Welcome to the finance and personnel committee meeting held tonight, Monday, March 23rd, 2026.

Sir Clerk, you please take order.

Here.

Thank you.

Our first item is a financial discussion on February of 2026.

Ms.

Haggerty.

Yes, sir.

Welcome.

Thank you.

So it is very early in the fiscal year, so difficult to draw any conclusions based on the information we have so far.

But as you can see here, income tax slightly over budget and replacement tax under budget year to date.

Just really due to timing.

So we would expect as the year progresses that those will catch up.

After uh two disbursements of MFT, we're about three percent over budget.

Year to date, no CAP sales tax received yet.

And in the redevelopment fund, uh we're showing slightly under budget year to date and all uh revenue sources.

So happy to answer any specific questions anyone has.

Alden Salgato.

Yeah, just real quick.

Um I know that you said that it it could be timing, uh, but I saw the the hotel uh tax um 10.8 percent.

Um is that pretty standard or we're lagging uh will we catch up?

Yeah, so we collect the uh we collect all of the um local sales taxes here in finance, so we don't have the same delay as the statewide revenues.

Um so there's I know that we have a couple of hotels that are a little bit behind in remittance, and you know, we go through our normal collection process in order to get um those hotels into compliance.

Um I would anticipate that there will be some catch up here.

Um hopefully that it you know, right now after two months we're at 19% under budget.

You know, our hope is that trend does not continue.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Yes, it's easy.

All right, thank you so much.

Moving on on item two is information only, it relates to a change word at the Elks Club due to um uh removal of the stained glass windows, additional asbestos abatement uh and sidewalk replacement costs.

Um they were most of these were previously unknown conditions and were required to address safety concerns and restore safe pedestrian access.

Um, you've got me to vote on it.

Alden Salgato.

Thank you, Chairman, for allowing me to speak again.

Um just quick question.

Um, I know these are public safety uh concerns that were unforeseen.

We we didn't know at the time, um, but just want to get uh a process when it comes to these change orders because it is 34 percent increase um from the 233108 that we agreed.

I didn't see of um up to say three hundred thousand, four hundred thousand.

Um just want to get clarity on that because you know uh from my perspective, you know, it is about you know, here give or take about 70 to 75,000 dollars uh additional cost that we are incurring, and I understand that it's a public safety sidewalk replacement and so forth, but just want to understand that that process.

Um, you know, because I I don't know.

I just I just feel that it's quite significant from that perspective, and you know, it would have been great to at least say up to 400,000.

And I understand that there's a lot of unforeseen things going on, but uh to secure the facility and and to the tear down after the tear down.

So just wanted to get some clarity on that process.

Okay, go ahead.

Yeah.

Um so anything under 25,000, we we assume that we could the um sorry the requirements to come back to council when it's over 25,000 more.

Um the first two change orders were done beforehand.

This last one just came in.

Um the sidewalk was needing to be repaired, and that's why it's coming forward as an info only as an emergency change order due to the safety concerns.

So normally if it's anything over 25, we would normally try to come to council if it's something we can um bring to you for approval ahead of time.

So when there are safety concerns, that's why it's coming as an info only.

Yeah, just to add to that too, um, these were all changes that uh were not included in the original bid specification.

So the the um ask to remove the windows was uh after the fact, um additional asbestos abatement, we provide them with an asbestos report, and if additional asbestos is discovered outside of the report that we provide, they have to abate that legally that they're required to do so.

So that was a change order outside of the specifications as we provided to the demo contractor.

On the sidewalk replacement, which obviously is the largest component here, there were some site conditions that were that we were unaware of at the time the bid um was let not disclose that there were some foundation pieces that ran under the sidewalk to all of the bidders.

So that was discovered once the demolition began and we had to make that pivot and and require not only the sidewalks to be torn up so the demolition could be completed, but then obviously the restoration of the sidewalks for safety reasons after the fact.

So generally, if it's a if it's a change order that um is intended to achieve the original scope of the the contract as we have defined it, um, and we encounter field conditions that require or ness necessitate a change.

We authorize and and that's outlined in our um purchasing ordinance uh staff to make those decisions in the field and then report back to council the the required additional cost.

This was not something that could have been foreseen by the contractor necessarily.

Yeah.

I'm just gonna respond real quick.

Um not directly uh anyone, but it just from my standpoint, you know, I just think thank you for uh bringing this to our attention.

Um but once again, you know, uh the commentary was said you know, a change order was less than 25,000 one and two.

I could split it up or whatever.

I'm not saying that that's what happened because these are two three different instances of different things.

But I just you know, from my perspective, you know, typically when you know I see some of this, you know, you see a 10% um deviation from a change order per perspective, right?

So, you know, it's it's a lot.

Uh I just wish that it would have come back to city council for this perspective because it is about $75,000, 70 to 75 additional to what it was.

I think we did the right thing here and stabilizing some of these things that we we've done.

Um, but I just from my perspective, you know, it just jumps out at me, and I just feel that it should come back to city council from that perspective.

Thank you.

Well, I would just comment what you know, there are times with respect to lots of construction projects, uh water mains uh especially where something comes up in the field that's discovered and it has to be addressed, frankly, uh in an acute situation.

So that uh you know, in this case, the city for change orders one, two, and three, they they clearly were were the ones uh asking for the change orders.

And so um, you know, the original contracts though were made at 233, the change orders were all specified by the city based on uh what they found, whether it was the asbestos or the need to remedy the sidewalk situation.

So you you can't have a contract, the contract was for 233.

You can't have a contract to for up to 400 grand and say, well, if you find X, Y, or Z, because it wouldn't be fair, and you frankly have no contractors bidding on them because they'd have no uh no definition of of what their exposure should be.

So in this case, I think the city frankly did everything they possibly could uh adequately.

Thank you.

Uh moving on to uh committee reports.

Item number one is an approval of vouchers, the amount of ten million nine hundred and ninety-five thousand seven hundred and forty dollars and sixty-four cents.

Is there a motion to approve vouchers?

Any questions or comments on vouchers?

All the two more.

Thank you, Chairman.

Uh I was just wondering, does the city have uh on travel costs uh when it comes to flying uh to other cities?

Anything on seat assignments, additional uh fees for seat assignments.

Um I know it's a small cost overall, uh, but I'm wondering what the nature is for travel and that additional fees for seat assignments.

Sure.

Thank you.

Ms.

Hagarty.

There are staff, um, particularly in our larger departments that handle those arrangements directly.

Um, but we would expect the lowest cost um option to be selected unless there is some sort of uh medical or other justification why some higher cost seating arrangement would be necessary.

Okay, and just to yeah, just to specify their uh, you know, I I can see possibly in certain circumstances where maybe it's necessary, but it is distinguished between the airfare and then an additional cost for seat assignment.

So just it's yeah, it's pretty cut and dry that there is an additional cost there specifying seat assignment.

So uh just wanted to see on what the city's take on that is.

Thanks.

Any other questions?

Seeing none, all is in favor nicely.

Aye.

Proposed?

Matter passes.

Item two is approval of an IGA between the city informed resanitation for 11th Street improvements in the amount of 169,807, which will be reimbursed to the city at 100 percent.

Is there a motion to approve?

Sorry.

Any questions or comments for staff?

Seeing the all of the beach.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Just help me once again understand why if we are 100 percent reimbursed, we have to put it out.

Why aren't they paying for it?

Up front.

Sure.

So you're asking why do we have to put up the money for them to reimburse us?

Yes.

The contract is through the City of Rockford for the can for the construction of the project.

So there's no mechanism to where the four rivers can directly get the invoice uh to pay directly to the to the contractor because the contract is through the city of Rockford.

Thank you, sir.

Any other questions?

Seeing none, all is a favorite indicate by aye.

Opposed?

Mayor passes.

Uh moving on to resolutions.

Item one is an award of bid for 11th Street quarter improvements phase two to Fisher Excavating and the amount of 9,698,143 and 27 cents.

The contract duration is through October 31, 2026.

The funding sources are the 1 percent infrastructure sales tax, water replacement, and improvement account.

Is there a motion to approve the bid?

Any questions or comments?

Seeing none, all is a favorite indicate by aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

Matter passes.

Item two is the award of engineering agreement for the 11th Street quarter improvements, phase two to fair gram in the amount of 593,000 dollars.

The contract duration is through December 31, 2027.

The funding sources the 1 percent infrastructure sales tax.

Is there a motion to approve?

Any questions or comments?

Seeing none, all is in favor of indicate aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

Matter passes.

Item three is award of engineering agreement for land acquisition for the high crest multi-use path to handsome professional services, the amount of 120,000 dollars.

The contract duration is through 2026.

The funding sources are the 1 percent infrastructure sales tax, the MFT funds, and the Illinois Transportation Enhancement Program grant funds.

Is there a motion to approve?

Sorry.

Any questions or comments for staff on High Crest?

Alliment Toonberg.

Thank you, Chairman.

Uh how many homes again are along this route?

On High Crest.

Uh homes?

Yeah.

Uh 75, I believe, around there.

And it looks like I think 17 between spring fee or Spring Creek and High Crest that there would be possible land acquisition.

Yes, land acquisition also includes um temporary construction easements.

Correct.

Okay.

Thank you.

Alma Logan.

Thank you, Chairman.

Um yeah, I remember this was on again then off again, then on again.

Um this is land acquisition right here, when would we expect shovels to start hitting dirt on this project?

Uh um if land acquisition um goes well, I would expect next spring for shuttles to be uh us to be at work on it.

And then probably one season overall to uh take care of it.

Yeah.

All right.

Any other questions?

Seeing none, all is a favorite indicate by aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

Matter passes.

Item four is awarded bid for citywide street repairs group one to rock road companies in the amount of three hundred and eighty-seven thousand three hundred and seventy-three dollars.

The contract duration is through June 26, 2026.

The funding source is the one percent infrastructure sales tax, and these are for uh roads that are in the downtown area, I think by RMTD.

season overall to uh take care of it yeah all right any other questions seeing none all those in favor indicate by aye aye opposed matter passes item four is awarded bid for citywide street repairs group one to rock road companies in the amount of three hundred and eighty seven thousand three hundred and seventy three dollars the contract duration is through June 26 2026 the funding source is the one percent infrastructure sales tax and these are for uh roads that are in the downtown area I think by RMTD are there is there a motion to approve second any questions or comments for staff uh I just had a question uh I I saw there that they're basically around the new construction of RMT are they is there a joint venture are they participating in there is because there are roads uh we have 100 percent of them uh there were it it's because of the development we're supporting that development the roads were in poor condition you know prior to the development so we wanted to wait till after the construction all the heavy equipment and so forth and to just to clean everything up okay thank you uh seeing no further questions all those in favor indicate by aye aye posed matter passes item five is the award of bid for the Rockford Peace Center roof replacement to Miller Engineering and the amount of 1 million thirty eight thousand dollars the funding sources of the Winnebago County Mental Health Tax Grant um DCO funds and the American Rescue Act Family Peace Center funds.

Is there a motion to approve?

Second any questions or comments for staff seeing none all those in favor indicate by aye aye opposed matter passes.

Item six is an award a bid for a gray iron sewer castings to Zimmer and Frankenstein an estimated annual amount of $75,000 the contract duration is through December 31 2026 with four optional one year extension options annual price adjustments for CPI be considered a contract renewal only and the funding source uh is the street and water division operating budgets is a motion to approve second any questions or comments for staff seeing none all those in favor Nicky I opposed matter passes.

Item 7 is award of professional services contract for the 2026 Brownfields assessment assistance to fair graham and the amount of 125 thousand dollars it is a one year contract and the funding source is the community and economic development operating budget.

Second any questions or comments for staff all of a meeks so much for allowing me to speak and this is just a random general question.

Is Fairgram the only engineering and environmental firm in the city of Rockford who would like to answer that yes it is okay thank you so much Alvin Logman thank you Chair I just noticed that there in the memo it said there were several sites in Brownfields related assessment cleanup activities that were ineligible for federal grant funds.

Why would what makes um some properties eligible and then other these ineligible for one of the issues we run into a lot of these older sites were acquired um and they didn't meet the eligibility criteria of the federal grant money so we can't spend money on them probably one of the biggest limitations we have in the Brownfields program is the Southeast Rockford Superfund site when they originally set the boundaries of that they put it at Rock River to the west Moford Road to the east Broadway to the north and Sandy Hollow to the south which is about eight square miles.

Unfortunately with federal funding Brownfields funding if a site even if it is in a source area is in a superfund area it won't be eligible to use Brownfields grant funds.

So it puts a pretty big limitation to us on one of the most oldest industrial areas of our city when we can't use federal funding there so this helps get some of these sites off the ground.

Okay thanks any other questions seeing none all those in favor indicate by aye aye posed matter passes item eight is an acceptance of a community of community solutions to receive uh a case for community investment built for zero intervention for unsheltered homeless grant award in the amount of 1320 it does not require a cost match it is effective from March 1 2026 through February 20 2027 is there a motion to approve second any questions or comments for staff seeing none all is a favor Niki by aye aye opposed matter passes item number nine is a award of joint purchasing contract for infrastructure for the VOIP phone system to ring central an estimated annual amount of 211 dollars for total contract amount of $93864 and fifty two cents which includes a $95,865 first year consulting and implementation fee the contract is for one year with three possible one year extension options.

The funding source is the information technology integration operating budget.

All those in favor to keep it.

All right, we're back in open session.