The Naperville City Council held its first budget workshop on September 21, 2026, from 6:00 PM to approximately 8:30 PM, focusing on the proposed 2027-2031 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The preliminary 2027 CIP totals $211 million, an 11% increase over 2026. No final actions were taken; the workshop was for discussion and direction. Councilman Sayed participated by phone initially, then joined in person. Public comments covered the climate action plan, battery storage, the Riverwalk South Extension, the electric utility debt strategy, and the Nichols Library parking deck.
Good evening, welcome to the first workshop for the proposed 2027 budget. Councilman Sayed will be participating by phone tonight. Councilman Sayed, can you hear us? Yes, I can hear you. Okay. Tonight our professional staff will focus on the preliminary capital improvement program. As a reminder, no final actions are being taken at this meeting since it is a workshop. Also, all the rules of the city council will still apply. Speakers are asked to present their comments in a respectful and curious manner. Speakers should be on topic and be cognizant of their words. Speakers are given three minutes to address the city council and to help speakers stay within the three-minute time frame. Speaker should be aware of the timer on the side die is to your right. Mr. Krieger, want to call the first four. All right, the first four speakers would be Teresa Huss, Joe Huss, Patrick Kennedy, and John Doyle. If you've heard your name called, just please proceed to the front row. Thank you. Hi, Teresa Huss, longtime resident and a member of NEST. I know tonight's meeting is focused on the capital budget, but I'd like to look ahead to the next meeting, the operating budget, and urge you to consider funding a climate action plan. A climate action plan would be a one-time cost of about.015% of our annual budget, and it would give us a clear framework for measuring, tracking, and reducing our greenhouse gas emissions while preparing for the impacts of climate change. At their core, these plans focus on implementing the most cost-effective actions to reduce emissions and strengthen our long-term resilience. And we've been talking about climate action plans for years. It began back in 2019 when the City Council directed NEST to prepare Naperville 2036. It continued through last year when we completed our greenhouse gas inventory in 2025, both of those being important precursors to having an official plan. And many of you on the dais have expressed support for developing one and say you understand their importance. So our question is if not now, when Naperville has already shown it can lead. Staff have worked really hard to keep sustainability on the agenda. But work plans alone can't provide the long-term structure that we need. A climate action plan would allow us to measure progress year after year and identify the most cost-effective actions, ensuring our investments align with a clear and forward-looking vision. Funding a climate action plan is also fiscally responsible. Communities with climate plans are better positioned to compete for federal and state grants tied to clean energy, sustainability, and infrastructure. A plan would help prioritize our actions and save us money over time through energy efficiency, reduced operational costs, and avoided future risks. And most importantly, a climate action plan would reflect the values of Naperville residents. The recent survey showed that sustainability is a high priority for residents. Many of us already work on sustainability in our neighborhoods, our schools, our faith communities, and in organizations like NEST, but a citywide plan would bring these efforts together and demonstrate that Naperville is committed to thoughtful and long-term stewardship. So I respectfully urge the council to fund the development of a climate action plan. It's a practical community-driven investment in Naperville's future, and now is the right time to move forward. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next speaker. Next speaker would show us the name's Johass. Thank you. My name's Johas. I'm a 27-year resident and an S volunteer, and I have two questions. Why didn't we put any money in the capital budget for a battery? And second, why would we assume IMA should operate the battery if we purchase one? My recommendation is simple put some capital in the budget for a battery and use a competitive process to use to choose the best battery operator. First, why doesn't the capital budget include any funding for a battery? Both the city's NES analysis indicated that a battery would quickly pay for itself and reduce our electricity bills. The value is not only financial, as you can see on the slide.