperative agreements.

Has the city ever thought about making their own cooperative agreement?

And if they are like what's the process for doing something like that.

Uh the answer to both is no, we haven't thought about it, and I don't particularly know what the process is.

Um in the past, we've had a very lean purchasing department, and I think that it would have been stretching the the capabilities of the department to go into looking something like this.

We've gone through some recent change.

We have a incredible purchasing officer, Nick Etmanon, who is very engaged in the purchasing community.

It's something that I can begin talking to him.

We're rebuilding that department now after the retirement of a longtime employee, begin looking into the possibility of what it would take for the city to be a leader in a joint purchasing cooperative program.

Thank you.

So not immediately on the horizon, but we're coming to the stages where I think it's something we can begin potentially looking into.

We're getting that skill set.

All right, thanks.

Mr.

Dixon.

Um for this uh for this bid, um, Shaw Industries.

No relation to my favorite former city council person.

Shaw, is it?

No.

I don't know.

I believe it came up once before.

All right, because uh, you know, he retired, and you know, now he's hitting it big because we uh that's another one from Shaw Industries coming up.

So last I recall he's still in the telecommunications industry.

Okay, all right.

All right, anything else?

Clerk, please call a roll.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Captain.

Yes.

Motion's approved nine zero.

Item two is a uh bid number two is a fire station five flooring replacements, uh, another source wall joint purchasing agreement.

Move toward the bidish industry in the amount of thirty-two thousand nine hundred and ninety-six dollars for the replacement of ceramic floor tiles at station fire station five.

Chief, we get a new floor, maybe.

Second second.

It's been moved and second for approval.

Any discussion.

Hearing none, Clerk, please call a roll.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Captain.

Yes.

The motion is approved 90.

Brings us to other business.

First item is consideration of petition 26-25 for 2125 Point Boulevard.

An amendment to special regulations for street graphics to construct a larger than permitted monuments signed along I-90.

Mr.

Millot.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

This property is located at the northeast corner of I-90 and Randall Road along Point Boulevard.

Here is I-90.

This is Randall, and this is Point Boulevard.

McGrath Honda is up here.

Jimmy's Char House here.

This is the Pace Park and Ride facility.

This is Woods Springs Suites.

Here is the headquarters for Fabricators Manufacturers Association International and San Filippo.

The building owner requests approval of an electronic changeable monument sign along Interstate 90 for A Tech Ambulance.

The sign is larger than otherwise permitted by the zoning ordinance, but is smaller than the others that the city has recently approved in the same area along the tollway.

The larger size provides visibility of the sign to high-speed drivers over tall natural landscaping and an existing chain link fence, all located on tollway property.

The table on the screen shows the other electronic changeable monument signs and their sizes that the city is approved in the immediate area.

Again, the proposed sign would be the smallest of these to request zoning relief to date.

The applicant is available.

Should you have any questions?

Staff in the planning and zoning commission recommend approval, subject to conditions outlined within your packet.

Move for approval subject to conditions.

Second.

Move and second subject to conditions.

Any questions for Mr.

Millad?

Mr.

Ortiz.

For the images that are going to be shown in the sign, I'm assuming they're going to rotate.

Is there like how many they can put on there or like how long they got to show before like the distracted driver looking at the other?

Yes, for any of our electronic message boards in the city, you have to, it's a static message, no video, and the message has to hold for 10 seconds and then instantly change to another message.

Okay.

That's it.

Thank you.

Anything else?

Clerk, please call a roll.

Oh, one question.

Sorry, Mr.

Mr.

Dixon.

Yep.

Thank you, Mark.

Quick question for you.

We rarely approve these type of signs off of the expressway.

Can you talk a little bit about you know why that is and and how we were able to make you know what I view is it the exception for this company?

Um sure.

We the provisions for LED signs are a lot like uh what we've done with a lot of other zoning changes.

We've done it incrementally.

It started with gas stations when you wanted to have the ability to change the the price of the of the um of the the gas, then you needed to bring other signs into uh uh into compliance and you could have these LED signs and incrementally we looked at a section along Randall Road, then we added a section along State Street, and eventually we looked at other zoning districts.

Um I think it's uh it's a purely a question of economics for the particular for the particular uh business.

Is it something where the the cost of the sign and the electrical that has to be run to it and the foundation to support it?

Is that worth the uh the need to change over that message?

Do they have products that they need to to be able to do that?

So I think it's a balancing act for the particular business owner.

Okay, all right, very well, thank you.

My pleasure.

Anything else?

Clerk, please call the roll.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good?

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Captain.

Yes.

The motion is approved 9-0.

Item two is consideration of petition 25-25, 1475 Larkin Avenue.

A plan development as a map amendment to construct improvements to the existing athletic field at Larkin High School.

Mr.

Millot.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Larkin High School is located at the southwest corner of Larkin Avenue and McLean Boulevard.

Here is Larkin, and this is McLean.

Here's the Jewel Osco.

This is Britain's car wash.

This is McDonald's.

And the Evangelical Covenant Church is located here.

School District U 46 requests approval of significant improvements to the existing track and athletic field at Larkin, located south of the existing buildings.

The improvements would allow Larkin to host its own football games, which currently take place at Elgin High.

The track and athletic field currently has temporary bleachers on the north side that sit about 250 people, and bathroom facilities are provided via portables also on the north side of the field.

The project includes the construction of a new 7600 square foot building for concessions, locker rooms, and bathrooms, a new 1,500 square foot covered outdoor pavilion, two new ticket booths, a new scoreboard oriented to the west towards the field, and new permanent bleachers on the north and south sides of the field with a seating capacity for up to 2250 people.

The South Bleachers, which would be the home team bleachers, also include a press box.

The plans replaced the existing chainling fence along McLean with a six-foot high ornamental fence that matches the fence along Larkin.

And extensive landscaping is provided in and around the scoreboard as well as down McLean.

Friday night varsity football games are expected to generate the largest attendance of events to be held at the improved facility between 750 and 1,000 people, according to a traffic study provided by U-46.

The district estimates five home football games during the regular season.

Peak traffic volumes would be the same as daily student drop-off and pickups, and traffic for games will be managed in the same way.

Vehicles enter driveway one and enter and exit via driveway two, or vehicles enter via driveway three and exit via driveway four.

Existing uh sorry, exiting during peak times would be limited to right turns only.

The parking demand is expected to be between 300 and 400 vehicles based on a conservative estimate of 2.5 persons per vehicle.

The high school has 540 spaces on site.

Equally important, a large number of Larkin students walked to school.

875 out of the 2,075 students, or more than 42 percent uh enrolled walk to school.

If additional parking was ever needed, perhaps for the homecoming game or the Larkin Elgin rivalry game, the district would run a continuous shuttle service from nearby Highland Elementary, which is three minutes away at Highland and Weston.

Kimball Middle, which is four minutes away on North McLean at Dem at Demond Demond, Devon, Demond?

Demon?

Uh and or Creekside Elementary, which is seven minutes away off of North Airlight Street.

I believe that's how you pronounce airlight.

These three schools have an estimated 362 parking spaces.

The rivalry game would only be at Larkin once every other year.

The applicant is present.

Should you have any questions?

Staff in the planning and zoning commission recommend approval.

Subject conditions outlined within your packet.

Move for approval subject conditions.

Move and second for approval.

Any discussion.

Mr.

Dixon.

Yeah, this question is for the U-46 officials.

You're about 25 years too late.

I just hope you know that.

And uh, you know, I'm probably I think I'm the only person up here that attended both Larkin and Elgin.

I started at Larkin, played football for Larkin, varsity football.

We were really good back in the day.

These days, not so much.

Right.

The football program is actually in limbo of sorts and is really struggling.

So but I know that this project has been in the works for years, so it's not wasn't determined, you know, yesterday or anything like that.

So I just want to say like I'm really looking forward to to have it as a maybe this will you know invigorate the sport at Larkin again.

You know, a lot of other things probably have to fall into place.

But I really like the plan.

I did receive some concerned emails from residents uh in the area who you know are worried about parking, um, are worried about traffic, um, which are all you know valid concerns because it absolutely is going to be an increase in an uptick.

But what I what I saw in the plan was a very thoughtful process.

And Mark, you're not new to to things like this.

And so the thoughtfulness of you know, if we do have a lot of um people come out, where can they park?

Um that area is actually very walkable to us well.

So there are crosswalks, there are stop lights, of course, there's a lot of um activity over there as far as law enforcement is concerned, so it is going to help keep people safe and sound.

So hopefully it's the it's a minimum impact uh on that on that neighborhood.

And and for those who don't know, um, this was actually supposed to happen.

I don't know how I mean before my time, many, many, many years ago, and the rumor or the message the information I got was uh the field was built in the wrong direction initially.

Is that I don't know if that's real or not, but uh there are fields over there, but they're facing the wrong direction.

This will get us in the right direction.

Um so hopefully we'll get a lot of uh good use out of it.

So good job.

Thank you, U46 for being a wonderful partner uh again, and uh let's continue to keep this ball rolling.

Ms.

Martinez.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I'm in favor of this project.

I know uh as uh council member Dixon said we had received some concerns, and uh but you think about it, and it's like how many times a year is it that this happens?

Five all right, and uh I think the peak moment that this is gonna affect the West Side would be uh probably the Algen Larkin games, you know, and depending whether it's on at Larkin or at Albert.

And uh I like the idea of um having uh the middle school and the elementaries involved because Larkin and its day was made really for people to walk to school, and um as the schools uh expanded, and I know in a study when we were doing the um walkway, uh 15,000 cars go by there a day, right?

Um I'm sure they're not gonna be going right at that moment that evening, but as I was saying, um having the additional parking um or stops, I think will help a lot because people rather than walking to Larkin at that time, it would be very convenient to take those shuttles.

And so um because who wants to deal with the mess going on at that time?

Um I'm really excited, it's something that um is needed for a long time.

I I'd like to thank uh everybody at U46 for your forward thinking, and um I look at what you've done in this short time, you know, because Larkin has been here for a long time.

U46 has been here for a long time.

Are the improvements that you've done around the city?

It just it's beautiful.

You know, I I look at Route 19, and um it wasn't really anything to look at, but now it is.

You know, I love the bus depot, what you've done at Shells Parkway, what you're doing with the schools.

I mean, I could just go on and on, and I think this is great.

So congratulations.

Uh I hope that this passes, but I am in favor of it.

Thank you.

So far out.

Thank you, Mayor.

So bear with me, I got several questions.

Okay.

Um, so the first one is on page 142, it talks about gazebo, and then on page 179, there's a map of a gazebo, but there's no other information on what this gazebo is or what does it do?

What is the gazebo exactly?

Uh it's well, why don't we have U46 come up and explain what they how they intend to use the the gazebo?

Yeah, thank you.

Good evening, there, Captain and trustees and our entire community here.

Um I have with me, or I'm sorry, I'm Dr.

Ann Williams, deputy superintendent of operations for the district, and I have with me our um construction coordinator, Miss Jolene Linneman, and she would be happy to address your question as it relates to the pavilion.

So the pavilion is actually for picnic tables.

Um we've been putting them in at every of our high schools.

We do one a year, so we're actually tying this one in with the Larkin Stadium.

Um and it gives families a place to sit where they're eating it at the concessions.

So I read about the pavilion.

So the gazebo and the pavilion are the same thing, they were just using two different words.

Okay, got it.

Perfect.

Thank you.

I had another question.

Um, there was concerns from residents living in the area, not only on parking, but also on lights.

Uh, where are we planning to put or where are the lights planning to be put?

Because my concern is the light pollution to the homes.

Since some of the games don't end till 10:30 at night.

That's a great question.

We are um very thoughtful about that and have prepared for the lights to not provide additional lighting um directly into those homes.

We also had a community meeting.

What was that a month ago, maybe?

Has it been that long?

We had a community meeting, and we sent out invitations to everyone that is in that direct area.

We only received about four people that came out, um, and we addressed all of their concerns.

But we definitely did look at lighting and take that into consideration in the design.

Did you want to add something, Mark?

Okay, I didn't know if you had yeah, I don't know where the lights were gonna be, but I did read that you were gonna have like some kind of light shade that kind of blocks some of that light.

Can you speak to that a little bit?

I have my architect and my engineer here, and I am going to defer to their excellence.

Thank you.

Hello, I'm VP Trimm with Arkhan Associates.

Uh, we're the architects of the project.

Yeah, so the lighting is going to focus on the field, and there's gonna be a reflection on a topic that's gonna help with the light pollution, so it's not fluent to the air, and that it's gonna be very direct to the field, and also it's gonna meet all the lighting requirements and the photometrics uh based on City of Algen.

Oh, that's good.

Thank you.

Um in the design, they had mentioned that um the visitor section will have more ADA accessibility and then the home section.

Is there a reason for that in the design?

They should be the same.

There's a percentage requirement for both.

So when it comes to the quantity, there's more home seats versus the visitor seats, right?

So it's uh 5% or 10% for ADAC uh seats.

So that's how that's how the numbers come out.

Yep.

Thank you.

And then uh my last question is actually for uh city staff.

So um council member Dixon mentioned about parking, and so there is a lot of concerns, and I was reading from the zoning and commission meeting about people concerned with parking and not being able to find parking.

Can um city manager, can you share a little bit of what can residents do if this passes to get like permit parking in the area to ensure that they're able to find parking?

Sure.

Uh the city has what's called a neighborhood services committee that takes into consideration concerns of neighborhoods about parking issues and whether that results in odd even parking or some other type of neighborhood restrictions.

It was something that would be analyzed by staff in conjunction with the police department, and we would come back to the city council with recommendations on any particular action.

Thank you.

Those are my questions.

Thank you.

Mr.

Thorne.

Thank you, Mayor.

Well, uh, I can say that when I first went to Larkin High School, it was only nine years old.

So there were no additions yet.

And I've seen a number of additions since then.

I've seen it expanded and grown, and I just think this is a wonderful thing.

So my compliments.

Okay.

Anything else from the council?

Ms.

Paul.

Thank you.

Um I live in the area.

Um, my son's a I'm a proud U-46 parent, uh, graduate of uh U-46.

Uh, my son did a couple years ago.

Um, he went to South Elgin.

Um, has a wonderful, wonderful stadium.

Um, so I can't imagine um being a parent of an athlete and and knowing how hard those athletes work not having a stadium there for them to um compete in.

So um I'm definitely supporting this, and and as some of my colleagues mentioned, definitely aware of some of the concerns that um we've heard from neighboring um residents about noise pollution, parking, lighting pollution.

Um I I think you guys have done a really good job of of addressing those concerns.

Um we're only talking about probably five times during the year where this will would likely be um a major issue.

Uh but such a wonderful addition to this school and and so um so long overdue.

So I'm I'm I'm excited for uh Larkin High School and and the students and staff there that that this is finally coming to fruition and can't wait to attend a game there.

So congratulations, Mr.

Ortiz.

I'm a larkin kid through and through.

I'm not a I don't like Algin High School at all.

Um that's why he's wearing blue.

I don't wear blue today.

Uh so uh going to miss a Dixon's point, the field is the wrong direction, it's gonna stay the wrong direction.

How many fields are there in our area that are going east and west instead of north and south?

There was some in the memo.

We did do some research on that.

Um we only have the fields listed that are in our district, though, on this particular okay.

Well, I don't have on my spec.

So we confirmed that the Illinois High School Association permits both both north-south and east-west field orientations, and a review of recent IHSA football champions, including Mount Carmel, Glimbard West, and Providence Catholic show that these schools successfully compete with east-west oriented fields.

Sweet.

Now we actually have to have a uh a good athletic program over there.

I'm sure that the new stadium will attract um additional players, and we will have an outstanding team in a few years.

Well, tell tell the student athletes that I support them no matter what, even though I would just got the best of us last Friday night.

All right, thank you guys.

Thank you.

Anything Mr.

Steph.

I I had a lot of questions that have already been answered.

Um but I wanted to point out what was significant to me is that um in this plan you've put the ticket boost on the north side of the field closest to the parking lot in the school, and I think that will help drive people who come to the games to park in those parking lots and come from the north, which is where the school and the parking lots are rather than from any of the other directions, which are neighborhoods.

Um I also went to Larkin having coached rugby for 11 years.

I have a lot of other coaches that coach football at some of these schools, including South Elgin and Larkin.

Um, and they've they've all raised this east-west orientation as something that was really surprising, and I got the information that you just read from uh that was provided uh in response to my questions earlier.

And so, you know, I I'm glad that the district is alerted to the concerns of an east-west field and the setting sun and trying to play football facing west at that time of day, and I I expect that they'll work around that or plan the games accordingly.

Um, and that combined with the fact that the ticket booths are on the north side of the field in hopes that that will drive the attendance, the spectators that come to these events to use the parking in the school and come in and out of that side rather than Erie or Jane or any other Van Street or any other streets that are south and east and west of the field.

So congratulations.

Thank you.

Okay.

Anything else?

Uh just a comment from me.

Um, this is for the uh neighbors and uh for U46 as well.

You know, we went through uh uh I worked with uh St.

Edwards High School and they had some issues around their field, their athletic field with the football and with the uh the night games and uh with the cooperations of the neighbors, the police department, the school, uh, and the uh alumni at uh St.

Ed's and the city council.

Uh the uh issues that came up were resolved one at a time.

So I would encourage the neighbors to be a little patient.

You're gonna have construction there, you're gonna have trucks going back and forth through your neighbor, your neighborhood for a while.

Uh and when uh when they start playing games there when the issues come up, uh they'll be addressed.

New 46 will work on it, and we'll the city will be apt to help, but uh in uh whatever is under our purview is traffic control and uh parking.

So congratulations to you 46.

We'll look forward to it.

Thank you.

All right.

Kate, please call a roll.

Councilmember Zalcaro?

Yes, Dixon?

Yes, good, yes, Martinez, yes, Ortiz, yes, Powell, yes, Stefan, yes, Thorn?

Yes, mere captain.

Yes, motions approved 90.

Okay.

Brings us to item three is an ordinance amending chapter 2.08 of the LGA Municipal Code as amended entitled City Council and Title Three of the Elge Municipal Code as amended and titled boards and commissions.

Second move to second for approval any discussion.

Ms.

O'Parrow.

Um I had two questions.

Uh, my first question is for corporate counsel.

Um, the first, whereas, and one, two, three.

The fourth, whereas it's both referring to the closed meeting and materials.

Do we need it twice?

Or is there a big difference between the two or that I'm not catching they are saying different things.

The first whereas is saying that it's desirable for these amendments, and then the other whereas clause is saying that these amendments pertain to the governmental affairs, so it is um restating these things but in different contexts.

So, you know, I I think be comfortable leaving it as as written.

Okay, because we didn't refer other changes we were making, just that change has gone written twice.

So I was just asking about that.

Um but if it's fine, it's fine, it's just like I got the point, y'all don't want me to take materials, so I'm at a closed meeting.

Um but the second question I had for corporate consul too is on the human relations commission.

Um talking about the appointments.

Um I know we had changed it to um allow for Martha Luther Keene as a subcommittee.

Do we need to add that in here?

Or is that information separate within that own ordinance or rules?

Sorry.

If you're talking about the revision to the section on the human relations commission, appointing the that's the Martin Luther King subcommittee is not a part of this.

Okay, so I just wanted to make sure because it's seven members is not including the subcommittee, then right?

So we don't need to note that here.

It's just some okay.

That's all I had.

Okay, anything else.

Mr.

Ortiz.

I'd like to make a motion to amend about the part for uh event tickets.

The last meeting I made a comment about that 48 hours wasn't good enough, in my opinion.

And if Lindsay gives us a month and a half, I was read it as what I mentioned last week that if Lindsay gives us a month and a half to a heads up of an event coming up, and then she give us about a week, week and a half to say yes or no.

I think we should give her the same courtesy that if something I understand if like a huge event happens, a medical emergency happens, then you can't give the week notice.

But if you know that something came up a week in advance and you can't make it, then we should give her the courtesy of doing that.

And then so I'd like to strike the 48 hours and change it to a week and uh prior to the event.

And then I also want to add in that tickets are non-transferable to uh friends and uh relatives.

And if you do transfer the ticket, then you just have to pay for the ticket.

So my motion is to strike 48, add a week, and then non-transferable to friends and uh relatives.

And then if you do, you gotta pay for the ticket purchase.

I'll second it.

It's been movement seconded to uh amend uh that's item one B.

Is that correct?

Yep.

Uh to uh 48 hours of from 48 hours to one week and to not allow transfer of uh tickets any discussion Mr.

Good, you haven't spoken today.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um did was there a conversation at all with staff who handles these tickets?

I spoke to Lindsay a while ago about it, but since then I have since the last meeting I haven't spoken to her, I spoke to her before the last meeting.

Okay.

Ms.

Paul.

Yes, um, I guess I'm I guess I'm looking for some clarification around um the ability to transfer the tickets.

I mean I'm assuming well, first of all, if if something comes up, you're not necessarily gonna have a week's notice.

I mentioned that.

Right.

And a lot of times if something does come up, I know you know we'll kind of converse with ourselves to see if there are other colleagues up here that you know can use the tickets or other city employees.

Um so I'm your transfer language does not apply to either of those circumstances, correct?

It's kind of this the kind of intermerge a little bit, but it's more like if I get the ticket, I tell Lindsay I'll go, but then I don't go and I send my dad.

And my dad ends up going in my place, it's technically shouldn't be allowed.

I don't I should have to pay for my dad's tickets since I gave it to him.

Correct.

But if I find another city employee to no, if it's city staff or one of us, you could you could move it.

Just that's why I said uh friends and relatives.

I didn't say city staff or or council or nothing.

But if the city staff person is a friend or relative, if they still work for the city of Algernon.

Okay.

Just want to make sure.

Okay.

Anybody done?

Ms.

Alfaro.

Um I don't know who we'd be doing that.

I don't think anyone should be uh transferring tickets to family member or non-city staff or non-council members since it's city money.

Um so I would be in agreement with that.

I don't think we necessarily need it, but if we need it, I'm fine with that piece being in there because I think we should be able to transfer it to another council member or to another city staff member.

Um, in regards to the one week, I would not be in favor of that because I think things come up last minute, but it shouldn't all fall on to Lindsay.

That council member that has a ticket with the last minute, I think they should take some proactive initiative to be reaching out to other council members and to city staff to see if anyone else should be able to take the ticket.

It shouldn't fall back on to one single individual at the city.

They can help and assist if need be, but it shouldn't just fall on them.

So I would not be in favor of a one week.

I think it should be shorter to the 48 hour.

Okay.

Miss Martinez.

Thank you.

Yeah, I think um what happened is I I went ahead and I asked, I didn't know who to ask, so I asked Lindsay.

I said, if this were to come up, you know, it would um it would be easier.

And she just said, you know, the sooner the better.

And um the only reason why I'm in favor of the week is because you say 48 hours, somebody tells you on Thursday, it just seems harder.

If it can be a week, fine, you know.

Uh I think the bottom line, just as long as uh ticket is covered, is is great.

Uh I I understand where um council member Ortiz is coming out with Transible because we just had a situation in the last gala where uh somebody was supposed to show up and they were asking for um uh I think it was vegetarian, you know, and the person didn't show up, you know.

I don't know who it was, but this happens all the time.

I don't know if it was supposed to be a council person, a staff, or or sometimes I know that uh people bring a spouse or uh plus one, but uh you know when you have tickets that cost anywhere from 20 dollars to 200, that's all this is trying to prevent.

And um, you know, if it's I think it it's preferable for a week, uh, but if you can get it, you know, um get rid of in 48 hours.

Um that's fine.

The thing is just to get rid of it and not let it go to waste.

Mayor, can I add something to that?

Just real quick.

I'm sorry.

Go ahead.

Um just for to clarify to the community if you take a plus one, you they that has to be paid out of pocket.

That's not city money, right?

So if you're taking your spouse, you have to pay for that out of pocket, the city doesn't pay for that.

So just a clarification on that piece.

But in regards to the 48 hours, I think the missing component here is if you can't find someone 48 hours, you're paying for it, right?

Right.

Just because you told the city you can't come and you can't find them, but it you end up paying for it.

So moving it to one week versus 48 hours, I think doesn't make for me doesn't make sense.

I think most people would like you planning to go and things just pop up last minute.

A family member passes away, someone's sick, etc.

You have to go take care of your child now.

So within 48 hours you have an idea, so you start scrambling to ask for people, but in the event that someone can't go, you know you'll have to end up paying for it.

Mr.

Stefan.

Yeah, I was gonna take some time to try to make that same point that was just made by councilwoman Alfaro, but I'll just say that that was exactly what I was gonna say.

I'm thinking of more of health emergencies and family issues that come up, and that's why the 48 hours is what I prefer.

I I agree with councilman L Ortiz that if you know that you can't go and it's a week away, you should be telling.

I mean, that should be standard practice and not wait till 40 hours.

But I I like giving people till four for the 48 hours in case there's an emergency, it can still make plans and do other things.

So Mr.

Good.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh just so I'm just trying to walk through this practically.

So if if I accept a ticket and within 48 hours of event an emergency comes up of any sort, I'm paying for the ticket, and that's gonna be based on the fact that somebody at the event reported that I wasn't there.

That's pretty much it's good.

In the honest system, I'm assuming it's on the system and plus normally there's other people go have gone to events where like you know, you could tell who hasn't gone or etc.

And so we'll be able to do that.

So again, there's no exception for if there's as you would pointed out a debt in the family uh or any issue that comes up.

I think that's something for us to decide here.

Okay.

Do so in that line of thinking, do we have an exemption?

And what's the process?

Yeah, I think we're over.

Ms.

Martinez.

Thank you, Mayor.

I think we're all basically saying the same thing, you know.

Um the only reason why this is being brought up is because more and more I see uh more empty seats, but I know they're being paid by the city.

And um that's something new that we're putting in that I kind of like that um councilwoman uh Alfaro said is um that we pay for the ticket bring a plus one, but it's never been like that before, so that's why uh to add that on.

Sure.

I know we could do that.

Um but I think we're we're basically saying the same thing.

I'm sure there's not going to be a death each time there's an event, you know, but um I get it, it can happen.

Uh so we're just trying to cover that, just trying to be uh make it easy for to uh have somebody go or replace you.

That's it.

I mean um I I still stick to the week, but I guess the vote will decide.

Thank you.

Okay, Mr.

Good Mr.

Dixon.

Thank you.

Um yeah, I'm not in favor of the of the week's notice.

Um I I hear that an exception could be made for a death in a family.

Um, but I I'm the only one up here with still that has young kids.

I mean, and you know, and I have all girls, my daughters get sick all the time.

They just came home last week with a stomach flu that would you know one of them had it two days, gave it to the other one, the other one can't was home sick the other two days, and you don't get 48 hours uh week's notice knowing that kids get sick.

And I know you know, Mr.

Ortiz, you have a young child too as well, 10 year old, 11-year-old.

Um so if we're going to make exceptions, you know, I would say illness, you know, and death in a family, you know.

Um, if we're going to categorize that to Mr.

Good's point, um, but understand too that we all have different lives, but we have the same responsibility as elected city council people.

And so I and I think that we all try to honor that as as best as we can, or we're going to fall short sometimes and being penalized, I think is punitive.

Um, and also too, I in most occasions, not all, but in most occasions, um, I think the city purchases an entire table and doesn't buy the tickets individually.

So that's why there's the money is spent.

And I'm not saying that's a reason to waste to not show up.

I'm just pointing that out that the money is already spent.

So that that's that's my position.

Everything else I'm fine with, but the 48 hours, like I why would I put myself in a bind knowing that I have young children and I can things come up and things happen.

So anybody else hasn't spoken.

Okay, Mr.

Ortiz.

Yeah, I think the first thing I said was if an emergency or sickness comes up, then that's what it is.

This is more like if a scheduling conflict comes up.

If I didn't specify that, my bad, but that's that's what I said.

I had a sidebar in Miss Powell and she reminded me that currently uh boards and commissioners are allowed to go to some of these events, and then maybe my motion restricts them since they're technically not city employees, kind of how we are not city employees.

So if Mr.

Thorne is okay with it, I like to add in the board of commissioners into it, so city employees, council, and the board and commissioners, since they're not city employees, just like how we aren't.

So I overseen that and Miss Powell corrected me on that.

And then it was something else I was gonna say, but I remember, but I just want to if it's okay with Mr.

Thorne on his second, I think he was going to second it.

If we can amend it to add in the board of commissions, it's okay with me.

All right, that we could transfer tickets to the that we can transfer tickets to them if we need to.

Mr.

Thorne, thank you, Mayor.

Um, I'm okay with that uh change, uh Anthony.

Um and with everything that's been brought up, I can see both sides of the week versus the 48 hours.

Um I thought about it from both sides, and whether it's Lindsay or the individual, uh if they know in a week and they don't say anything, or if they have that week's time to find someone else to use it, whether it's Lindsay or yourself, that's why I like the week's time.

I understand the 48 hours because something comes up short notice, and that can happen too.

But there's exceptions now, and so to me, I'm I'm gonna go ahead with the week, and it doesn't mean it's gonna be etched in stone like that forever, but I I think it is a good uh motion for us to have just overall.

Okay, Mr.

Good.

Thank you, Mayor.

So I just want to clarify.

So we are we saying now there's an exception for health or uh death in the family.

Um that counts for it whether it's a week or 48 hours.

But what we're saying right now is a week is the expectation of notice to our staff in the event of a schedule change for us, and if an emergency comes up, and it's say 24 hours in advance, this is kind of an exception for a health reason or for uh death in the family.

Correct.

Okay.

Um and just to clarify, we we're talking is there is a seven-day suggestion, or is this like a business week suggestion?

Uh seven eight or five days.

I guess five business days could be tell Lindsay or one of us on a Saturday.

We might not get back to you until Monday, so I guess five business days will be a week.

I just wanted to clarify some of the specifics here.

So some of us don't answer emails on the weekend or we're busy doing something with family.

Okay.

Okay.

Ms.

Martinez.

Just one thing that I wanted to say is um, you know, I I realize it's true that um the city pays for uh the table.

All we're trying to do is even if the city pays for the table, we're just trying to fill the seats rather than just let um a seat be empty.

I think that was uh the premise two on this.

And um, you know, like I said, uh a week because that also gives um, you know, there's some people that want to go, but because there's only a limited uh spot, you know, eight or ten to a table.

I think it gives them also um uh time to uh if if they want to go to the event, and it just I think makes it uh easier for everybody.

So thank you.

Okay.

Um I guess the motion now is for we have a discussion, is to still for five business days.

Um no transfer tickets other to relatives, uh and and up of course this thing with the death in the family and and that type of thing will have to be.

Yes.

I asked corporate counsel.

We haven't added the exemptions to the amendment.

And do we need to take final action today?

Or can it go back to city?

Yeah, because I was trying to get I was gonna suggest if we're not taking final action on this ordinance tonight in terms of the the technical motions and whatnot, I think we can just kind of take informal votes to get consensus and come back with uh what would hopefully be a final proposed draft ordinance that meets the consensus we come to, and then um rather than trying to amend the motions back and forth.

We'll just take some informal votes and I'll come back with the final ordinance at some point.

So however we want to best do.

I'm gonna offer a suggestion, and uh well been uh I think that uh the best way to handle this is if you can't make it to contact Lindsay and Miss Rushka and let her deal.

She that's her job, and let her make those arrangements.

If you're sick, why do you want to do that when you're sick and try to call people?

Let her do it.

She can work through the manager, and if there are senior staff available that need to go, that's the best way to do it.

It should not fall on you, but that's my suggestion.

Doesn't have to be part of this, but just for your own peace of mind, let her deal with it.

She's very good at it.

Okay.

So um the motion is uh uh the motion to amend we'll put on hold, and you would like to uh continue this to uh uh a meeting in the future.

Mayor I think we need a roll call because some people don't like the idea just to make sure there's enough votes even for Chris back to waste the time on it.

I think there are some elements that I think we should get consensus on so I can bring back the ordinance that has at least the most support at the moment.

So uh I think there are a couple issues.

The the first is the five business days versus the 48 hours.

All right, then we'd have to do that to do these one at a time.

You want to vote on each one of these?

Sure.

Okay, this is for five business days.

Clerk, please call the roll.

Council members of our own?

No.

Dixon?

No.

Good, yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

No.

Stefan?

No.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Captain.

Yes, motions approve five four.

And I don't know if we need to vote.

It seemed like there was consensus on the fact that we'd have exceptions for death, illness, or some other type of emergency.

I don't know if anybody had an objection to that or wants to vote on that particular aspect.

No, I think that consensus.

I don't I don't think that I don't think that needs a vote.

And then I think the last thing is whether or not uh vote on whether or not uh tickets can be transferred.

I don't know if there's consensus on that or not.

Um the motion was it can only be transferred to officers of the city, employees of the city boards or commissioners, um no friends or relatives.

In the past that's been done in the managers' offices handle that, and people through the again through Lindsay.

Um again, if it's a uh senior staff member, they go through and see if anybody's available to fit to uh uh to attend.

And I've obviously the people that would uh we would like to attend would be the people who benefit the most from whatever the event is.

Mayor Kaplan.

Yes, Ms.

Paul.

Um I have a question about one of the other sections here.

Uh the appointment and reappointment of of the board and commissions.

Um during our discussions, I know you you had indicated that you didn't necessarily have to be or want to be a part of of those appointments.

I'm not sure if that still stands or not, but right now the way this is written, it says that uh the mayor and another member of the city council will do those appointments on a rotating basis.

Um the only person that it looks like it rotates, at least if I'm reading this correctly, is the other city council person.

It looks like the mayor is like a standing member, regardless of how this works.

So is was that the intention?

I have no personal preference, but I'll leave it up to the uh up to the council.

If you'd like to have two council members out, uh it gets to be uh makes it a little simpler if I'm the I'd do it, but I personally really don't care.

Um I'd I'd personally like to see you know just two different council members each time.

Um, versus the mayor and one other council member.

Um I think that makes sense, and again, just based on some of the discussions we've had.

Um I I think it would be a little bit more equitable.

Mr.

Bigson?

Yes.

Just clarification for uh Ms.

Powell.

Uh are you saying to rotate two at a time?

Two of the nine, and the mayor's just one of nine.

That's what you're doing.

Okay, yes.

Just rotate like every one of them.

Okay, gotcha.

Not removing him completely, he would just rotate just like every all the rest of us would.

Yeah, versus being always on the committee, and then we're just rotating one person.

Ms.

Dewis, can you keep track of that?

GPS there we go, that's all we can ask.

So that would be a rotation, and sometimes we do get two or three that come at the same time.

So that does not necessarily mean that you're going to be for all three.

There would be two separate people for each one.

Right.

For each commission.

Wow.

Yeah, that could be it can it could get confusing, but we'll find out.

Yeah.

It ain't that hard.

Okay.

Rotating, so that would be uh you you would only do uh uh be responsible for doing one commission and then you'd be rotated off.

Okay, can I just martinez?

Can I just say uh something on that?

I think um I I kind of would personally prefer uh the mayor to be uh the stable one because you know sometimes we have that um we have an election every two years, and just to make it constant, I think it would just be easier if we just had the mayor and be a lot easier to keep this rotation.

I know for some people it may not be hard, but um I think uh that would be the most practical thing.

Um just my opinion.

I don't know how everybody else feels about that.

I can I think that what Mr.

Thorne I I tend to agree with that.

Um I mean it's in the past it's been the mayor and one the same council member, the senior council member.

We're changing it to rotating the council members, but I think the mayor should remain stable.

I at least that's I like that myself, and especially with what councilwoman martine has just brought up, depending on election times and things like that.

It's just uh uh the mayor's the pillar, and then we have one rotation.

That would be my preference.

So far.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, given that the mayor doesn't have a preference, I think it's good to have um both positions or both people that are selected, the council members are selected rotated.

And the reason why is it helps with succession planning.

Um everyone has an election every two years.

There's four of us that are up, so that doesn't impact that's every everyone.

And so I think this is good for secession planning and helping um spread the love, given that the mayor gets a bunch of other stuff that's on the his plate.

And so I think personally it's good to rotate between both okay.

I serve with the I I serve at the uh uh will of the council, whatever the council would like to do.

So if you'd like to have a vote on that, that's fine.

Otherwise, we can go along with the original amendment and just do the rotation.

I'm fine with that Mr.

Ortiz.

Uh this is the question for a corporate council.

I have unicode pulled up, and I'm trying to I'm looking through it, but maybe you know more than I do or to find it.

So in the boards of commissions ordinance, I think it says somewhere in there that the mayor is the one that removes and appoints at the consent of the uh of the council.

So would we have to redo that ordinance and the boards of commissions?

Since if he rotates, then technically that's not really true.

Is there a particular section you're looking at, Councilman?

That's what I'm looking through.

I thought I read it somewhere one day, and that's not maybe if you knew exactly where it was at if that was just hallucinating when I read that.

I could be wrong, but I thought I read that somewhere.

No, uh I can certainly uh review that before the next meeting, and if there's any requirement that the mayor be uh I mean this is just a recommendation, it's not the actual appointment, so I'm not sure that it gets implicated by uh any change to that.

Um but I I would certainly review that.

Uh yeah, if you can just if we do change it that way, then it's make sure we change it over here also.

All right, thank you.

Okay, anything else?

Call for a vote or do we wait or um I'm sorry, Mr.

Decasson.

Mr.

Good.

Uh I I know we're in the middle of starting this process out right now, but I did have an item I wanted to mention, so I don't know if this is the appropriate time to do it or if we're still having a conversation.

No previous time.

Yeah, go ahead.

Okay, so um last meeting I had mentioned uh us thinking about considering and establishing some guidelines as it relates to remote meetings.

Um and the recommendation there was you know I presented a spectrum of options and doing some more research.

Uh it seems like the most consistently selected option is for remote meetings to just have your camera on if you're attending remotely.

Um and then going down that thought line that we were uh working on last meeting about materials from executive session.

Um it made me think that if we're not going to allow materials to leave executive session, that we potentially shouldn't allow remote meetings for executive session.

Um so I wanted to bring it to the council for consideration.

And basically the consideration is that if you're going to attend remotely for a committee of the whole or city council, you have your camera on, and for executive session, you have to be in person.

So I don't know if there's a need for any discussion at this point, but I I'm prepared to make a motion, um, but I want to open this up for discussion.

Yeah, that would have to come as a separate amendment.

Um then yeah, I'll make the motion to amend.

Um let's uh and then informal vote.

What was that?

We're gonna have a formal vote on uh uh having uh uh requirement for uh being at the uh attendance at the executive session.

Well, mayor may I propose that we finish the other roll call first.

Yes, we have to do those first.

Yeah, let's do that first before we I feel like that might be.

I'm just writing it.

Yeah, that might open up a discussion, so like before I forget about the I'm just trying to write them down.

Um we have uh we have one motion, and that was uh uh for I think we started out with the uh 48 in one week.

Is that correct?

Oh, we finished those.

I think we're gonna be able to do that.

So that's the we start.

I'm just we start out with that, yeah.

And then we moved on to uh uh tickets, whether tickets can be transferred uh to relatives or or uh uh that they'll be required to be transferred to staff or to uh uh other council members.

Including board and commissions, I think.

Including boards and commission members.

Okay, so we have a mo uh we'd have to make a uh vote on that as well.

Okay, so call I think we have consensus on that.

Yeah, mayor on that all right.

Um so I think the next issue is whether or not uh the mayor is going to be uh permanent recommending member or it's uh one of the nine rotating.

So I think the motion was that both of the recommending persons rotate council members.

Yeah, both yeah, okay.

Clerk please call the role.

This is for both uh uh the recommending people would both be council members.

Oh okay.

Okay.

Rotating is right.

Council members of our yes, Dixon?

Yes, good, no.

Martinez?

No.

Ortiz?

Abstain.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

No.

Mayor Captain.

Abstain.

I lost track.

That's that's 43.

Three no's and two abstentions.

So it'll be the ordinance I come back with will be prepared with both uh recommending persons rotating.

Okay.

We'll see where it goes.

Okay, and last is um a Mr.

Goods amendment that would require uh attendance at the uh uh visual attendance on a Zoom meeting and uh attending in person for executive session.

Is that correct?

Yeah, and I can talk with corporate counsel about some of the enforcement and exceptions for that.

Okay.

Um in the way.

So um I'm I guess I'm there haven't been a whole lot of instances that I can recall during the what for number of years I've been on council where we've had executive session and have had folks that have had to attend remotely.

I mean, obviously for if people are away for job, whatever the situation is.

So why why are we trying to restrict people if if you've if you're in attendance remotely for the regular meeting in the committee of the whole and we happen to have an executive session, why are we trying to exempt them from executive session?

Would you like me to respond?

No.

Um so the logic there is that executive session is a privileged session, right?

So attending remotely, the idea of somebody attending a public forum remotely is a different scenario than attending a privileged session, um, which is executive session, which we just decided last meeting, we weren't going to allow materials out of.

So following down that logical path, in addition to some of the feedback I've gotten from other communities, is that not only are they considering outright banning remote attendance for all meetings, which is not what I'm proposing here, um, but for executive session, that's the thought line is that if we're not going to allow materials to leave executive session, why would we uh allow an open link to that session, which we have no idea what's on the other end of it?

So this is again this is just security best practices.

Um since I've been on council, which is less time, there have been instances where council members have attended remotely.

Um I'm not like there wasn't anything in those moments that caused me to have any sort of anxiety.

Um again, that was my first term, kind of see what's going on in the organization.

Second term, we have this opportunity to talk about council rules.

Um I'm recommending this because it's proactive, it's what other communities are doing.

Um there's a lot of pressure on local governments uh and coming from all sides right now, and and that's not exempt uh or digital connections are not one of the exemptions.

So I think this is us just being really proactive.

And um, you know, as it was mentioned before, I don't believe remote attendance was allowed for any meeting uh before the pandemic.

And so obviously uh what I've composed here has exceptions where we could put those rules what we're considering right now to even vote on at the next meeting um that by a majority vote we can suspend those rules and allow everybody to attend.

What are the exceptions that you're proposing?

Um if you want to hear it, it would just be that you know we could excuse temporary temporary interruptions if this is for a council or committee of the whole, that if somebody for some reason there's a technical difficulty and their feed dropped, um that there's nothing punitive that's going on.

Uh so in that case the chair, the mayor uh could ex excuse that.

Um but in extraordinary circumstances, example a declared emergency uh that prevents physical attendance, the council may by a majority vote suspend these rules for the duration of that emergency.

So it's not encumbering us to be flexible in the case of an emergency like the pandemic, but this is getting us in order with best practices.

Um not only moving in the direction for any of our vis uh digital attendance, but specifically drawing the line at executive session that you know you it it requires personal attendance because it's serious issues, and that's what we signed up for when we ran for council.

So that was stretching out that conversation from last week.

This is what I landed on, and this is what I'm proposing tonight that we just consider for a vote at the following meetings.

And understanding, you know, the confidentiality around you know, discussions during executive session, and again, the few instances where people might have to attend remotely.

I don't I don't think people are attending remotely, you know from a from a coffee, a public coffee house or anything like that.

That would obviously, you know, be a problem and and in terms of maintaining confidentiality.

I think I think this is going a bit extreme.

Um I I don't think that um we should be restricting folks that you know we we've all signed up to do this.

I you know, I I think we all take it seriously, um, and are only um those few instances where any of us have had to attend remotely have been you know probably few and far between, and it's not something that I don't think anyone up here just does, you know, on a regular basis just because you know we we have certain parameters that have to be met.

Um but if you're you're here in attendance for the committee of the whole meeting and you're um and and the regular meeting, um I I guess I'd I'm failing to see why you would be exempt um why you would be prohibited from participating in executive session.

I mean, if we want to say, hey, if you're if you're attending remotely, you know, you have to be in in a private environment and you and making sure that we're you know maintaining confidentiality and um you know other people can't hear what's going on.

I'm completely fine with that, but I I think this is going a bit extreme.

Um and and penalizing people for having jobs that may take them out of out of town on a day when you know we we might have important business to take care of or whatever the situation is with with within the confines of of what's allowable.

Um so I I will not be supporting it.

Um I like I said, I I think it's a a bit extreme.

But I'd definitely be interested in hearing what communities you're saying are are implementing these really extreme measures.

Yeah, maybe there maybe maybe they've had more problems with it than we have.

Well, there's um, I mean, if you want me to send you the specific legislation, there's uh items happening at state level.

Um again, there's nuance between uh a public meeting and executive session.

So I will be happy to provide those in a packet if this is put on to be considered at the next meeting.

Um and again, this is in no way an attempt to try and penalize anybody.

This is uh restricting.

But that's it, but that's what it ends up.

I mean, that's what it could potentially end up doing, though that's my point.

I I respect your opinion there.

Um, but just again to reiterate this is for executive session.

We just voted in the last meeting to not allow materials to leave executive session.

The reason being is because we're discussing items of either property acquisition, ongoing negotiations, or uh staff-related issue.

And what we are held to is that we don't share that information with anybody.

Um, you know, when I'm in executive session, that's just for us.

Um, I don't go home to my spouse, I don't go talk to any of my friends.

That is confidential, privileged information.

Therefore, why would we allow an unsecured environment with a link into that meeting?

Um so again, this isn't in my opinion, this isn't penalizing people.

I mean, I've got three jobs.

Um, you know, we we work our schedules around this.

We signed up for this, and this community has been doing executive session for decades and decades and decades before remote meetings are even a possibility.

So I don't want anybody up here to feel like we're trying to penalize you.

This is just an integrity of the organization and how we run our executive session.

So that's why I brought it forward.

Um so I I I specifically asked the question about what communities have adopted this and are using this.

And you said because you said that other community.

Like I said, I'll go to the lengths of providing you all the information I've compiled if this vote here passes to go to the next meeting for actual consideration.

So again, respect your opinion.

You know, there's nine of us up here.

Um I think right now we're looking for a roll call to see if this will move forward for corporate council to put more consideration into for me to finalize the research that I've started doing into this topic, and then we can have the conversations if you would like me to compile all the different municipalities that have considered this, and more than happy to do that.

I'm at requesting that information before we take a vote on it.

That's what I'm I'm because you you you mentioned that it's there.

That I mean I that would be helpful for for me and I think for my colleagues to know.

I mean, if this is something that's so widespread, maybe I'm missing something.

Um be helpful to have that information ahead of time.

But I mean, if going down that path of what you're saying in terms of confidentiality and you know, um open streams, I mean, for that matter, should we all be leaving our I mean following your logic?

We should all be leaving our cell phones outside of the room.

I wouldn't be against that.

Um because someone might be secretly recording something on their cell phone or have a conversation going on their cell phone, we go into executive session.

Again, uh this just goes a little bit far.

I mean, again, that there's this is proactive.

This isn't reacting to any specific incident that's happened here in Algin.

Um we're trying to ensure that doesn't happen.

Again, I'm more than happy to provide you the list.

I did not come prepared thinking that based on the number or the specific municipalities I provided as an example to go down that rabbit hole as uh a merit to garner a vote from my colleagues.

If that's part of your decision making, then I it sounds you as you mentioned you're not in support of this.

So that that's okay.

And like I said, this is just a roll call.

We're not voting at any policy tonight.

This is to give direction to corporate council.

So it I think I'll leave it there.

Um, I think we probably if uh any of my colleagues have any other questions um that you think I would be able to answer or help fill you in.

Um I'm open to hearing those, but this is just uh to move it to a more formal process for consideration.

I I think just my opinion.

I think there's a a doubt a definite distinction between the public meeting that we're at right now that's being live streamed and what goes on in an executive session.

And uh I don't think it's unreasonable to uh uh to have this as a roll call or have Mr.

Good has some information to bring back that allows him to do that at the at the next council meeting.

And I'll be I think that's I think that's I think that's reasonable.

And I'll be absolutely sure to share that information in advance.

Um Ms.

Martinez.

I just have just for point of clarity.

So it's just like for example, um, if we didn't have zooming at all, okay.

That because I know some places they just stock that.

So if we didn't have that, and then we have executive session, a person would be there anyway, right?

If they weren't at the meeting, they're not gonna be at executive session anyway.

So that's kind of like my take of it.

Is that kind of right?

Um councilman good.

Yes, exactly.

I mean, this has been a long-standing practice up until pandemic and remote meetings became a thing.

Okay, I'm just trying to get clarity.

Thank you.

Did you have your hand up so far?

Well, I have a lot of thoughts, but I'm trying to collect the lead put them together.

So I'll hand it over to that mic for a minute for me to put it on.

Just a couple thoughts.

Um I've lost a couple of them already.

Um I'll I'll support the idea of of making people turn their cameras on for the meetings because um even though I I've just read recently that AI is as cheap as a couple bucks, you can take your picture of your head in three different ways, and they can you can give them a couple phrases and they can recreate an image of you, and that image can lip sync with whatever they want to say, just like our president for whatever reason did recently by posting it on his private uh um social media pages.

Uh so my point is I don't think making people turn their camera on is going to prevent what I think you're trying to prevent, which is AI or other means of creating an image that makes it look like somebody's there that isn't.

But I think this is all academic because anybody who does that is I mean, we're already martyrs for spending two nights a month coming to these meetings and spending all this time together.

I can't imagine who would want to go through the effort of creating an avatar or some kind of AI generating image to zoom into a meeting and try to do what I don't even know.

I mean, what what would be the point?

It's uh so I'm I'm willing to support it, but I I kind of am just because I think it's something that's really kind of far-fetched.

Um that because turning the camera on, given the latest AI technology is not gonna stop that dynamic from potentially happening.

So um, so those are just my thoughts.

Thanks.

Okay.

Mr.

Ortiz.

Yeah, I wasn't too sure which municipalities allowed or didn't allow Zoom, so I did a quick research right there's talking.

And the first one that came up was Chrome.

City Council wasn't no longer allowed.

City Council members to attend executive meetings via Zoom or other virtual tools after hearing recommendations from its attorney.

So it seems like this city, their corporate council or their chief legal counselor, I'm not sure what they have.

There's the one that recommends the city council.

So I didn't do any more research, but that's one of the first articles that came up.

And this is from what's the date of this thing.

Let's see.

April 25th, 2025.

Crone?

C C O N R O E I don't know where they're at.

Oh, and I'm gonna pay WAF, so they want to pay for it.

But yeah, it's one of the first links.

So I don't really see a problem with it.

It's I think it's fine.

But yeah, it's this Google search and that city doesn't allow theirs as a Bishop, so that's it.

Okay.

Ms.

Alfaro, we don't have to.

I think I'm on the same uh similar to council member Powell.

I think I need more information.

I feel it's somewhat an overreach right now.

Um similar to what she had mentioned.

I was thinking the same thing.

Phones, are you gonna start panning people down to make sure they don't have recorders on them, etc.?

Um and it's inequitable given that a number of people have jobs and they have to travel for their job at times, so to prohibit them from doing what their job responsibility, what they got elected to do, I think is is unfair and it's unequitable.

So I would not be in favor of it as of now.

Anything else?

Mr.

Stephen.

Yeah, I now I remember the other point I wanted to make.

I I I don't want to lose sight of the original to me the original reason we went to allowing remote loosening the rules about remote attendance, and that was to increase the pool of potential people that could become council members and not eliminate them given the change in the work rules and people's work lives.

Of course, the standard, you know, you have to live in Elgin, you gotta be over 18, you can't have a felony, whatever else rules that apply to a candidate running for the council, but I certainly don't want to want to lose sight of the fact that to me it's important to make sure that we leave this the ability to run for and be a council person open to as many people as possible, and given the change in work lives and people's uh schedules, you know, uh the fact that somebody couldn't get to a six o'clock or a seven o'clock meeting twice a month, I would hope that that wouldn't eliminate them.

Uh it would just be executive session.

Right.

So I that's what I'm holding it's that's kind of why I'm making that point, is to hold the line with that.

I don't want us to start going backwards with our regular meetings.

So that was a point I wanted to make.

Okay.

Anything else?

We need a vote here.

Okay.

So are we are we dividing the vote up?

Because I think it sounds like some people were in favor of having the cameras on.

I think we can just do both because he's gonna have to come back.

We have to come back anyway.

But doing them separately, yeah.

Well, and we can come back and do it separately in the you know when we get the more information.

Yeah, that's fine.

Is that acceptable?

Okay.

Why don't we do two votes just so I can bring back exactly what the comments so uh if we could ask the council to vote on whether or not to have cameras on uh when attending remotely at regular meetings or any remote attendance having cameras on?

Yep.

Council members alfaro?

No, Dixon?

No.

Good, yes, Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz, yes, Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Captain.

Yes, motions passed seven to two.

And then uh a vote on whether or not um council members can attend executive session remotely.

And the yes vote means they cannot, correct?

And a no vote means they're not.

Okay, let's make sure.

All right.

So motion um I'm not gonna make a motion.

Uh yes vote means yes, they can attend remotely, and no vote will mean no, they cannot attend remote.

Okay.

Okay.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good.

No.

Martinez?

No.

Ortiz?

No.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

No.

Mayor Captain.

No.

Uh so that motion passes by um.

Um I'll prepare a draft motion where the motion is never keeping attend remote.

Okay.

All right.

Anything else?

Well, there's more to the agenda.

Miss Martinez.

I have uh one more.

It's uh the same section uh A.

Uh and this is about the travel policy.

And um I was looking back when we discussed this um last year, and um I thought that what I had brought up was that I don't think that um we is council people should be um attending seminars or conferences um at the city's expense.

I I don't think really anybody in the dais has done that.

I don't know.

You know, I uh where the city would pay if you go ahead and you attend a conference or a seminar or training.

Um my thought was that that would be for staff or um uh city employees because that's their career, and for us, you know, we're just here uh part-time, and you know, uh it's happened before where uh thousands of dollars was spent for a class, and then shortly after that uh the person resigned uh his position, and um just to prevent something like that.

Um so I kind of wanted to change um a uh to say that it would be that it would be that uh it would be staff or uh city employees for training seminars or conferences.

Um so I guess I I'm just trying to get clarity here.

I think the last time this was mentioned there was uh talk about formalizing uh dollar amount for this, and I think what I'm hearing is that you're saying no dollar amount for city council, and if that's that's what I'm hearing, is that also inclusive of if somebody from council presents at a seminar on behalf of the oh if they presented a seminar?

Yeah, just is there a distinction between attendance and presenting?

Uh yeah, I I think that would be uh the exception if if you as a council person were gonna present somewhere to present, I think that would be uh different.

But um, I think the travel expense for me was if we were to go and um represent the city in a way um with either training or conference or seminar.

Um I guess being based that we're just in this position part-time, but I don't think that has happened like uh or I don't know that to this point or to this day where um any of us have gone to a seminar or conference or uh training where we had to um the city had to pay for that Mr.

Stefan.

Yeah, I I can absolutely refute that.

I know myself, I know others on this dias have gone to numerous conferences and seminars, and myself included.

I've gone to the Northern Illinois CLA, I've chosen various car topics from there and have the city pay for them.

I've gone over to Naperville and attended those classes.

I've been to uh a couple strong town conferences, I've been to sustainability conferences.

The mayor asked me to take his place to go to Harvard University and attend a land bank conference.

This was back in to help me out 2010, 2011, something like that.

So I can say unequivocally that absolutely we all at least for myself and I think there I know of others on this dias that have done it.

We absolutely go to the conferences on the city's dime.

Yeah, I'm sorry, I'm just never seeing it in transparency anywhere.

That's why I'm sorry, that's why I brought that up.

So I didn't know.

And just to finish I I brought it up because I I the conference I went to at IML two years ago.

I presented that's another one.

So that was just a distinction that popped into my brain as personal experience.

Um and so I think I think what I'm hearing here is I think when this was discussed last week, it was proactive approach to try and get us out into a space that talks about you know municipal ideas, concepts, best practices.

I think what I'm hearing tonight is that there's been instances in the past where this may not have been how everybody wants.

I mean, when I came on to council, I know there was kind of like a joke about you know there was somebody that went to a conference that was exorbitant cost, um, and I think departed the council shortly thereafter.

So I definitely am in agreement and trying to put guardrails um on preventing stuff like that from happening, you know, there being an abuse.

Um so I I I feel like I'm I'm are are we trying to prevent misbehavior or are we trying to promote council getting out into the ecosystem of municipal best practices, et cetera.

Um so I've just where are we at?

Well, you know, maybe um councilwoman Powell brought up a good point because you know I honestly uh uh councilman Stephanie, I I didn't know, you know, but I think it's a good point that she brought that if you do go to a um a conference or training or uh anywhere, then it would be wise I guess to share it with all of us.

Uh I didn't know that, so let me just follow up quickly.

I'll I'll just give the latest one that I did uh was a week ago Friday.

I went with the Metro West Council of Governments to the LRS transfer station.

Took a whole morning on a Friday.

I brought that I brought back their annual report.

I've got nine of them because we had this discussion at the last meeting.

I hadn't thought of that, but I think it's a good practice and the city paid for that.

If there was a cost, I asked Lindsay to sign me up, and she did.

I don't know if there was a cost, but uh it was through the council of governments.

One of the somebody on the dias at a meeting recently complained that they weren't getting notice of what was going on with the council, Metro West Council of Government.

Now we're getting weekly, I believe everybody here is shaking their heads, you're getting the weekly emails.

That was offered to us.

I took it up.

Oh, yeah.

I will have those reports in your boxes because I've got them on my desk.

So I brought them all.

And I'm also going, I asked if the mayor was going because it was the invitation was to mayor's first, and I Lindsay told me he's not, so I'm going to the CMAP state of the region on November 4th, something like that.

Downtown in Chicago at the post office.

If there's a cost, the city's paying for it, because I asked Lindsay to sign me up because the mayor wasn't gonna go.

Okay.

Um I think it's good that council members and the mayor tr you know attend these conferences to bring information back.

We only learn from you know from other communities.

Um we can't be the first in everything, so it's good to learn about best practices elsewhere, and you're not always a presenter at these.

So it's good to attend and then come back and share that information.

I think that's where the transparency is, right?

As you're going, you're attending, then you have to come back and report what you've learned, etc.

And so having that in there, I think I'm fine with that.

I think we should be going out um and getting as much at education as possible to make the city as better as possible.

Okay, Mr.

Ortiz.

Yeah, I'm I'm fine the way letter A is written.

Like I go to conference, but I pay for them myself, that's why I never report anything back, but maybe I should, even though I pay for it.

But I think I I like the way I I can go with what A says because people that do go, there's those accountability because they have to come back to the council and say what they learn.

So the public knows because uh it's all recorded, and then we know, so we know the money's spent for a productive reason.

So as long as I'm not going to whatever that seminar was that was a lot of money, and then um the council person decided to leave, I'm fine with that.

Okay.

Are you good?

Ms.

Martinez.

Just to finish up, um, I guess it was my error because I didn't know that that was being paid for.

I'd never seen it anywhere or that people were were doing that.

But yeah, I I like the idea of uh presenting back then.

Thank you.

Okay.

That's it.

Okay, Mr.

Good.

Thank you.

And just because I know we're going through this process of deciding what we're gonna discuss at a future meeting and providing more information.

Um for this one, I I know that we were gonna start looking around at comparables, um, and then and now it sounds like we're breaking uh uh city representatives into different groups.

So is that going forward?

Are we expected to see a a range of allotments from comparable communities?

And is that range gonna be bucketed as a whole com organizational fund, or is it gonna if it bears out that uh municipalities allocate more funds for staff conferences versus council?

I'm just trying to get everything accounted for so we're taking consideration that we're allocating funds for this to be proactive, but we're also not potentially just leaving it open.

So I'm just saying that tonight would be something we would talk about at the budget.

Is that it is um the council, I think it was one or two years ago asked to have their conference budget increase, it's right around $19,000 is my recollection.

Okay, I and I'm not suggesting any numbers right now, just but thinking that's forward uh what categories are we gonna talk about at the next one.

Yeah, there's a budget number that's uh uh there for that.

Okay, that's all I have.

Long as you don't use it all at once.

It would be 19,000.

Okay, Ms.

Paul.

Um thank you.

And and uh the reason I brought this up is uh, you know, I think there was a chilling effect um uh a while back, you know, we keep referring to an instance where um you know perceived abuse of of the program before um and and as a result people just kind of stop going to stuff.

And I I brought this back up because it is just as important as city council members as elected officials for us to go to conferences and seminars that are that are specific to the job that we do here.

Um there are it's you know, IML.

I I was at the Illinois Municipal League conference uh a couple weeks ago, about a month ago.

Um there's there's several statewide or national or regional uh organizations that are specific to elected officials, and again, for those of us who have jobs, we have to take our own PTO to go to these things.

So it this is not some free vacation, you know.

So I I want to make sure that people understand if if we identify something that we want to go to to help us do our role better here.

It this we're not looking at this as some vacation.

We're there to um get information, bring it back to the city, um, enhance ourselves, you know, to make us better public officials, um, gain knowledge about best practices, meet other elected officials in in similar roles in other communities.

That is extremely important.

Now, if as an individual, if you choose to not participate and you choose to isolate yourself and not try to enhance you know your knowledge in this area, that's your personal choice.

But I'd I would I have a problem with you know, in having having um a policy that restricts that from other people.

I I have a I have a really I I have a a serious problem with that because again, I don't think we do it enough, quite honestly.

And I don't I don't see anyone sitting up here, you know, that would abuse that.

I really don't, you know, because most of us are still working, and like I said, we have to take PTO off of work.

So I mean I I use mine very carefully for for fun stuff, preferably.

Maybe not the beach, but okay, Miss Martinez.

Thank you, Mayor.

Yeah, I I don't think anybody does it to go on vacation or anything.

I think to gain knowledge, you know, I I think we have a preference whether we want to pay for it or not.

I guess my mistake is that I never seen it transparency.

I think maybe what I'd like to change is that who the council member that's going, it should be under their name then.

You know, I didn't realize that it was uh under Lindsay's uh expense, you know, just say the um council member that's going, and I love the fact that you could come back and let us know what knowledge you learn so that we could all earn it because that is a good idea.

We should gain knowledge, but if you're just keeping it to yourself, I that's why I didn't know that this was happening.

Thank you.

Right, and I believe when she books those, it is booked under our specific credit card.

Um, but some of the instances that I think that are were being shared in terms of, you know, when I went to IML, I I went for my job, but of course I'm there wearing two hats too.

Um, but the city benefited from that without having to pay for it.

Um and years ago, there were several of us that they used to go to IML, um, you know, but that was probably before you know the transparency page, so maybe that's why you're not seeing probably seeing it there.

Um, and probably some of the things that that councilman Stefan is mentioning.

Maybe you know, some of his stuff might be paid for through the housing authority board uh that he goes to.

But I I just think that we should be going to some of these things on a more regular basis because it only helps to enrich our ability to do our jobs better, period.

Okay, uh, we need a motion to approve the uh ordinance.

Is that correct?

Oh I think the I'm gonna come back with the draft ordinance.

I don't think we need a final vote.

Okay, we just have we voted on the individual items.

All right, then let's move on.

Thank you.

Uh item four is a resolution authorizing execution of a change order number two with Rambaul Americas Engineering Solutions Incorporated for supplemental site investigation services at 356 to 358 Dundee Avenue.

Move for approval seconds.

Second move to second for approval, any discussion hearing none, clerk please call the roll.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes, Dixon?

Yes, good, yes.

Martinez?

Yes, Ortiz?

See.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Captain.

Yes, motions approved nine zero.

Item five is a resolution accepting the Department of Homeland Security and Fed uh and FEMA grant under the staffing for uh adequate fire and emergency response programs, a safer program.

Move for approval second moving second for approval.

Any discussion hearing none, Clerk, please call the roll.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Captain.

Yes.

Motions approved nine-zero.

Consent agenda.

Move for approval.

Second.

Move and second for approval.

Any uh discussion.

Hearing none.

Clerk, please call a roll.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Captain.

Yes.

Motions approved nine zero.

Miscellaneous business.

Move for approval.

Second.

Move and second for approval discussion.

Clerk, please call the roll.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good.

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Captain.

Yes.

Motions approved nine zero.

The next committee of the whole meeting will be Wednesday, October 22nd, 2025 at 6 p.m.

in the city council chambers.

The next regular meeting of the Elgin City Council will be October 22nd.

Uh 2025 at it's in the city council chambers at 7 p.m.

I don't obtain a motion to adjourn to executive session.

So moved?

Second.

Move the section to adjourn to executive session.

Court, please call the roll.

Councilmember Zalfaro?

Yes.

Dixon?

Yes.

Good?

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

Ortiz?

Yes.

Powell?

Yes.

Stefan?

Yes.

Thorne?

Yes.

Mayor Campton.

Yes, we are adjourned.