So good evening, everyone.

We will call to order the city of Rockford's city council meeting for Monday, June 29th, 2026.

But if you do not have a seat right now, you cannot stand in the middle of those aisles uh in council chambers.

So I'll give you a minute or two to move up.

So at this time you you can't be standing in the aisles, so I'd ask you uh leave, and as seats open up, you can certainly come in.

I know there's many important items on the agenda.

Thank you.

As we begin this evening, uh we have chaplain Ken Henley who will provide us with an invocation.

Let's pray.

Father in heaven as we come before you tonight.

We thank you for this place we have to come to.

Thank you for our leaders of this community as they go about their business, trying to keep the safe uh city safe.

And Lord, we just pray that you'd be a lighter than our path as they go.

And then Lord, we ask that you would be with all of our fire department, our police department, Lord, as they go about their business to keeping us safe.

Lord help us to look to you for our help and for our strength in everything we do.

Bless in this meeting tonight, we pray, Lord, for we ask these things in Jesus' precious and holy name.

Amen.

And indivisible with liberty and justice.

So you cannot stand or bring in the chairs in the middle of the aisle so people can get in and out of council chambers, and those doors will have to close.

There is the TV out front in the lobby that you can follow along, and as seats open up, you can certainly come in and take in any seat that is open.

You do.

I'm sorry.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And if you have not been to a council meeting in the last several weeks, uh, I do want to make you aware uh we will all try to lift our voices.

We have had uh a number of issues with our audio internally.

We do have microphones that are up.

They are not to project inside this chamber, but they are to go out to our uh Facebook as well as our YouTube channel so that folks who are following online can be able to hear us.

I will tell you it is frustrating for you as someone who's in this chamber.

It will be at times hard to hear.

We will try to raise our voices so that you can hear everyone who is speaking.

We are set, knock on wood that our audio will be back on for our meeting on July 13th.

Uh we are hoping all of the equipment comes in as scheduled, uh and that there are no delays, and certainly do appreciate all of your patience, and council certainly appreciate your patience as we work through this as well.

With that being said, clerk, could you please call the roll?

Here meet here, present.

Thank you.

We have a quorum for this evening's meeting.

Uh is there a motion to approve the journal of proceedings for the city council meeting held on April 6, 2026.

Almost second.

We have a motion and we have a second.

Is there any discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed.

We do not have any proclamations this evening, so we're gonna move to our public hearing.

I'm gonna turn over uh the chairmanship uh for this public hearing to Alderman Logan, and the public hearing is on the proposed annexation of 14 XX, 15 XX, and 16XX Edson Road, and a portion of 8631 11th Street.

And at this time, I'll have Alderman Logan call that hearing to work.

A public hearing is being held tonight pursuant to 65 Illinois compiled statutes uh for the agreement to NX for the following property 14xX, 15XX, 16X, Edson Roan at a portion of 8631 11th Street, uh and a portion of 15-35-400-003.

Notice of this hearing was given by publication in the Rockford Register Star on June 8, 2026.

That notice informed citizens of Rockford that the Rockford City Council will hold a public hearing on Monday, June 29th at 5 30 p.m.

on Council Chambers, and on the second floor at Rockford City Council Hall, located at 425 East State Street, Rockford, Illinois, for consideration of a proposed annexation agreement for fifth 14xX, 15XX, 16XX, Edson Road, and a portion of 8631 11th Street.

Comments must be specific to the purpose of the hearing.

Comments regarding a data center are not related to the purpose of the hearing.

I'll repeat, comments must be specific to the purpose of a hearing, and comments regarding a data center are not relate are not related to the purpose of the hearing.

This annexation agreement contains a provision that prohibits the establishment and or operation of a data center on the subject property.

Are there any comments or questions from council members on the annexation?

Are there any questions or comments from the public?

Seeing none, I conclude this public hearing for annexation agreement.

Uh Alder Woman Printy.

Thank you.

So this is a public hearing about something that's on the agenda tonight for a reversal.

Is that my understanding?

Uh I'll move it over.

Uh Director Hammer.

Thank you.

The statute requires that you hold a public hearing for all an expensive agreements.

So that's the purpose of the public hearing.

But it's also it was also gone before committee.

And committee denied it.

That's correct.

It is on the agenda tonight as a denial from committee's recommendation.

And then there's a letter here from the chair of COVID regulations that's going to ask for a reversal.

Yes.

Of the denial?

Yes.

Um why are we asking for reversal of a denial?

So it was a unique set of circumstances last week in which building had three members of the twin regulation committee.

And under Ellino Law, three permanent votes required to approve an item.

So the consensus was in favor of the item, but it was only a two to one vote.

So for that reason, he included all of the items on the agenda.

Is the hearing is the hearing late or is the hearing frame?

The hearing is time to statute center.

It is all right.

Thank you.

Any further comments from the alderman of the public?

Yeah.

Go ahead.

My name is Gloria Blakely.

I live in this town.

Um I just want to say that the fact I think that you guys are doing the tricks that they're doing all across the country, hiding behind uh little rules and things, tripping up the public right before they're able to speak about something that they obviously all care about.

Um just the disrespect for your people for your community, what we're all saying, what I've heard.

I haven't heard anyone say anything good about it.

And the fact that we're you guys are giving us this runaround.

You guys are hiding behind these little rules and things.

It's just there will be repercussions.

You can't get away with treating your community like that.

And that's all I have to say.

And I live in Rockford.

And my concern is that one of the biggest problems we studied in 2016 on the Transform Rockford teams were the urban sprawl.

And that's exactly what we're doing again.

And I just want to know: are we gonna need a million-dollar fire station?

Or it probably costs more than that.

So there's all kinds of considerations because that area is not close to a lot of things.

And I just hope that it has been taken into consideration and that the entire city does not have to pay for this sprawl.

Any further comment from Ullerman or residents of the public?

Seeing none, I conclude the public hearing for the annexation agreement for the property located at 14XX and 15X.

Hi.

I'm just reading on a Facebook group that says what you aren't telling us is that once the new TIFF is approved, Monarch will have the ability to develop a data center without a vote because the land in question will be zoned for that.

And that it's semantics that we're not really being told the truth of what you guys are doing in time to protest.

I'm with Venture One Real Estate.

I am the contract purchaser for this property.

And that won't be built on this property.

We are also the developer of several business parks in the region, one in Loves Park, one in Cherry Valley.

And we're very proud of what we've brought to the community.

And I will commit to you tonight that we will not have a data center on this property.

What we are planning on building are industrial distribution facilities, similarly what we've done in other areas where we've provided Microsoft or Dan Foss that employ people as uh industrial workers, which is a high-paying job.

Um we've built about three million square feet over the last 10 years here and have invested heavily in the community, and we look forward to doing it again on this property.

So I greatly appreciate the opportunity for all your to hear all your comments, but I can address them to you that we won't do a data center, and we are very transparent and will be very open about what we are planning to do here, and be happy to answer any of your questions.

Thank you for hearing me.

Hi, so that man owns 10% of the TIF district.

Um, so that's not actually the rest of the 90% that's owned by Monarch.

Um there are data centers that you that cool the center through wind and not through water.

Um and then they're powered by solar, not electricity.

Our electricity will go up with the data center, and the water will um be gone.

Like we're not gonna have enough like the Rockford, we are good because of the river, but without the river, we are not going to be what we are.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any further comments from the public?

Hello, my name is Stephen McMaster.

I'll be speaking later in that as well.

Um, I wanted to reiterate that venture one owns 10% of the land, roughly speaking, and that this annexation agreement is part of a larger conversation.

This is part of the conversation about the entire TIFF district.

This is part of the conversation about the data center.

When we're talking about investing this much money, this much time and resources of government staff, we need to be transparent and honest about what this conversation and what this public hearing is actually about.

In addition to that, I'd like to point out that the last time this city held a public hearing, it was shut down while people still wanted to speak.

I I realize that you don't want a conversation about the data center to happen now.

But when is that conversation going to happen?

As far as I know, this public hearing is available for all public comments, including comments about a data center.

I understand that they're not relevant to this discussion, but if I'm not mistaken, we can make them.

So if anybody wishes to come up and make any comments they want, they are perfectly able to do so.

On the topic of Mark Good making comment about the success of businesses that he has been partnered with, opened, seen success with.

And to me, it's not really saying a whole lot that you put a run on the scoreboard if you started at third base.

So maybe, and I don't think I'm alone here, that all of us are supportive of businesses, but do it like the rest of us do.

Start at the bottom and work your way up.

There are no handouts, and we're not supportive of it.

So just don't do it.

Thank you.

Any further comments from the public?

Seeing none, I close the public hearing for the annexation agreement at 14, 15, 16, that's in.

Thank you.

We have more people would like to speak.

Because the we weren't able to have people standing in here.

There are people that want to speak that are outside and right.

We were kicked out, and so we couldn't see.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Hello.

I'm Lyric Ellis.

I'm a single mom to a disabled student of RPS 205.

My daughter is in the 88th percentile for testing scores in our district.

I was very proud of her for her to be accepted to the gifted program this coming school year.

It has been proven that students' test scores in areas close to data centers are declining after data centers are built.

We already know that water is going to be affected.

And water scarcity is already an issue, but do we want to impact the education of our children by ruining their education with adding a data center?

We're thinking of the impact on ourselves currently with our drinking water, but are we thinking about the impact of future generations?

Are we thinking about the impact of their ability to think, their ability to go to school and work and function so that we have a future for them to come home to?

We need to think about that.

Thank you, Chairman.

Um I have received a text stating that the audio visual that's coming over mine is off, and that the audio and the visuals are not matching, and so it's kind of hard to uh understand what's going on, and I don't know if that's impacting the people out there as well.

Thank you.

Comments regarding a data center are not related to the purpose of the hearing.

Further public comment.

So I said that we should see if we could just give our tech people a minute to get those people so those people have an opportunity to catch up as it relates to the audio, if that really is an issue that we don't move so fast that people don't get a chance to say what it is that they have to say.

Good point.

Thank you, older woman prunty.

Uh, I think we'll proceed if that the will of counsel overall, uh, we'll proceed to hear the comments from the public.

Uh I know I just saw Director Hughes step out uh to address the issue.

Thank you uh for bringing it to our attention, older one prunty.

But um I think in the the interests of you know, just moving things along here, um, we'll continue to hear from the public uh unless there are uh a majority of objection from council overall.

Seeing that a majority will continue to hear from the the public.

Ma'am.

Ma'am, would you uh like to uh uh approach and uh speak regarding the annexation agreement?

Hello, my name is Amber Dewey.

I'm speaking today because last public hearing, none of you were here except maybe one or two.

You need to be held accountable for silencing the community.

So I'm gonna tell you my speech from the last public hearing that you guys weren't at.

I know it's a little snug in here, but please stand up if you oppose this TIFF district.

Thank you.

We are here.

And instead of being with them, I have to spend my time urging the council members that the people entrusted to make the right choice.

I'm sure you already know the vast repercussions of this TIFF district and data center.

So I all I want to say is think about the children that are being affected by this.

Think about the grandchildren that are being affected by this.

Because ultimately, your decision is gonna affect their future.

I know money is tempting, but money is not everything.

It's not these people's lives are everything.

The people's lives that you are affecting are everything.

How are you going to vote on this TIFF district if you don't already have pre-development in mind?

You do.

Remember who you work for?

The community.

And I've been a little frustrated about the setup here.

Because you aren't looking at our faces when we're speaking to you.

Thousands of people have signed against this TIFF district.

The countless letters that you have received, and don't write back to the hundreds of voices you have tried to silence by not giving it your all and showing up for the community.

So please listen to us.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any further public comment?

Oh, sorry to hear.

I also, if this doesn't work, so I'm not even gonna pretend to use it.

Um, I also spoke at the last public hearing where there were only two members of council present, so I'm also gonna um read that again since you're all here.

Hello, my name is Brace Bayer, and I do not want to be here.

I have a full and wonderful and privilege life, despite the short-sighted, reckless and self-serving decision made by elected officials and politicians at every single level of our government.

I recognize though that we are all connected, and I am here in solidarity as a fellow human being.

They've used science, they've used data, they've read headlines and news reports.

But I'm going to appeal to the thing that I believe you as politicians honor first and foremost.

And that thing is your own self-interest.

We'll start with the basics.

Laying the groundwork for a hyperscaler data center and corporate neighbors of the hyperscaler data center will affect you all as well.

Our elected officials, they're just like us.

They need clean, drinkable water to survive.

Their bodies are not immune to pollution.

Their property values can also decline.

They are vulnerable to a changing climate.

To anyone paying attention, and probably most people on this side at the backs of our politicians, it has become abundantly clear that you don't actually want to deal with those healthy thoughts and opinions from your constituents.

So here's what I'd like to ask you today.

Do you think you'll hear from us less when our utility bills climb higher?

Do you think that you will hear from us less when the water pressure in our homes drops off?

Do you think you'll hear from us less after the city has to ask residents to ration their water use so computers can be cool instead?

Do you think you'll hear from us less when visible toxins pour from our closets?

Do you think you'll hear from us less when there is a round the clock noise and light pollution?

Do you think you'll hear from all of us less when our wells are poisoned or run dry?

Do you think you'll hear from us less when the electric company tells us we're on our own because they need to redirect their service delivery away from our homes and toward a hyperscaler data center like they just did in Lake Tahoe?

Yeah.

This is not worth it.

This is the map for it today.

As I talk to my friends and my family and my coworkers and my neighbors, and hell, even as I talk to strangers.

They all have the same question in mind for all you politicians.

And that question is what is in it for you.

Hi.

I don't think anybody's standing up to protest.

I understand it's not the same.

It's not, there's logistics behind it, but you're arguing and putting it off and putting it off.

And their programs the community wants.

So I'm not quite sure why you won't listen on this issue.

We've heard from a couple of people on this issue who have been loud, and we haven't heard a whole lot from anybody else.

We see the back of their heads every week.

We don't see any sort of comment.

It's exhausting.

That's the part that's exhausting.

Not showing up and making our voices heard because we know who listens.

We pay attention and we know.

So I don't get that part either.

Um, another thing is that 10%.

There's 10% of this that we're voting on.

And as far as I'm concerned, that 10%, I feel bad for them because they're, I understand you want to keep that relationship.

It's a great relationship.

It brings the city of Rockford money.

But if they were for Rockford, they would not want this data center.

They would not want this to work it out to where they would somehow be with the community that they are getting taxpayer payer funds from.

Thank you.

I introduced myself before.

A lot of comments are made about data centers.

We're not doing data centers.

I will say this from the environment perspective.

Okay.

I can only act on what I've actually brought to your community.

About three years ago, we built a building for Microsoft in one of our business parties.

Has anyone heard of LEED?

It's lead environmental status.

We built a lead platinum building, which is the highest standard environmentally pure building you can build for Microsoft.

There are only five of them in the entire state of Illinois.

That's who we are.

And so when you talk in general about data centers and not annexing the property, but we would like to build buildings like that for a company like Microsoft or Burner Foods, who's a staple in your community.

Every industrial job that we bring to your community provides three additional jobs in the area in terms of retail, doctors, service providers.

Buildings will be built by union labor.

All of our buildings are.

So again, I'd like to separate what we're trying to accomplish here in Rockford for your concern about data centers.

Well, I think that the annexation agreement tonight is about our property, not a data center property, if I'm right.

So and the buildings we build.

Can I answer questions?

No, sir.

Just please address I'm happy to answer questions after the meeting, before the meeting, or whatever.

But from my perspective, we're building what I would consider to be a very class A industrial building made of green gas, meant to last a long time.

Our buildings, when full of tax, will be about two to three million dollars a year in taxes.

Not all that is coming back in the TIP, which goes into public infrastructure, and maybe some incentives, but to bring the company here to hire people from the community, which we've been which in the buildings we built here in Rockford, and I've been investing here for 25 years.

Um so I'm very familiar with the area.

We brought about 1,500 new jobs to the community in the buildings we've built.

No, just address.

I can I can answer that question.

Yep, please address the center of the room.

Well, I'm happy to answer the question about tax incentives.

We won't even get us left bad.

I thought it was a council meeting.

I thought you were the U.S.

Uh are your comments complete?

I can be done if you want me to be done.

You can continue to talk, but please just address.

This community of Rockford has lost many jobs to Wisconsin, in Beloit, it's lost many jobs to other areas in Iowa and almost every one of the business parts I develop have some form of incentives through economic development to attract major corporations like a Microsoft, like a burner, like a FedEx, to the to the community.

Um, right now, this land is paying about $5,000 in taxes a year.

When my buildings are built, they'll build, you'll they'll pay approximately two to three million dollars a year.

Those taxes go into the communities to support social services and other areas.

Um go to the Senate, but the majority of it over time will go to supporting services in the area.

And and that's the benefit to the community for pure good quality industrial buildings where many of you may work now.

And that's the kind of buildings we build.

And and and I and I really would uh appreciate the thought process that when you build a really good industrial building in an area that lasts a long time and provides a lot of um jobs and benefits to the community.

And we don't use a lot of water, we don't use particularly a lot of power, like a data center.

So I appreciate you giving the opportunity.

I am personally available to answer any questions, any time, anywhere, about the benefits of good industrial buildings being built in a community.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Annexation.

Yes, uh real quick again, comments regarding a data center are not related to the purpose of the hearing.

The annexation contains a provision that prohibits the establishment or operation of a data center on the public property.

Real about the annexation, right?

I lied, it's about the data center.

Uh you have a very condescending attitude, sir.

The way you're snapping your gum spit it out.

It's very condescending.

Um if this data center gets built, the town the decision will haunt you like a specter everywhere you go.

No, you'll feel no peace.

The Walmart, your gym.

We will remember your faces.

It is a pivotal decision in our town.

If you do it, if you do it, there's no going back.

We're not going to vote you in.

You're saying we love millionaires and billionaires.

You're hoping to get a piece of the pie.

You want money.

You want money?

You want money?

You all want money.

Who knows how you're getting who knows what kickbacks you're getting?

Whose cousin is building the data center?

Liars.

All of you.

And this Crescent moon of lies.

And I hope, I hope to God you don't build this.

I hope to God.

I just have a question.

I'm not actually sure if this is the right area to ask this or not, but my name's Karen Schwitters.

Some of you know me.

Um I vote in every single election.

I do want to say that.

Um I'm I'm actually just asking about the feasibility study done by Fairgram in 2015 on this area that showed it was a soils testing and an evaluation that showed that it needed remarkable amounts of improvement to build any type of industry here.

Um are you all familiar with that study and the details of it and the cost that it said that it would take to make all of that land feasible to build on?

All of you council members.

Are you familiar with the 2015 study by Fair Graham?

No.

Okay.

Do you think that since this study was done in 2015 and to my knowledge has not been updated that it might be prudent of you to review this study before you make a decision on a TIF or any industrial development or development of any kind in the system?

Because it is a 90-page document that that outlines wetlands in that area, soil types, endangered species, water runoff, whether or not it can support certain types of infrastructure.

It all seems very relevant.

I would think that it would be a significant document for you to consider and look over.

So I just wondered how many people were familiar with it.

I can give you the docket name.

The Bible says that we we have troubles because we outsmart ourselves.

So we got to really look into this.

Remember the West State when we had all those houses, y'all tore down.

The people ain't even got houses no more over there.

It's all roads.

And people had to bought their houses and they were already paid for.

And they could have had paid.

Um my mother's house was paid for.

She could have gave me wealth.

So y'all gotta think what you're doing because it helps it hurts people.

I don't understand this data center, so I'm not up here for this data center because I really don't understand.

But I because they chose you guys, you guys gotta do what your heart really say, not what man says, but what your heart says.

Because what your heart says is what God is gonna make you pay for the rest of your life.

So you better listen to Jesus Christ and that man, and don't let greed get in your mouth.

Any further comments from the public?

Seeing none, I close the uh public hearing for the annexation agreement.

That was a tip.

That was a tip.

Good evening.

Next, we'll go to petitions and communications.

We have nothing under planning and development committee, so we will go to code and regulation committee.

And we have Alderman Logan.

Petitions and communications.

Item number one, memorandum from Scott Capavilla, planning and zoning manager regarding plant number two of the Rosewood Subdivision referred to regulation committee.

Item number two of three traffic commission's agenda for the meeting to be held on July 8th, 2026, and minutes from that meeting for consideration at the Code and Regulation Committee meeting on July 13th, 2026.

Referred to code and regulation committee.

And certainly final item item number three, memorandum from Martin Bloom, project manager permits and special events regarding upcoming special events for Rockyard Music Fest and Ramp River Font run.

Referred to Code and Regulation Committee.

Thank you.

Next we'll go to Finance and Personnel Committee and Alderman Frost.

Can you speak off, please?

I'm speaking rather loudly.

The criminal justice response programs year 25.

Any amount of $500,000 for project period of $36 months.

Number two is a memorandum from Jennifer Catchalia regarding the acceptance of the Illinois Attorney General Office by the Prime Victor's Assistance Grant of Work.

Number three is a memorandum from Joshua for sales regarding the proposed sale of city owned property located at 218 Independence Avenue.

Number four is a memorandum from Charlotte Clos regarding the consideration approval on plan of acquisition of 4100 East State Street by the Rockford Board of Library Trustees.

Thank you.

Speak uh as loud as you can so folks can hear in this room.

It can be difficult.

Also uh for those individuals who are still standing, we can't have you stand, so I'd ask that you either exit out that door so that you can listen to it.

Uh that's being broadcast, but you can't stand inside council chambers at this time.

Folks, let's have some order.

Alderman Frost, let's focus on the center of the server.

All right.

We have uh public speakers this evening.

We have public speakers this evening.

I want to remind our public speakers, the microphone on my left, your right is the one that will transmit uh and be able to be heard online.

Uh so please use that uh microphone if you are able to also want to remind our public speakers that you have three minutes to address the city council.

At the close of that three minutes, I will ask that you close your comments and that you conclude.

Our first public speaker this evening is Stephen McMaster.

Mayor Mr.

McMaster, do you mind if I wait one second and that answer a question?

Alderwoman Prunty.

Thank you.

My agenda here and my agenda on the city website, they are a little bit different.

Which one should I be working for?

So your agenda was updated around noon.

Uh so that would be usually with new petitions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Forgive me.

Thank you.

You're great.

And uh, Mr.

McMaster, uh, three minutes and you can begin.

Thank you for your patience.

Absolutely.

Uh kind of curious how uh we get notified of changes that are occurring right now.

Can I see what the updated document is?

Or does the 48-hour agenda posting period mean nothing to you guys?

No?

Cool.

Anyway.

Uh I I I kind of want to touch on uh obviously the data center.

That's that's why we're that's why all of us have been here and have been here for weeks.

You have seen these signs when there's no conversation regarding the data center or that area whatsoever.

These people care, man.

Like very clearly, we're all here because we're passionate about our community.

None of us are receiving a penny from this data center deal or from this TIFF district or from any of this.

Venture one.

He he stood up here and said that he really wants this TIFF district to go through.

Uh let's just take everybody at their word.

Let's say that Monarch Energy is right.

They're going to build a data center in that area of the TIFF district.

And let's say the mayor is right, and they're not going to get a single penny of tax increment financing from this TIFF district.

That dude who's up there, Venture One LLC, he's just got a check.

If you approve this, he gets a check for 51 million dollars.

Starting right now.

Like if it doesn't go to the data center, it only goes to that other 10%.

Like that.

I I would love to have a conversation with you, Miss Meeks.

I would appreciate that to happen before you vote on the TIFF district.

Just uh for the record, the only people that I have heard talk positively about this TIFF district are the gentleman set to receive 51 million dollars at least, and Ryan LLC.

Just if I go to Ryan LLC's website, because I know most of you missed this at the supplement public hearing.

The main page starts with liberating our clients from the burden of being overtaxed, freeing their capital to invest, thrive, and grow.

I don't want those people representing the will of us.

Very clearly, they're more interested in big business succeeding than the populists.

When we talk about things we can do with tax money, things we can do around this chamber, you you have to understand that this is 51 million dollars that we could provide to big business.

Or perhaps we could use that money for programs like CCS or for the mobile food pantries.

We do actually need things in the city of Rockford.

We need you people to care about the things that we care about in the city of Rockford.

When you communicate for over a year with Monarch Energy behind the scenes to figure out if maybe something can happen or maybe it can't, that's spending taxpayer dollars against the wishes of the taxpayers.

I understand that there's some information that you don't want to share, some information that Monarch or whoever wants to keep close to the jest.

Thank you, Mr.

McMaster.

Your time's expired.

Thank you.

Our next public speaker this evening is Kathleen Montaleone.

Yeah.

Good evening, Mayor McNamara and City Councilman.

My name is Kathleen Montleon, and I represent the University of Illinois College of Medicine in Rockford.

I also serve on the task force for food insecurity.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak tonight.

As a person's zip code should not determine their health outcomes.

Yet in our community, where people live often determines whether they have access to healthy foods that prevent disease and support healthy lives.

When more than half of the adults in our area are living with at least one chronic health condition, access to healthy food is no longer just a social issue.

It is a public health issue.

In Winnebago County, 11 low-income census tracts are classified as food deserts.

Many of these neighborhoods are also food swamps where unhealthy food options greatly outnumber stores offering fresh nutritious foods.

As a result for many residents, especially older adults and families with children, accessing fresh foods, vegetables, and other healthy foods remain a daily challenge.

The health consequences are real.

More than 53% of adults in our area are living with one chronic health condition or more, including diabetes, high blood pressure, and other diet-related illnesses.

These conditions reduce quality of life, increase health care costs, and place a growing burden on families, health care providers, and our community.

The mobile grocery store offers a practic practical evidence-based solution by bringing healthy foods directly into neighborhoods with limited access.

It removes transportation barriers and helps residents make healthier choices.

Research has shown that mobile grocery store programs can increase fruit and vegetable consumption and improve overall community health.

What excites me most is this opportunity for partnership.

As a member of the healthcare community, I'm eager to work alongside the mobile grocery store.

As a member of the healthcare community, I'm eager to work alongside the mobile grocery store, grocery store, to provide health screenings, health education, technical assistance for data collection when needed, and connections to community resources.

Together, we can meet people where they are and address health challenges before they become a medical crisis.

As you consider your decision tonight, I encourage you to think about the long-term impact.

We can continue paying the costs of chronic disease after it occurs, or we can invest in prevention today.

The mobile grocery store is more than a vehicle delivering food.

It is a health intervention.

It is an investment in the healthier families, healthier neighborhoods, and healthier Rockford.

Healthy communities begin with healthy food.

Tonight, if you have the opportunity to invest in both, please do.

Because a person's zip coach, health outcomes.

Your decision.

Thank you.

The next public speaker this evening is Shelton K.

Our next public speaker this evening is Shelton K.

Good evening.

My name's Shelton K.

I'm the executive director of the Rockford Regional Health Council.

Before I start my talk on CCS, I would like to say that I'm also a member of the Food Insecurity Task Force and am also a major component of the mobile grocery store.

My main part that I find the most intriguing about it is that it's going to help us learn some of the needs of the community as it goes and finds out where the most need is, and we'll really have some proven data to say that this is where we may need to build another grocery store.

But I'm here tonight to talk about CCS.

I spent 30 years in social service here in Rockford working at Crusader, dealing with the underserved, the homeless, people who are struggling in life.

And I'll tell you, there are a few organizations that I always heard something positive about and was really told that had impacted someone's life, and that was CCS.

They really have made a big difference in improving our community, improving other people's lives.

And that's why I joined them as a board member.

But in my role as executive director of the Rockford Regional Health Council, I have been involved with the Violence Prevention Coordinated Council, as well as the gun violence safety committee that NICNE and the League of Women Voters have put together.

And in both of those situations, we have had incredibly active participation from the young people at CCS.

They really feel a connection with our community.

They would really like to help us grow, thrive, make an improvement, really do things to encourage the younger folks who are behind them, who are watching them through mentoring and just being out there in public.

So I really believe that it is important for the city to fund this program because it's saying to these kids, your city supports you.

Your city believes in what you're doing, encourages you to be a part of this, and to continue contributing.

It's not because you're a victim of trauma, it's not because you're dealing with mental illness, which I'm sure a lot of these kids are, but I think they're finding the answers through their involvement with CCS, through the relationships they build, through talking to other people, beginning getting that comfort level to talk to adults, and that way they are more receptive to counseling and hearing what's going on and being a part of this community.

So my main reason for supporting this is I think we need to tell these young people, we as the city of Rockford really support you and what you're doing and appreciate your involvement.

So that continues.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, everybody here.

Um, for the city council, I bear a little gift if you can just pass these out.

Stories from our young people that um have participated in our programs at CCS.

Um I'm here uh not only to support CCS as a board chair.

Uh we just recently celebrated 34 years of CCS being in Rockford about 26 years ago.

That's one of the first programs that was created under CCS.

Now having other programs under CCS.

Being the part of the board is means a lot to me because I don't share too much of my story in Rockford because I don't think they're ready.

I don't think Rockford is ready, but I do share it through the work that I do in my community.

Oftentimes through grants and funding, we have to report numbers, we have to report how effective these programs are, but I don't think you see the long-term impact.

Myself being raised in Rockford, going through uh many different changes in life from parents divorcing at a young age, being a victim of the gang violence in Rockford, and still being here today.

I can probably tell you in two hands how many times I've been close calls of not being here today.

But because of CCS around the time that I needed it, I needed a change in my life, the caseworkers, the staff, the the work that they provided me and in changing my life and transforming my life to be a leader in my community, not damaging my community, was big.

Um the long-term effect is this.

I've helped my pro I've helped my city through different programs through the YMCA, Boys and Girls Club, like myself, William, our CEO, going through the program has helped many youth through other programs and organizations.

This funding is gonna support those young people that just need that person that can hear them, that can show that love, that support.

And because of that, not only have I been able to help other young people through other organizations, it's also helping change my my children, my children's success.

Now, I might not have been as successful as I wanted to as a young person because I had to go through some challenges in life, but I make sure through the the the uh the skills training, the development, the support, and at the time I didn't know I needed the mental health support.

But young, but we had staff members and caseworkers that were there to listen.

Right before I became a father for the first time.

They equipped me, they told me stay the course.

You have something in you, Antonio.

I was getting ready to quit.

I'm not gonna lie.

And they showed me you stay the you stay uh you stay with us, we're gonna support you.

They showed me a list of apartments and I needed a house.

They showed me a list of jobs because I needed a job because I was gonna be a father.

They didn't give up on me, and I looked back and I said, they didn't have to do that for me.

And because of that, I've stayed the course not only after graduation, just for a short time, I came on as a staff.

Thank you, Mr.

So please support it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next public speaker this evening is Jessica Vandiver.

All right.

I don't think I could just that.

Okay.

So my name is Jessica Van Diver.

Many of you have seen my face several times, and I'm not speaking about me today.

I'm not speaking about how our community feels that we are failed.

I'm speaking about the voices, the faces that you guys don't know.

We have those say, we have Paul, we have Vicky, we have Dave, we have who else is here today.

We have Eddie, we have people who aren't here, people who we know you guys are pushing through with the somebody's Dexcom keeps going off.

Anyways, sorry, know it from experience.

Anyways, people of disability, people of low income who you guys you guys are pushing through with the manufacturing home being shut down.

And yes, it's a manufacturing home, not a mobile home park.

And what we're asking is that you guys add a stipulation.

Pass it if you may.

We've already reached out to John Plant.

We've already asked him to hear our voices, and what he said was when the sale goes through, he'll talk to us.

How's that fair to us?

Our request is for a fair and a reasonable chance to not become unhoused families.

35 families, that's what you guys would be putting on the street.

It's 35 families of low-income disability.

I'm a single mother who works third shift.

Literally, I'm leaving here, probably gonna get an hour of sleep.

Then I have to drive all the way out to Monroe Center, where I will be spending the next nine hours training somebody to do my job.

Well, I'm also raising two children who are not mine because I've opened up my home just to hear it get shut down.

We've had silence, we've had cold shoulders, we've been given crappy offers.

We've been giving crappy offers.

Say to less.

$4,000 doesn't move you into a home.

In fact, they want us to make $4,000 a month just to get a home.

The average person in this group is on Social Security.

We're asking for a fair chance.

Do as you might do as you will.

But my biggest question is I actually wrote it down.

Whether you're willing to stand up for us or you're willing to let us continue fall and then pick up the cost of unhoused families.

Because it's a bigger cost to have housed families than it is unhoused.

Thank you.

Uh to all of our public speakers this evening.

Next, we will go to new committee reports, and we will go to planning and development committee and Alderman Durkey.

Thank you, Your Honor.

Under Roman numeral 6A, Planning and Development Committee number one, the committee recommends denial of the proposed funding agreement with Hoodville Partnership with IBEW Local 364 for electrical workers' trade program to better prepare individuals for IVEW application process, the amount of $85,000, 85 172,000.

The funding source is the casino plan.

Number two, the committee uh recommends approval of the proposed grant of easement to Commonwealth Edison for the city owned property located at A50 South Horse Avenue, Rockford, Illinois.

Property index number one two one three seven seven zero zero three.

Number three, the committee recommends denial of the proposed funding agreement with comprehensive community solutions to expand the prevention and interventional programming in collaboration with the City of Rockford's community keeping center, the amount of 400,000.

Funding source is the cannabis fund.

Number four, the committee recommends denial of the proposed funding agreement with Angelic Organic Learning Center Incorporated, Illinois Nonfor-Profit Corporation doing business as farmers rising in partnership with City Center Market for the establishment of a mobile grocery store in the amount of eight hundred and twenty-two thousand dollars.

The funding source is the 2025 and 2026 casino fund.

Number five, committee recommends approval of an ordinance terminating the global trade park south redevelopment project area and the dissolution of a professional tax allocation fund for global trade parts south tax increment finance district.

Number six, the committee recommends approval of an ordinance approving the South Rockford Industrial Tax Increment Financing District Redevelopment Project Area.

Number seven, committee recommends approval of an ordinance designating the South Rothford Industrial Redevelopment Project Area.

Number eight, committee recommends approval of an ordinance adopting tax increment allocation financing for the Rock, I'm sorry, for the South Rockford industrial redevelopment project area.

These are up for passage.

Thank you.

Uh Council, without objection uh from this body, I would ask that we hold out uh item number one.

There's still a number of questions that many of you have brought to me that I am trying to work through with our partners on that.

Uh so if there's no objection, I'd like to hold out that first item.

Okay, Alderman Bell.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Uh on item number four.

Uh I move to revoke reverse the committee's recommendation for denial to approve the committee's report for proposed funding agreement with Angelic Organics Learning Center Incorporated doing business as farmers rising for the establishment of a mobile grocery store in the amount of eight hundred and twenty-two thousand dollars.

Thank you.

We have a motion.

Is there a second?

Second.

We have a motion and we have a second.

So, council members, that's uh we do this quite a bit, uh, making that uh denial and approval, so that would make all of your votes if it is approved.

If Alderman Bell's motion is approved, would make your yes vote mean that you support the mobile grocery store a no vote mean that you do not.

Just simply clears that up for everyone.

So we have a motion and second.

Is there any discussion on the motion the second before you right now?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed?

Okay.

Alderman Bell?

Uh thank you.

I move on item number four.

I move to amend the funding agreement with Angelic Organics Learning Center Incorporated doing business as farmers rising for the establishment of a mobile grocery store to reflect an amount up to $50,000 in year two and up to $50,000 in year three, which results in a total funding amount of $600,000 $622,000.

We have a motion on the floor.

Is there a second?

We have a motion, we have a second.

Is there any discussion on that amendment?

Alder Woman Prunty.

I think uh I'm not exactly sure at the so the question was she has two amendments, wasn't wanting to know if she was if we were going to deal with both of them.

Uh I cannot uh see your second one, but my understanding is Alderman Toomberg would like to make another amendment is that's at least what his eyes were telling me.

I hope that's what his eyes were telling me.

Um so yes, I am assuming that you will, but right now you have one amendment before you just voting on this just one amendment before you right now, and that would take the funding uh from 822,000 to 622,000.

Uh that means year two it would be 50,000, year three it would be 50,000.

Is there any discussion on the amendment before us?

Yeah, Alderwoman Prunty.

So we have these three phones in front of us, and I guess that uh is for like we just got on the and it's not a lot of time to consider I don't really have any questions about this.

Okay, is there any uh discussion on the amendment before us?

Clerk, could you please call the roll?

No, aye.

Aye, Ross, aye, no seat.

Aye on the amendment granted, aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Me, aye.

Thank you.

Alderman Toonberg.

Thank you, Mayor.

I move to amend the funding agreement with Angelic Organics Learning Center, Incorporated DBA Farmers Rising for the establishment of a mobile grocery store to reflect the funding source as follows: an amount of three hundred thousand dollars from the cannabis funds and an amount of three hundred and twenty-two thousand dollars from casino funds.

Thank you.

Second, we have a motion and we have a second before you right now is an amendment to the funding source going from solely being funded by casino funds to adjusting that to being three hundred three hundred thousand dollars of it being funded by cannabis funding and three hundred and twenty-two thousand of it being funded by casino funds.

We have a motion, we have a second.

Is there any discussion?

Alderman Frost.

Uh those numbers add up to six hundred and twenty-two thousand, but uh the item agenda says it's eight hundred and twenty thousand.

Is there gonna be an amendment on the total?

So we just did that.

We already did the amendment uh bringing it from eight twenty-two to six twenty-two.

Now you'll have that amendment which will just adjust the funding sources.

Uh Alder Woman Meeks and then Alderman Beach.

Uh, what was the reasoning for the change?

I have not been provided that reasoning for the change.

Uh if any council member would like to address it, they certainly can, and I can call on a uh Alderman Toomberg.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh looking at the reasoning for our both our casino funds and our cannabis funds.

Uh I felt through discussions that each of these funding sources uh would be appropriate for this endeavor.

Yeah.

Um what does that leave in a cannabis fund?

What would what does that leave in the cannabis fund?

If everything, uh Mr.

Cagnoni, I'm also gonna assume, and I don't want to make the wrong assumption.

Are you asking what it means if everything else this evening is approved?

Correct.

Okay.

If everything else is approved uh this evening, that would all of the cannabis funding would be used for 2026.

And where is the funding in the casino fund remaining?

Is that would that be in the redevelopment portion?

If everything that was approved, I just want to make sure I get you the right answer.

If everything is approved this evening, how much of that 2526 casino fund remains?

Correct.

Mr.

Cagnoni.

So 2025 casino funds would be exhausted.

There's 150,000 left, and then for 2026, there'd be on uh another 150,000 dollars coming out of the ED high risk area, and there would still remain a balance of 233,000 in arts and culture, 147,000 in other ED activities, and $90,000 in foundation for 2026.

Of course.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Uh Alderman Beach and then Alder Woman Pronty.

Thank you, Your Honor.

Uh I I will be supporting this amendment, but I I want to say again as I did in committee.

My concern that Rockford is the one that has always asked to foot the bill.

We get no help from the county, we get no help for any anyone else around but Rockford.

And I think it's time that when we get issues like this that are so important for the self-conferred children, okay, that has a wider task than just the city.

And if we didn't have casino funds, if we didn't have cannabis funds, would we be talking about this right now in the shape that we are?

So I am going to support this because I believe that it but sometime we're gonna just have to get together with our department.

They're gonna have to start the share in these responsibilities.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Alder Woman Prunty, I believe you had your hand rate.

Alder Woman Pronty.

Please, thank you.

Um I just need to understand those numbers again.

Because it's 300,000 that would be coming away from this number.

So how is it that is still yeah?

It's so this would instead of this being um $622,000 coming out of the casino money now.

It would only be $322,000.

So now tell us again how much would be left in the casino funds if this second amendment.

Mr.

Cagnoni.

So of the $622,000, $300,000 would come from cannabis, which would deplete uh the 2026 funding for uh cannabis funds.

$322,000 would come out of casino funds, uh $150,000 from 2025 funds, uh $150,000 from ED high risk in 2026, and then additional 22,000 in 2026.

So in but uh the casino money does have the 622,000.

It does, yeah, that is correct.

Okay.

Can you tell us without any thing being taken out right now?

Could you tell us one more time how much the casino, how many how many casino dollars are available?

I believe it's 150,000 in 2025.

Let me clarify.

Are you asking how much is there without this?

With that is without this, there's a hundred and fifty thousand in 2025 funds.

Um and then I'll give you a number of categories in 2026 funds.

So it's 150,000 and 2026 ED high risk areas, 233,000 and arts and culture, uh 47,000 in 2026 ED and 90,000 and 2026 foundation.

Um I put a qualifier out there that you know one of the items tonight, the labor project, um, is for 85,000 dollars, and the numbers I gave you know do not include that, and that there's an additional 85,000 dollars for that program.

Alder Woman Pronti.

So if we leave it at the 622,000 coming from the Catino dollars, that would be the arts money as well.

So the way we presented the staff report prior to the amendments, the the funding source was Casino Economic Development Funds in 2025 and casino economic development funds in 2026.

Obviously, there's been a several amendments this evening.

One that reduced the 622,000 from 822,000, which was casino ED funds, and now this other amendment that would split the cost between casino funds and cannabis funds.

Thank you.

Again, the amendment on item four is adjusting the funding source from being solely based on casino funds in 2025 and 2026 to being uh mix of $300,000 from Canvas funds and $322,000 from casino.

Is there any other discussion on that amendment?

Clerk, could you please call the roll?

Cross.

Aye.

No.

No.

Granted.

Aye.

Each?

Aye.

No.

Eight?

No.

Seven times one.

Excellent.

So now we have seven items before you because we've held out item one.

Item four has now been amended three times.

Alderman Bell.

Thank you.

Uh your honor.

Can I can we break these items up?

We can certainly go for all of the items at one time.

We can certainly separate different items.

Yes.

We started to go down you think held out number one.

So item one has been held out.

Now we have the seven remaining items up for discussion.

Alder Woman Meeks and then Alder Woman Granit.

Can I uh make a motion for item number three to reverse the denial for the funding with comprehensive community solutions?

Second.

So we have a motion and we have a second to reverse uh the denial to an approval, I'm assuming uh for the proposed funding agreement with comprehensive community solutions.

Is there any discussion on that motion?

Again, that is just allowing when you as a council say yes, you want to vote for it, uh, or you say yes uh for your vote, you are saying yes, I want to vote for this funding agreement, and a no is no, I do not want to.

Uh is there any discussion on the amendment before you all those in favor say aye?

Aye.

Those opposed?

Okay.

So now we have uh seven items before us.

Item four has been amended three times, item three has been amended once.

Alder Woman Torina.

Thank you.

I have a question on number four.

Um I don't know who's the directness to, but my question is regarding um who was around the table crafting and it's and specifically I wanted to know if anyone that's actually food insecure served on this committee.

Thank you.

Uh any council members or staff can answer that.

Uh I know in the committee list that I had, I know that they had individuals listed that were food insecure, but I don't know the number of meetings they did it or did not attend, so I can't I can't speak to that.

Alderman Bell.

Yeah, I know.

Thank you.

Uh Mayor, I I know that there are several individuals from my board from the 13th ward who are a part of discussions in the food insecurity task force uh and who continue to be around the table.

And I can certainly say that my ward is food and secure, so answers that portion of the question.

Also, Alderwoman Trina, not to specifically, it doesn't specifically answer your question, but I can tell you that they did a number of different surveys.

I'm searching up here for the packet and couldn't grab it quickly.

My understanding through those survey work is that they partnered with uh Northern Illinois Food Bank and did surveys.

I believe they also did surveys, and this is the part I'm a touch fuzzy on, but I believe they also did surveys.

I want to say North Main Manor, I want to say Olson Plaza, or at least some of the Rockford Housing Authority uh developments.

Um I know they did surveys through that.

That was actually one of the things by the time I got uh more engaged in this process was one of the questions I had asked of could we do surveys, and I know they did at length uh surveys with various partner groups in uh food insecure areas with individuals who have uh food insecurity uh concerns and issues, and those surveys came back.

I again don't have it with me, but I know would you utilize uh the mobile grocery store?

I want to say was 92 or 98 percent.

It was significantly high.

Uh and it was a statistically significant number that they did in surveys.

Um that's the only number I can remember off the top.

So and uh Mr.

Cagnoni can maybe address more.

Yeah, thank you, Your Honor.

To answer your question, the that level of information is within the the packet uh from the proposals.

Um but they did do uh surveys through uh zip code 61101 through 61111, uh core west side corridor, and 98% of those uh respondents did say that they would shop the mobile grocery store.

84% report somewhat difficulty and works assess access to groceries, 83% struggled to access affordable fresh food, and 91% uh available uh weekday afternoons for the stops, and there are certainly additional information, but those were the highlights.

Yes, thank you.

I I also read that in the portfolio.

Um I guess there was a lot of it.

It was a list of the individual organizations that were a part of this, was sent to me.

I did review it, but I guess I kind of know how these task force work is yes, you can say 75 people are at the table, but 75 people are not showing up right away.

So for me, it's like I I really wanted a little bit more detail regarding who crafted this.

That's really important, who was crafting essentially policy or program for the individuals.

Um that was important for me to know.

I didn't necessarily have that.

Um I I had just a lot of issues with this one.

Um not really knowing who was at the table, who was really representing still continues to be a lot of questions for me.

Um I also was concerned with the amount of subsidy that was going for this program, especially when it starts off saying that it's uh if if I read it correctly, this is a $30,000 subsidy each year or total $90,000, but that didn't make sense to me when you're going from 250 families the first year up to a thousand.

So if that subsidy is the same every year, it kind of seems like the amount of money that we given to the families for the subsidy as grocery prices are rising.

The math is a mapping for me.

Um I also want grocery store, right?

And that is what we constantly hear grocery store, grocery grocery grocery store.

Now I look at my own ward and the desires of my residents.

It is often, it is not Gabrielle or starving because I don't live in a food design.

It's Gabrielle, we want food quality.

So the desire is I want to be able to go get a full cart of groceries in my neighborhood, not have to go across the town across the side of side town to get groceries.

Um I need to be able to afford the groceries that are coming city, and so I'm I'm so there's just a tension between this.

This really the desires of my residents.

I don't know.

I have a just uh riddled with too many questions.

I I will not be supporting this item, so I just want to make sure that I go on record by saying that.

Um I think that more than anything, I see I see this coming into the neighborhoods.

I I all the articles that I've read said that of many of the other cities that were using as comparison cities.

Um they have a lot of trouble even getting support of this program, so I fear that I fear this asset would ultimately buy someone else's truck.

Again, this is just lots of too many red flags for me.

It feels very, very aspirational.

And this is a lot of money to support a large aspiration that I'm just not willing to support this time.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Alder One Meets.

Thank you so much.

I just and I don't know who to pose these questions to, so I'm gonna just ask the staff.

When it comes to just the pricing that we're gonna see on these vehicles, I think that's what's giving me the most apprehension.

We are starting with city center market, who is helping to procure the items that will be on the mobile grocery store.

So if I'm comparing pricing, uh city center market doesn't give pricing that I think most people would deem affordable.

Um yeah, just based off of some of the items that were in the store.

So I understand there's supplementing that's taking place here.

How do we kind of understand what that will look like on the mobile grocery store?

Because what I would absolutely hate is for this to all get started.

We get into neighborhoods and we hope that it works, but people see that a gallon of milk is four dollars, and they're like, I can get this somewhere else.

And they more than likely will, because people always figure it out and they do what they have to do, and I want to make this easier, and I want to be able to help, because the last thing that I want is for some senior or some child saying, Why didn't you fund this mobile grocery store so I can get my food and my groceries for the work?

I would hate for that to happen, but I also would hate for them to not be able to partake in something like this because of the inability to get that pricing procurement to a point that makes sense, and so if I already see the issues in the city center market that was if I already see the issues there, why and or how will I not see them on this mobile grocery store?

And older woman, thank you.

Good questions.

Uh just for clarity, are you when you're thinking about the pricing?

Are you comparing like uh a woodman's or a mire pricing as I would yeah?

The feedback was that this would be comparable price.

Understood.

Thank you.

I just want to kind of understand what comparable means.

Are we comparing it to a city center market pricing or are we comparing it to a Walmart or Aldi or a pricing that is a little bit more uh reachable and attainable for people?

Thank you.

I I think both uh council members have addressed uh or brought up really good concerns.

Uh you know I too uh for now probably most people in the audience think for too long, but at least for 13 years, uh, have heard concerns about grocery store.

This is not that it will not be a grocery store.

Uh I don't think this will be the end all solution.

I think this is uh a piece to a very complex puzzle that will allow us to advance in a time that we are seeing uh new policies come from the federal government uh that may make it difficult more difficult for individuals uh who are receiving SNAP and other benefits to get affordable and accessible groceries.

So I I don't see it as I also don't see it as something that will preclude us uh or this body from incentivizing larger retailers, like which has been done probably 14 or 15 years ago uh with the Meyer that we provided multi-million dollars of incentives.

We could still do that.

Uh as for most recent questions, I do believe this group has thought out a number of those scenarios.

I think when I was impressed by the many of the partnerships that they have, one including the food bank that will be providing free food uh to uh Jackie uh spoke to it far more articulately than I could, but there was a matching program that if you buy one, you get one that they will utilize.

Uh they will have some subsidy, maybe not as much as we all want, but will have some subsidy.

I also think they will be partnering with local farmers, growing uh uh much of this produce that typically will come at a farmer stand price, which is very attractive compared to at least the places I shop.

Uh and I will also say the one thing uh that just shows my privilege uh was I said many of the same questions of, you know, well, what if I get this at Aldi?

Well, I'm I'm not comparing apples to apples there.

Uh many of the folks that we are talking about and needing to serve the most aren't going to Aldi, aren't going to many of these larger locations.

They are shopping at a corner store that four dollars uh and fifty cents, five dollars for milk in many of those cases would be a dream.

Uh and so this is providing uh that accessible and affordable food with some subsidy, but certainly not ever going to be able to compete with the breath or the dramatic cuts in prices that some of these larger retailers make.

I I think for me, you know, I think that if we're going to be providing subsidy, I would like to have seen, and I don't know if this was discussed around the table, but I would have liked to have seen how we can support some of those local stores that are inside the neighborhoods, and while also providing that security because a lot of the success that comes with the mobile stores that have had success in other areas, they're successful because of that subsidy, and because it is a substantial subsidy that makes the pricing cheaper for them to shop there versus shopping at the grocery store.

So that's why they get those high numbers.

I would have been happy to support this the first time around had I felt comfortable that that was the method that we were going.

But I don't feel that that's the method based on the partners that we're working with.

Um a lot of the reason why some of those other entities outside of Rockford were successful is because before they came or before they even implemented, they secured a high level of funding from private entities, public entities, and then they moved that project forward.

So that was the initial apprehension of this plan.

But one thing I'm gonna say is I do listen to constituents, and I could not look someone in the eye that needed a service like this.

Now I'm gonna be honest, I don't think this is it.

I really don't.

I don't think this is the ticket.

I think that there's a strong likelihood that this will dissolve, and we will be right back to square one, figuring out how we're going to provide food for the and I think that I wasn't at the food insecurity meetings at this point.

Now that we're voting on this item, I wish I had it, because I would have liked to understand how we got to this point of everything, knowing that there's so much conversation around mobile grocery stores not being successful.

As much as they are great for photo opportunities and standing in trunk in front of trucks, and and everyone's smiling and being happy about the ability to think people.

And so it is a high price um item.

I do appreciate the negotiations that took place behind closed doors that I didn't know about to get it down to 622,000.

I don't necessarily appreciate the adjusting to take away all of the cannabis dollars.

But we're here now, and and at the end of the day, there is strong support for this initiative, and I don't want to ignore those voices.

So I will be I will be saying yes to this.

Um I don't think it's the best decision.

Thank you.

Uh older woman Prunty.

Thank you.

Um I know that it's out there somewhere, but could you do it for everybody else?

And I because I don't want to miss the could somebody please explain the difference between a full swamp, a food desert, food and security.

What are we talking about?

Okay.

I am not the technical expert on that.

Food swamp is typically referred to areas in a community that has food but not healthy food options.

A food desert typically is stating a portion of a community that lacks uh individuals' ability to get uh affordable and accessible uh groceries, what I would consider more groceries uh full service groceries.

That is an anyone who is uh impacted and can be in a number of different ways, and please anyone who has better definitions than what I am saying, please speak up.

Uh but anyone uh and it can be for a lot of different reasons, uh, but is struggling to get the food they need uh to live and survive, uh, is food insecure.

And that can have a lot of at least my understanding, Aldermone Prunty can have a lot of variety between uh those individuals who are struggling with food insecurity.

So food insecurity is the lack of ability to afford get it, afford and access it.

So swamp is and desert seems to mean that it's lack of access.

That would you're insecurity can be uh one's income.

I would also say, like for I think what makes I think this innovative may not be the end all be all uh but makes it innovative is its attempt to help solve both of those.

Uh attempting to get affordable uh food uh to individuals where they live, making it accessible for them to get it.

Um thank the 12th board augment for bringing up the idea of um supporting what we already have, and I'm just wondering from not the organizers of this, but the council or excuse me, the city portion that looked at this, was there or has there been any consideration for um assisting those brick and mortars that exist because I think you only say 61101?

Said 61101 through 611 61101 through 611.

Oh, you gave a range.

Okay, all right.

So those um and I they probably didn't ask for anything, but is there was there any thought or consideration to make those um less swampy?

So just so I'm attempting to understand where we're going here.

Uh because you're talking about the quality of food.

So when I think about like I've shopped at a couple of places downtown where I purchase food, and while I can buy soda and chips, I can also buy some fresh forms.

But if that's part of the goal, was there any thought process to making some of those areas in 61101 through 611 more or less of a desert or swamp area yes, uh your Honor?

I can short that your question to some extent, and certainly you can correct me if I must be, but when it comes to food insecurity, whether that's transportation or cost, I mean it's all on the table.

Um, our team's gonna look at holistic approaches, uh, whether that's the establishment of brick and mortar, which we've been successful in securing uh multiple DCO grants for brick and mortar uh grocery stores to be established or expanded with you know state dollars.

Um historically, we provide a sales tax agreements on the east side and the west side for the establishment of grocery stores.

Um when you talk about a food swamp, and just uh to make sure that it's answered correctly, a food swamp is an area uh that does not you know has an over concentration of unhealthy food options, um and then many times a food swamp and a food desert will be one in the same where there's unhealthy options but no healthy options.

So I mean, as a as a staff, we're willing to look at all the different opportunities and will continue to do so.

I think it was mentioned uh earlier tonight.

This is one option, uh, but certainly it's not gonna solve food insecurity uh all by itself.

It's gonna continue to be for this you know city, whether it's city government or not-for-profit organizations to continue to tackle the issue and a multi-prome approach, and prunty.

Thank you.

Um, just am wondering, thank you so much for those responses.

Um I am just wondering, since we have made the um move to amend this and to use the one that we agreed upon is to use the 300,000 from cannabis and 322,000 from casino fund.

Is there time to amend this again to make an amendment again?

Can we do that?

Or are we just still on the discussion of this one?

So all the amendments have uh went through right now.

Uh amendments uh if you wanted to have an amendment, it would need to be in writing.

Uh thus you had those in writing.

Uh, if there was needed to be time uh for that, I think in the past we have uh provided uh that time to get something worked up.

Uh so it is possible.

Um I just asked staff a question again.

Yeah, considering how we have used and what we have decided we will use cannabis dollars for, is this um I won't say the best use, but is this an acceptable use?

Yep, thank you.

Good question, Mr.

Gagnoni.

I've I believe it is consistent with the resolution that was approved by city council on the utilization of those funds, and certainly is in part of a geographical area identified in that resolution.

So part of, but not all but part, I don't want to say part of or all.

I just know I'm sorry, because you know you have my heart.

This is a hard job.

Um I guess that as I am uh looking at this, it sounds as if if we do if we um do not take this money that's 62,000 from if we only took it from the casino funds, that they would still have something left.

The casino funds would.

But if we take 300,000 plus we do the other thing that we're looking at doing tonight, then the cannabis funds would have zero left.

Is that my understanding?

Or there would be uh, I don't have all the numbers memorized, Alderman Prunty, but yes, there would be some uh casino funds based on all of those different categories that council approves uh remaining.

Uh and yes, if we use this, all of this year's cannabis funds would be expended.

So, but if we if I were to amend this, and rather than using 300,000 from cannabis funds, but use all 62,000 of casino funds, we would have 300,000 at least left in casino funds.

Then how much would we have left in or excuse me in cannabis funds?

How much will we have left in casino funds?

So if we went back to not to 800, but to think under 22.

Right.

And so we just no, I I think I'm following you.

Uh I just want to say it, so I'm half the time I'm only repeating it.

So A, people can hear it, and B, I can understand it.

Um your question is since it's been amended from 822 to 622.

If you utilized all 622 of casino, would there be funding left over in casino?

Are you saying in all categories or economically challenged categories?

Because we're pulling from everything, right?

We're pulling from multiple places.

We were pulling from multiple places uh when it comes to casino.

And we would still be pulling from multiple places at 322, correct?

Primarily you would be pulling from casino economic development and casino economic development and disadvantaged areas.

So the 200 and uh 233,000 would is that one of those two hundred and thirty-three thousand.

I'm not following that one.

Is that you say that there was 20 there was 233,000 left in one of the funds, and I was I didn't get uh write it all down.

So I you know, with the amendment that was previously approved by council that's under discussion, the three hundred and twenty-two thousand dollars would come from a hundred and fifty thousand dollar ED high risk twenty twenty-five, hundred and fifty thousand ED hydrisk twenty twenty-six, an additional twenty-two thousand uh and uh twenty twenty-six casino funds.

And is there Apple casino funds to carry the you know the proposal?

Yes, but that wasn't the amendment that was okay.

So I just need to change these.

Okay.

So and prior to you making that change, just so I understand, and I'm hoping I'm picking up what you're putting down.

Um if you were to make an amendment that go moves the funding back to casino funds, that was just defeated, right?

So it I mean we know the outcome of that.

It was defeated at approval.

I mean, yeah, but what she wants was defeated because it wasn't approved.

Because this the amendment became so but with this amendment, we had not had this conversation.

Now that we have had this conversation, looking at this amendment, which is the one that has the I'm sorry, there are several of them.

You're fine.

Which um asked for the 622 plus, I think it asked for the 50 and 50, if I'm looking at the right one.

So my recollection, Alder Woman Prunty and anyone can please do correct me.

Uh my understanding is that we had three amendments with this.

The first was to move denial to approval.

Yeah, the second was uh to bring the funding from 822,000 down to 622,000.

Then once it was that was approved.

Then once $622,000 was approved, then we had yet another amendment that then moved that $622,000 to have more of the split, the $300 cannabis and the $322 casino.

So could my if I were to make an amendment, could my amendment sound something like this?

I move to amend the funding agreement with Angelic Organics Learning Center, um doing business as farmers rising for the establishment of a mobile grocery store to reflect the funding resources resource as follows an amount of six hundred twenty-two thousand six hundred and twenty-two thousand dollars from casino funds.

Could I do that?

So I think you could, a if it was I think you could, b, it would have to be in writing, and C that is literally what they just voted on to not do.

No, yeah, yes.

Well, what is this $150?

And I'm sorry, maybe I'm not I want to be, I want to make sure everyone's clear.

And if I'm please correct me where you think I'm wrong.

So we first had the item up.

Then there was the motion to uh change it from a denial to approval.

Great, done.

Then we had an amendment to uh address the funding from 822,000 to 622,000, all still coming from casino done.

That got approved, that was done.

Then we had an amendment.

Can I then we had an amendment that we had six hundred and twenty-two thousand go into funding for the mobile grocery?

Then we had an amendment that kept the 622 but adjust the funding source away from using all casino funds to using 300,000 of cannabis and 322,000 of casino.

So I think you could make that amendment, Alderwoman Prunti, but I think this body just voted to not do that.

Thank you.

No, I'd want to.

Am I being clear?

I don't want to Alderman Toonberg and then Alderwoman Torina.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh on this mobile grocery store.

Um I think that when we look at giving the seed money, and I and I know I've talked with some other individuals regarding some other items that are on the topic tonight, so it kind of runs parallel to that.

That uh, you know, I had a lot of questions on this.

Part of it is as we looked at other mobile grocery stores uh around in other cities, they were I believe from what I saw very heavily privately funded, privately sponsored.

So I think what this does is gives us a or gives the organization a springboard to begin.

I appreciate the coming down from 822 to 622.

Uh I think what that also does is send a message to this organization that we as a city are serious in advising that they do seek and continue to seek.

I'm sure they've been doing it, but we'd like to see them uh be a little bit more diligent on that, uh, if possible going forward to secure private funding because you know we I think when some programs are ceded, it's hard to unseed them.

And so as this organization moves forth, I would like to see the success of it.

Uh, but I'd also like to see the whittling down of public dollars and the private sector stepping up, as we've seen in some of the other cities where they have been more reliant on private sector dollars.

Uh thank you.

Thank you.

And just I'm not responding.

I would just say lots of very similar conversations around the horseshoe, and I would say very similar conversations with uh farmers rising and gelic organics, and I think that message has been delivered.

Appreciate it.

Um I'm sorry, we Alder Woman Torina.

Thanks, Mayor.

Um, how do we arrive at the 200,000 decrease?

And ultimately, how does that impact the subsidy then?

Thank you.

So the subsidy will not be impacted.

Uh the 150 in year two and the 150,000 in year three were a not to exceed number.

If you look at the pro forma, I again I obviously grab the wrong packet, uh, but the pro forma highlights something around the area of needing less than 25,000 year two and needing 13 to 17,000 year three.

The idea was we would give them initially up to 150,000 year two, up to 150,000 year three, because we wanted to give them a cushion and make sure that they uh continue to operate and run and do what we all want them to do.

Uh in discussions uh with farmers rising and their team, they also heard from our conversations here on council that our council and our organization uh want them to fundraise more uh and put a greater emphasis on that on more private dollars and foundation dollars and less of an emphasis on the public dollars uh and conversations with them, the subsidy would not be impacted.

Uh their need to fundraise, I would say is probably the thing most impacted, and it has just been expedited.

Thank you.

All right, we're cruising.

Uh Alderman Beach.

Thank you, Honor.

I said that was going to support this, but I still am.

I do appreciate the remarks made by Albert Mexico.

Uh when you look at the facts, and I think we spoke about this, Your Honor, that unless they are heavily subsidized, the chance of them being successful questions.

Because when you figure that margins on these grocery stores are really at best somewhere around 4%, and it works more realistically, about 1%.

And the cost of goods to operate the store are somewhere around 25% at best.

If they're not heavily subsidized, we can't make it.

Unless they're going to do millions and millions of dollars of retail signals.

It just doesn't work.

So the message to the developers here is they've got to go out and raise this money.

If they don't raise this money, maybe they've got some tricks we don't know about.

And I just say that kindly.

Thank you.

Other uh discussion.

Alderman Alderman Frost.

Thank you.

I never thought in the same discussion, I would wholeheartedly agree with the 12th Ward and Third War Aleman combined.

Last week was unique.

This week is even more so.

I I don't think anyone uh disagrees with wanting to solve uh the what we call the food swamp, food inequity, the food desert that exists in any committee, but more importantly, ours.

And I and I think it was also mentioned by the fifth world alderman about this being aspirational, and I'm glad to see a back tick in the investment, not mean that we're not in favor of going forward and helping out, especially seniors and kids that don't have the ability uh to get certain places because of transportation uh and to have properly on properly food items, and that's why I talked to the director last week and about the Pigley Wigley program and the 25% subsidy that they're able to do, but on their truck, it really is more of a mini grocery store.

I think we really need to, and I don't know how we can do this with this entity, but really I would think with the Angeletic Gardens being involved, um, you know, really focused on what counts and solving those problems by providing better food by fruits, vegetables, dairy, those type items that that would could solve the desert slash inequity swamp problems uh and not have it just be more convenient to you know buyback chips, right?

So I I think I'm hopeful that I I haven't talked much about it.

I don't know what the logistics are.

I know there's been lots of changes made tonight.

I know everyone would kill me if I made a motion to lay it over, but I I think there needs to be a lot more moving steps going forward to get this right because the last thing any of us want to see is to say, I told you so, right?

The Milwaukee program, and I know the size scope is much different, but you know, they had almost half of their budget, they had 10 million dollars in private money coming from Pigley Wigley, Blue Cross New Shield, and I don't see any of that race so far, Robert.

And so I'm and I know there was a press conference, I think last Tuesday about uh the organization moving forward with or without it, and I don't think that's you know, I'm hopeful that it can be a utilization of our money to help give C money with with the with the with the care of the stick that you gotta go out and get all the money or it's not gonna work.

And the last thing I think anybody wants to see is to spend whether it's six thousand dollars or six hundred thousand dollars on a program that we're gonna fund that's gonna, you know, that it's not gonna be sustainable after three years.

So I again I I I would I would rather lay it over, but I don't think I'd probably have support of counsel to do that to figure out these details.

So I'm gonna hopeful and hopeful that um a city staff and the in the agreement with this entity and organization really is able to work out the details going forward to make it so it is actually a success because that's truly what we all want.

Certainly hear you appreciate that.

Well, I'll at least commit to uh following up with you uh after discussions with uh the team and provide you feedback from them and also uh with updates on their private fundraising efforts as well, Alderman Durkey.

Thank you, Your Honor.

Um as I stated in uh committee last week, I actually am not supportive of this program.

Um a couple of questions uh I think need to be answered.

The pro forma of this uh seems to be investigatory uh part of the issue as to whether or not we need a grocer on the west side.

We do.

We already answered the question.

So the root causes, why isn't there a grocer on the west side or in these certain neighborhoods?

A large grocer.

What is stopping them from coming?

So that to my knowledge, I haven't seen that.

I haven't seen that address.

I haven't specifically seen that answered or studied.

As far as the mobile truck, I don't know that it answers it.

Nothing, I guess, is going to solve everything.

But you're you're gonna move a truck from place to place, and I can only go by uh some of the data that's provided.

And I know the uh the end is only 22.

I don't know how the survey was done, but if you only have 22 respondents, I'm wondering even of the interest that people had in responding to the survey.

But in I can only go by what's in front of me for all these things, but you have uh 40 percent of respondents that I'm immobile.

Food trucks not gonna help it.

They got to get to the food truck.

Somewhere in there, it said 60 some 67 percent already drive.

So is their desire to have the food truck simply because I don't want to drive across town.

If if that's the case, we we're in a rural area, there's all kinds of people that drive all over the place for food.

The Milwaukee thing that people uh, as Alderman Frost brought up, the the Milwaukee program is heavily not only subsidized by Pigley Wigley, but is provided by Pigly Wiggly.

They have a large chain with economy of scale that is able to provide foodstuffs at a reduced price because of their purchasing power.

The farmers that we would use here are good for a season, but what happens?

What happens in January?

I mean, you're gonna go out in the market and buy it and have markup.

So I'm not in the studies I've read, there's all there's always creep and cost to eventually the overhead exceeds what exists in the private sector.

I called any number of grocers this week, this past week, and um everybody delivers, everybody delivers to every section of rock.

We can't afford that.

The um I asked the question last week as to where people got their staples from toothpaste, soap, different things like that.

That's not provided by this either.

So it doesn't completely answer what we need to get folks, but the private sector has stepped up to do that via Instacart or their own delivery service.

People on SNAP have reduced to no delivery fee in some of these places.

People poo-poo some of these, but they're they're major change.

The costs that can't be delivered to the people ordering online are the same as anybody else because of the economy of scale.

The data that's provided from the study section said that 85% of respondents said they would like to order online.

They already would like to do that.

The the people uh who were queried basically said that they were home most of the day.

So the delivery coming to their home, it's not like they're delivering to an empty home.

So I think the private sector has already answered the question as far as delivery.

What we need, the other is I talked to a few women during the week, and uh I did my own quick study.

Women, the the women who use this are women with small kids.

They don't want to drag like little kids to the grocery store.

That's one of the big, they're big users of online shopping.

Because they could stay at home, it's delivered to them, they don't have to drag kids all over the place.

Plus, there is an added expense.

You do have to drive.

You do have to own a car and pay insurance to get there.

So I I think this is more of a band-aid.

I think it's a misdiagnosis of what is needed, and it's a misapplication and a mistreatment based on that false diagnosis.

I would rather take the $800,000, just do them, find a building, buy it, and subsidize with no taxation or whatever, and let's see if we can draw a ghost grocer for very low cost to do that.

The margins of grocery stores run at two to three percent.

It's not it's that's not good.

We look at these big stores and think everybody's making a lot of money, and they're not the margins are tight.

And even as this mobile grocer will uh will try to you know buy foodstuffs, their margins are gonna be tight, which is why they only work if they're subsidized, and even if they're subsidized, their costs, at least from the studies I've read, are high.

So I think it's a gallant.

And if they want to continue as a private entity to do this, I have more power to them, you know, with um a private donations.

But I I see lots of trouble in this because I don't think it delivers uh it's not gonna deliver what they say.

It's gonna be very difficult to get fresh food, especially in the down ones.

They will not be able to deliver the staples food stuff uh the laundry soap dishwash, you know, all those things.

People still have to go to a store to buy them.

So they're out in mobile already.

The question is how cheap will this food be?

And I don't think it's it's gonna be as promised.

Um I actually think the private sector will outdo them in cost and and efficiency and availability of a variety.

So I don't I don't I I they're great ideas, they they look good, but I I'm I'm I'm not sure sure this is the right thing.

I'd like us to study why aren't we having the grocery and take this money and perhaps bind a building and try to seed it ourselves with other entities or groups uh and get something going uh on the west side so people can you know have a nice brochure?

So yeah, that's my comment on that.

There's a there's a lot to unpack there.

Um we are I I think uh really good thoughts and concerns.

Um I th I've said this before.

I did not support this initially.

Um my reason was how can we not get to someone like an Instacart and cut a deal that allows us to pay flat fees per person and uh connect those individuals or connect instacart and allow someone to buy anything that they want and have it delivered to their home.

Truthfully, what I found is the cost was exorbitant, they would not uh dramatically reduce their fee.

It was a flat fee, the one I spoke to uh it was a flat fee, fifteen dollars per uh purchase if they bought eight dollars worth of stuff or seventy-five dollars worth of stuff.

Uh it that we would at the way I looked at it, we would not be able to fund uh that for just a few hundred people for years, and it would never potentially go away.

Um I will also say we have had uh discussions with uh an organization that is considering a food co-op and looking for at ways that they're not ready uh yet, but looking at ways that we could potentially partner with them uh down the road.

I will also say, yes, uh farmers will be growing fresh produce in any season that they can and the circumstances that they have with hoop houses or not, uh, and the backup is not nothing.

The backup is a local grocer uh that has contracts with the Cisco's, etc.

That is also agreeing to provide, I think it's 10 or 15 percent of profit sharing back to the nonprofit to help uh its sustainability.

It doesn't answer all your questions, certainly, but I have gone to as high up as I can get into, I'll just say the instacarts of the world, uh, and went to their lobbyists and other government affairs folks asking and have had good discussions.

There's a mayor in uh South Carolina that did it, and everyone touts us.

Well, when you dove into it, I was like, that's an incredible amount of money.

But if we could do that in Rockford, I think it's worthwhile.

They were serving a hundred people, not 100 families, a hundred people, and that it I just could not get the math anywhere near where we're at with the numbers that we potentially could serve alder woman printing.

Um back to that idea about InstaCard, I know everybody does this shop at this particular store.

Um I let my um membership go, but currently Walmart has a fifty percent off annual membership of 49.

So that $15 per trip.

You I mean, once you spend your $35, or whatever you have, if you had a membership, you were you know that's there for you.

So I think we might be able to do more than a hundred people with $100, or excuse me, with $62,000.

Understood.

And truthfully the one I was comparing was not Walmer.

It was not that.

Um okay.

Thank you for that.

We have just to reset, we have seven items before us.

We held out one item.

Items three has been amended three times.

Item four was amended once.

Is there any discussion on those uh seven remaining items?

Alderwoman Meeks and Alderman Durkey.

Wouldn't we already if you called on Alderman Durkey for a moment, please?

It would be Alderman Durkey.

You're up.

You go.

Oh, thank you.

Um just wanted a uh a brief comment again on uh number three.

Uh in committee, I was opposed to this.

I am absolutely supportive of comprehensive community solutions.

I think it's a great organization.

I think they do great work.

We are voting though on one aspect of the work that they do, and then unfortunately, for the money that we're spending, the numbers uh results that they're putting up.

Um I don't think justifies the amount of money that we're providing this organization.

Um, but like I said, we're only we're not voting on comprehensive community solutions, it's just this program.

So I meant support what they do, but not this program.

Thank you, Alderman Meeks.

Thank you so much.

Um okay, so items five, six, seven, and eight.

Yes.

Um the things that have recently been put forward by our governor.

Um that he knows there's wide public objection to data centers.

Um I think that there are some things that we could possibly put in place in this particular project area that aren't even specific to the data center, but to just industrial industry as a whole and its impacts, and I do believe there is a pause that we could take.

So I am gonna make an ask to lay over items five, six, seven, and eight.

I did receive a couple of um zoning amendments that are um similar to other non-home rule communities that have implemented um rule changes in zoning, and I would like to present that to staff to see if that's an avenue that we could go to make people feel a little bit more secure about the decision that we're gonna make.

There's still so much unanswered questions and information that needs to be shared with the public, and approving this.

I I am understanding that this item is not approving a debt center, however, the incentive that will be provided for the industry, which I know many of us want this incentive, they want this development and to be able to move this group quickly, but I think there's something to be said about the fact that the governor put out this framework about the fact that there are still studies that need to take place, and before we commit to TIFF dollars, I think there is a moment that we can take to kind of identify what those zone zoning ordinance changes should be, and um the information that I received that I will share was crafted by people that have contributed to uh the Power Act and some of the legislation that they're trying to move forward.

So I do make a motion to lay over items five, six, seven, and eight.

Okay.

Thank you.

We have uh we have a motion and we had a second.

Okay, we have a motion, we have a second uh layover, so those items are automatically laid over.

Thank you.

Council we uh now have three items before us.

Is there any discussion on the three items before us Alderman Thomberg and Alderman Frost?

Oh that is worthless.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Uh on the CCS.

I want to uh thank you to Will, who uh Mr.

Chapman, who we had a it's hard sometimes busy bees trying to connect uh and you finally did in the 11th hour, so I appreciate the conversation with him.

Uh I did make it clear that I have no issues with the uh services that CCS does.

Uh and what I would I do have an issue with sometimes here is as in with other programs as well is the funding source.

So the in our discussions uh it was clear that the mental health uh there is mental health issues or mental health uh is being addressed within uh this program, and for that it goes back to our discussion of last week, and the mental health tax that every one of us in this room are paying into.

So uh we chapman and I uh did discuss that in in greater length, and uh there is I think going to be uh more of an effort to go down that route if possible.

Um the you know, is brought to my attention initially that there was about 20 million dollars in this fund.

Now I'm hearing it's possibly up to 40 million that is sitting in the mental health tax fund.

So there is a lot of money sitting there.

Uh and now I haven't confirmed it, so let me be very clear.

I haven't confirmed it.

So uh you know, if there's someone else on council that would like to chime in on that, I would be appreciative of it.

But uh, yes, going forth.

I would like to see more of uh that mental health tax come into the equation here.

Uh and it looks like they uh will go down that route once proven to that health board.

Uh if that is the only thing holding that back, uh the board back from doing this uh that as they prove themselves going forward that they would look for a larger allocation.

So again, it goes back to the city, the public schools, the county, all benefiting from this program, and I would like to see some of those entities step up if possible.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Alderman Frost.

Thank you.

I I just wanted to uh express my support for CCS of as an organization that they've they've taken over youth bill, the Rockford Work program.

I think is outstanding to help you kids.

Um I know there is this debate.

I hate that you throw away the baby with the bathwater over the mental health tax and and punish an organization because you know we I think that's another conversation that we can have with respect to the use and viability and success that we as a city are at the table with and discussing how those funds get utilized if we get some, but I'd hate to see um CCS not getting additional funding because they they used they do obstacle and and I think they affect a lot of kids.

I don't know the details of this um specific funding in the cannabis one particular area.

I'm hopeful that it'll get spread throughout CCS and utilize to help a whole bunch of kids in a whole bunch of different ways.

So that for that reason I I think it's a good good use of $300,000 to begin this.

Thank you.

Uh we are continuing to dwindle the number of items that we have before us.

Uh and we have Alderman Salgado and then Alder Woman Pronti.

Thank you, Honor.

Um there's a lot that I wanted to cover.

Uh it's like six through eight is uh laid over, so I won't talk on that.

Um real quick, is bank um I'll start with the mobile grocery store.

There's been a lot of talk about uh building grocery stores, and I want to reiterate what I said last committee meeting.

Um we have El Rancho grocery store that's coming up on Fishwalking.

They got funding for about a million to 1.3 million, I believe.

Uh don't quote me on it.

Just over two million.

Over $2 million.

As some might see it as a subsidy, some might see it as you know an investment for that, whether it's for the food desert, that's where it came from.

So there is a lot of that, right?

So, and then there's talks about margins, right?

Yes, very thin margins.

I go to Fiesta Market Balladir once in a while, or I go to Wanapuato, you know, they have a restaurant, they have a bakery, they have an order express to send money, pay the bills.

Um, and so they lease all these spots.

Why?

Because their margins are thin, and so they want to keep their business viable.

Um that's part of the process, right?

Just buying produce, milk, you know, may not pay all the electric bill, or may not pay the refrigeration and so forth.

So, yes, margins are real thin.

Um, and I just want to reiterate again.

You know, we we talked about this framework, it was brought back because we didn't have enough time to you know put the framework, whatever it was, we put it together, went to the task force.

We have a list of the task force that said, hey, this is one component, this mobile grocery that we can tackle at this point in time because we don't have a developer that wants to put on the west side or in certain spots because the margins are real thin, and there's a lot of risk that goes with it, right?

And so that's the conversation.

We talk about Woodman's, we talk about Walmart, we talk about all these different you know, grocery stores.

No one has stepped up to the plate that I can recall, right?

Um, yes, there is a lot of food swamp, you know, comedian stores and so forth and so forth from that perspective, right?

So this is one attempt from that perspective, and that's why I support that piece of it because the the work was there, the survey was down there, uh they got the information, they put it out there.

Um, they went with Angelico and Farmers Rising because they're established non-for-profit.

Their role is a non-for-profit, it's not for profit, it's not a schnooks, it's not any of those things from that perspective.

It is a need in the community, and that's why it's putting it in that direction.

And that's what we have to think about from this perspective.

So there are subsidies out there, there are tax incentives, and I want to bring this up because you know, we talk about TIFF districts and so forth.

That is a purpose too to help some of these businesses establish those types of businesses in certain areas.

You know, from Blight, we talk about it, whatever the case may be.

Those are the reasons why we certainly have those TIFF districts.

Obviously, it's not going to fund uh a whole lot compared to one million to two million dollars.

Uh some TIFF districts only have 50,000, 100,000, very minimal from that perspective, right?

So I just want to be able to understand that yes, it is a risk.

Yes, it is a subsidy at some point, but it is getting food to the individuals that really need it from my perspective.

Um we can talk about maybe Milwaukee.

How many private sectors did they have when he the first established?

Was Chinooks on on board 100%, 25% subsidies?

Was it 10%?

Was it 5%?

Um, whatever the case may be, right?

And so from my perspective, you know, it is a start, and I do appreciate some some of my colleagues here saying that we're willing to give the startup, you know, so they can get going.

I'm sure they can come up with other private sector, other companies that are willing to put in um money, private money, or whatever the case may be, but it is part of the task force.

It is the framework that we have been talking about.

Now, I'm hoping that someday we will get a grocery store down the on the west side, because I also I had a colleague that's here from the county board, he's no longer here, but we always talk about too um development and the rural pockets of Winnebago, Pecatonica, grocery stores, so they don't have to drive all the way to Walmart over here, Sam's or whatever the case may be.

There's that push too.

We can reach out to the county and work with them.

Um, and that's what I'm trying to do from that perspective.

So it is a good start.

I think it's a good amount of money to invest in this perspective.

I don't uh I don't like the fact that uh you know, from that perspective, we split it, uh, you know, taking it out of the cannabis funds and half of it, you know, going from the the casino funds.

Um I don't I don't agree with that 100%.

Should then the casino, we should have left it the way it was.

That's why I voted no for it on Mr.

Thunberg's um amendment on that.

So I just want to be clear on that.

So I was one of those that voted no for that.

Um next thing, uh want to talk a little bit about number three.

Uh you heard Alderman tell uh Tamir Bell talk about this.

I'm a very we we hear, we see the emails that we get about juvenile um crime being committed, 16 years, 17 years.

I'm I'm mad about that.

I talked to Jennifer Catabilia, you know, uh from uh about that, you know, when they're doing the peace center and how do we do intervention and so forth.

I'd rather pay 50,000 per person than to be locked up in in the system where I have to pay my tax dollars and put them in jail, maintain them, you know, whatever it is.

If I can save individuals that they can contribute to this local economy, grow their own family, raise, buy a house, and invest in property taxes and sales taxes or whatever, that's that's what I'm willing to do.

And that's what uh comprehensive community solutions organizations like that will do.

Youth bills, fatherhood, etc.

etc.

I used to work for community action up in Beloy, Janesville.

Perfect organization.

I want to mimic some of the stuff that we do here with our community action here in Rockford because they do a lot of good work uh with their youth uh youth bill programs and so forth, and they give second opportunities for those.

Um I know the county is working really hard with the chairman in trying to Loyola University and trying to go after these individuals that need a second chance, opportunity for them to integrate back into our society so they can contribute to our economy, to our taxes, to our sales taxes, and raise their own family, and not us having to put the bill and be locked up in in our uh juvenile or justice center uh uh facilities.

So that's why it's good use of this money from this perspective.

And we talk about the mental health, yes, and I talked about Marshmallow Hope, similar situation.

They are getting 100,000 as being confirmed by them saying that they are getting 100,000.

Yes, it is the city of Rockford that they're serving 90% of the participants.

So why would we not want to invest in our own community since they're Rockford?

Yes, school district kids, whatever the case may be, absolutely.

But I think that if we really care and we want to invest in that, that's what we need to do to address those issues.

And the cannabis funds is set aside money to address those issues from that perspective, whether it's violence, whatever the case may be.

So those are the things why I think it's very necessary for us to fund this.

Uh it's a lot of money, absolutely.

Um I wish more organizations would come forward to us with uh solutions to our issues and sit down.

Um, but yes, absolutely, mental health uh board needs to hear this stuff.

They need to understand this.

Yeah, it's probably 40 million dollars from that perspective.

Um, and we've talked about this having a conversation with county board uh as well with the county mental health uh Winnebago uh county mental health board to address some of these issues about why the funding's not going out as should be, or why is there such a uh reserve because we say surplus, it's not really a surplus, it's a reserve uh from in my opinion.

It's not a surplus, it's a reserve from that perspective.

And so we need to uh have those conversations, but just to uh Mr.

Mr.

Alderman Frost saying to hold them hostage just because I don't feel that the mental health is not doing their job or whatever, therefore I'm not gonna fund them whatsoever.

But I do appreciate what they do.

I I think is it's not good enough for my perspective, and I think we need to help out our community.

It is our Recordians that need the support and help from this perspective.

So I just want to make those comments.

Um I wanted to talk a little bit about the TIFF, which I were reserved my comments and my questions for that, but most definitely I think uh those are my comments for those two items.

Thank you.

Um regarding number two, umprehensive solution.

I guess I don't know.

Item number two or three numbers right.

Thank you.

Everybody correcting me, I appreciate it.

I really do.

Um, I just wanted to just kind of throw it out.

Not even throw that there when it's saying that I every time I um kind of hear um this program talked about we are kind of treated like a crime prevention, but these children aren't criminal.

I want to just kind of keep these children are trying real hard.

And so I I don't think that we're funding a program that would have helped somebody who already decided to pick up a gun and shoot somebody.

So I want to that's not these kids.

So I'm happy to support them, and I hope that there is a program out there because I don't think we have it as hard as we try.

I don't think that there's anybody out there who has much for those kids.

And I I hope that we will find a way to help those kids.

And I also want us to help these kids who are doing great things.

So and I want them to continue to be able to do great things and continue to move forward in their lives.

So I I want to say that because I don't want anybody leaving here thinking that these are future, these are criminals and we are saying.

And I think these good kids trying to do what they try to do.

All right.

Next, um, can somebody I I received a little message, and I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything.

Um somebody explain the make sure that you you're explaining it to me, but you're also explaining it to the audience and thinks I missed something.

The grocery tax, what it can be used for.

The grocery tax?

Yeah.

So uh a couple of things.

One, just for record, since we're explaining things, we do have a focused deterrence prevent uh intervention program for those individuals who have been committed of a crime that we are working to rehabilitate and make sure that we get them on the right track.

It's the program that Alderman Salgado mentioned.

We actually fund half of it at the city of Rockford, the county funds the other half.

As for the grocery tax.

Thank you for that clarification.

Absolutely.

Yeah, as for the grocery tax.

Uh historically, the state of Illinois collected the groceries tax and took a percentage of those dollars, uh, and then remitted it back to municipalities.

Most recently, they did away with that and said cities, if you collect it, you have to collect it on your own.

Uh and so we do that.

Uh those dollars go into our general fund to fund our general operations at the city of Rockford.

So, including public works, finance staff, uh HR staff, IT staff, every staff member that we have that is not on uh what we would call like an enterprise fund basis.

So uh water department is an enterprise fund, it makes money uh it sells water, makes money and funds the staff that does those operations.

So that's nothing that we could amend and use for item number four.

So any dollar going into the general fund you can amend to use for other items.

Uh but when you take something from the general fund, uh let's say i.e.

622,000, you need to find $622,000 of either revenue or cuts to make that fund hold.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yep.

All right.

Started with eight, down to three.

Uh we have items two, three, and four before us.

Any last discussion?

Seeing no last discussion.

Clerk, please.

Please call the roll.

I am two, no one three and four.

If you know no on four, I on the rest.

Aye on two and three, no on four.

Aye.

I have these aye.

Item number two, high, number three, and all item number four, eight, I screen.

Excellent.

If you're keeping track, we're gonna be able to vote on all three of those three items yet again later this evening.

Uh, we're gonna move to code and regulation committee alderman logan.

Fifteen items tonight.

Code and regulation, committee recommends sustaining the traffic commission's approval requiring the traffic on 13th Avenue be required to yield prior to entering the intersection of 17th Street.

Item number two, committee recommends sustaining the traffic commission's approval requiring traffic on 14th Street to yield prior to entering intersection 10th Avenue.

Item number three, committee recommends sustaining traffic commission's approval for a restriction prohibiting commercial vehicles on Guildford Road from Prospect Street to Alpine Road.

A request to establish a four-way stop control at the intersection of Fayton Drive and Wagonet Drive.

Item B request to establish stock control at the intersection of Pioneer Drive in Windthrop Wayne.

Item C request to establish traffic control at the intersection of Wisconsin Avenue and Holland Street.

Item number five.

Committee recommends denial of the annexation agreement for 14XX 15XX and 16XX Edson Road and portion of 8631 11th Street.

Item number seven committee recommends denial of the zoning map amendment from County AG to I3.

Airport Industrial Zoning District at 14XX, 15XX, and 16XX Edson Road and a portion of 8631 11th Street.

Thus reversing ZBA's recommendation of approval.

Item number eight committee recommends sustaining the zoning board of appeals approval for a variation to reduce the required front yard setback from 30 feet to 20 feet and five inches in an R1 single family residential zoning district at 252 length, subject to conditions.

Item number nine, committee recommends sustaining the zoning board of appeals approval for a zoning map amendment from R1 single family residential zoning district to C2, limited commercial zoning district at 8539 East State Street, subject to conditions.

Item number 10, committee recommends denial of sale of tobacco products in conjunction with the tobacco store of the C4 Urban Mixed Use District at 714 Broadway, thus reversing the liquor and tobacco advisory board's recommendation for approval.

Item number 11, committee recommends sustaining the liquor and tobacco advisory board's approval for A.

Sale of Liquor Like B, sale of package liquor liquor in conjunction with a cafe, restaurant, and bar in a C4 Urban Mix Use Zoning District at 501 East State Street, subject to conditions.

Item 12, committee recommends sustaining the liquor and tobacco advisory board's approval for modification of an existing liquor license to include liquor by the drink with video gaming terminals in conjunction with the restaurant banquet hall and a C1 limited office zoning district, C2, limited commercial zoning district, and C3, General Commercial Zoning District at 6075 East Riverside Wilbur, subject to conditions.

Item number 13, committee recommends denial of A, sale of package liquor, and B sale of tobacco products in conjunction with the liquor store in a C2 limited commercial zoning district at 922 Kilburn Avenue, thus reversing the liquor and tobacco advisory board's recommendation for approval.

Item number 14.

Committee recommends sustaining the liquor and tobacco advisory board's approval for sale of liquor by the drink in conjunction with a restaurant in an I-1 light industrial zoning district at 3222 and 3208.

South Alpine Road subject to conditions.

And finally, item number 15.

Committee recommends denial for the sale of beer and wine by the drink in conjunction with a restaurant and video gaming terminals in a C2 limited commercial zoning district at 754 Walton Street, thus reversing the liquor and tobacco advisory board's recommendation for approval.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Alderman Logman.

Uh Council, we have 15 items before us.

Is there any uh discussion on those 15 items?

Mayor.

Alderman Bell.

Thank you.

I moved to reverse uh the committee's recommendation from denial to approval for the sale of tobacco products in conjunction with the tobacco so a 714 proper.

What number is that?

Item two, thank you.

What number is that?

No, ten.

Okay.

So we have a motion.

We have a second, I believe I heard.

So we have a motion and a second.

Is there any discussion on moving that denial to an approval?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed.

Okay.

You said no.

Okay, thank you, Alderman.

Uh Alderman Bell.

Thank you.

I move to reverse the committee's recommendation from denial to approval for the sale of package liquor and tobacco products in conjunction with a liquor store at 922 Kilburn Avenue.

What number are you referring to?

Sorry.

13.

Okay, we have a motion.

Is there a second?

Second.

We have a second.

All those in favor say aye.

Those opposed?

No.

One no.

Uh all right.

Alderman Bell.

Thank you.

I move to reverse the committee's recommendation from denial to approval for the sale of beer and wine in conjunction with the restaurant and video gaming terminals at uh 7054 Walton Street.

That will be item 15.

We have a motion.

Is there a second?

Second.

We have a motion.

We have a second.

Is there any discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Okay.

Those opposed?

No.

One no.

Any others, Alderman Bell?

No.

Alderman meets.

Yeah, just to stay aligned with my previous commentary on the project area.

I'd like to make a motion to lay over items five, six, and seven.

So items five, six, and seven have been laid over.

Thank you.

Down to twelve items.

Any other discussion?

So council, you have 12 items before you, items 10, 13, and 15 have been amended.

Is there any uh uh final discussion seeing no discussion?

Clerk, please call the roll eight.

All right, Ross, aye.

Julian Noah.

13 and 15.

I have the list.

All right.

Aye.

Aye.

Meet aye.

No one, ten, thirteen, and fifteen.

Item ten is nine times, two notes, eleven, twelve, eleven eyes, item thirteen, nine times, two, eleven ayes, item 15, nine, item two.

Thank you.

Next, we're gonna go to finance and personnel committee and alderman frost.

Number one, the committee recommends approval vouch of the amount of 15 million four hundred and eighty thousand five hundred and seventy-one dollars and forty-eight cents as approved at the finance and personnel committee meeting held on June 22nd, 2026.

Number two, the committee recommends approval of lean reduction requests from Z Financials release liens on various properties from 1987 2017 in the total of 15,495 and 50 cents on payment for 10,000 dollars.

Number three, the committee recommends approval of a memorandum of appeal with asking local one zero five eight regarding financial incentives for telecommunicators.

Number four, the committee recommends approval of an item in the city of Rockford Rock Housing Authority in amount to determine per weatherized scattered site unit.

The agreement is not required cost match.

The agreement term is from the trimmer, the date of execution with a potential one year extension.

I places full match before you thank you, council.

Four items before you any discussion, alder woman meets.

Thank you so much.

Um question for item number two.

Um are there any assurances that we have in place to kind of not run into this situation again?

I noticed there's a long gap where this um these properties were not in compliance, and I appreciate the negotiating to get to that ten thousand dollar uh mark.

I'm just a little concerned back here with this individual.

Um I can't recall uh did you mention last week that they're intending to sell these item or these homes?

Mr.

Kegnoni.

So uh thank you, and Alderwoman.

Uh we have been advised by the owner that that is their intention to sell the sell the properties.

Okay, I mean, are they on like a watch list to make sure that they don't fall back into or out of compliance considering they have such a strong history of doing that?

I would I mean I wouldn't characterize it as a watch list, but you know, I certainly want to make sure that they conform to the the agreement that we have where the properties will remain in compliance.

All right, I appreciate that.

Um, and then item number three.

Um I'm just curious, how does this memorandum of agreement differ from the incentive that was offered to Health and Human Services?

Chief Tayo first, and then maybe for uh I don't have the background on the incentive offered for adulthood services, so I can't speak to that.

But do you want to begin by speaking on this and then I'll go over to Director Farham?

How we we see it um in our 911 center, we have um a certain level of staffing staffing on the axony side.

We have been short staffed for quite some time despite our efforts.

It just takes a long time to get people hired trained, and we can only hire so many at a time to train so many at a time.

Um and so heading into July and um August, we we recognize it might be short staffed here on a few occasions.

We have um 10 positions that are open, and so working with finance and legal and HR to see what we have within our operational budget to be able to incentivize individuals um who are already working over time and already working hard to just um uh incentivize not calling in sick, maybe um if they if they don't need to or um using other time offered those incentives um to be able to show up on the regular regularly scheduled work shift um just to get us through these busy months and we can get some more people trained uh onto the floor.

And what is the estimated cost?

So we budgeted um within this uh our operational budget to have about 64,000.

If everybody were to not call in and everybody were to um you know take the incentive, uh, and that is within the budget work requirements.

I think so much.

Director Parham, could you touch on how your uh program was yeah?

So let me ask a question first.

Um I know we did are you asking about the incentive acts that we had earlier issue, or would we have one uh over a year ago that more specifically related to attendance?

I think I'm speaking, yes.

I'm speaking of the one earlier that related to a tent.

Okay.

Um so um the agreement that we had um around attendance was at is all stacked that actually mimics the agreement uh RPS had with their that's on Paris um and maybe but it was if all staff had perfect dependence during um and uh paper they they were it received as a bonus in the location that was it continually lingering beyond the candidate, but indicates what the district had already occurred.

And do you happen to recall what the cost was for that incentive by change?

I do not know I believe it was 250 dollars cost okay.

Thank you.

Any other uh discussion or questions?

Alderman Frost.

With regard to uh to number two, was Z Financial the owner of these properties?

Yes, probably Sprung 87 through 2017.

Yes.

Thank you.

Any other discussion?

Clerk, please call the roll.

I no one to either major aye.

No one to I on a remainder granite.

Aye.

So that uh one two three non-four number one, ten I do eight eyes, two those, I have three, ten eyes, and four, nine.

Thank you.

Next, we're gonna go to unfinished business.

We'll go to code and regulation committee and alderman Logan.

One item in front of us, uh item number one committee recommends sustaining the zoning board of appeals approval for a special use permit for planned unit development for an RV and fifth wheel only community in an R1 single family residential zoning district at 2530, 2710, and 2720 South Main Street, subject to conditions.

Thank you.

Alder Woman Tarina.

Um perhaps I'll provide some more context because this is a I'm gonna be making a motion, um, but I want to explain what the motion is because your crib sheet is just a bit vague.

Um so we've talked about this item many times, and the the residents are obviously very concerned about having to leave their homes.

Um, and we I have empathize with them for that.

They did send over a request wanting some additional assistance from the developer of the RV park.

Um they're asked, they asked for 450,000 in relocation.

Um, the developer is able to do, they were at 175,000.

They're willing to come up 10,000 more to provide a total package of 185,000, um, which would be the initial offer was 4500, they did go up 25 percent to a total of 5,625 dollars, and so the condition that we're asking to be put into the special use per special use permit is that the applicant shall provide a relocation assistance program to offer support for existing residents for the property transition use, and the program will consist of a one-time payment of $5,625 for each lease site that she wants to voluntarily relocate within 90 days of accepting the offer.

So the motion that I'm making is to amend the conditions of the approval to include this condition number 11, which would be spot though, so I just read it, and that they must comply within the relocation plan data June 29th, 2026.

And that's what I just read.

Thank you.

We have a motion, is there a second?

We have a motion, we have a second.

Is there any discussion on the item before us?

Alderman Bell.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Um I I did not catch that last maybe three two or three sentences, um, just due to the microphone not.

Can you correct me if I'm wrong?

Uh I believe uh Alder Woman Trina stated that the relocation has gone from $4500 to $5,625 to those residents who relocate within 90 days.

Within 90 days of accepting the uh I believe that's it.

Thank you.

Um I guess I'll ask a question that I've asked before.

Do we believe that we have enough housing stock to uh for these individuals to potentially move into here in the city of Brockford that that's affordable?

Uh Mr.

Cagnoni or uh Miss Heinrich uh I don't have the availability of the units, Alderman Bell.

Uh, as I told you the last time you asked, I I don't have that, but I'll ask staff if they happen to have it.

You know, thank you, Your Honor Alderman.

Similar to my last uh you know response.

There are available housing units uh within the city of Rockford.

Um, certainly aligning cost points.

Uh we have available housing units is you know an issue that needs to be resolved.

I don't know if uh financial um information related to all the residents of how those would apply.

Any other uh maybe in a little bit, but you can okay.

Any other discussion?

Alderman Durkey.

Thank you.

My understanding is um a lot of these um mobile homes are bought and paid for in good shape, but cannot be moved.

Um so basically they went and did all this in an R1 zoning, and we're flipping the zoning underneath a resident.

This is a hard one for me.

I'm not I'm not so sure I could be supportive of that.

Uh these folks uh the the mobile homes have value.

The owner of the property do ahead of time, you know, all the stuff, and he wants to flip the zoning and remove them and do something else.

Rather see the owner work on some kind of compromise with the city to keep part of it, R1 and part of RV.

It's a tough one for me.

I can't support what we're doing here.

Is there any other uh discussion?

Alder Woman Torino.

Um, from my understanding it was not it's a zoning change, then it's a special use permit.

So the what I'm looking at is older owners that want to sell this property and have wanted to sell it for a long time.

The opportunity came forward to do so, and so that's what they want to do.

Now we're dealing with yes, displacement, um, which is very difficult.

So that's why it was important to listen to make sure that they knew that the city did offer some services to help with that.

Um this is a tough one because there are two sides to the story.

Um there isn't just one side, there's a lot of information that is being given about what's happening to the property currently.

Um I don't even know if I need to be public about some of the things that I'm that I know.

Um I wish I could have some private conversations because I don't want to say anything derogatory towards anyone in this because it's it's hard for all sides.

Um but for me, I guess I'm just looking at it in terms of the developer is offering something.

No, it's not ideally what we want to see, but they don't have to offer anything.

Um that makes it difficult.

Um the call the current owners, they don't have to offer anything either, and they're not.

I know that that was a desire was to see the current owners offer something, but they're they're not.

I'm just trying to think of any pieces of this puzzle that I could try and fill in from just what I know from having spoken to lawyers on both sides.

I think I sort of put in the middle of it, um, which I didn't necessarily want to be in the middle of it, but I guess I'm looking at individuals that want to sell their property, and why can we legally say that they cannot do that?

Um, and I understand again the people part is important to me, and that we're not denying that, but at the end of the day, I'm just looking, I have to I and at the end of the day for me, I had to look at the issue at hand, which was the person wants to sell their property and wants to get a special use permit, and the zoning board didn't have an issue with it, city staff didn't have an issue with it, so I didn't I could not come up with a sound enough reason to say no when I had all of those factors in front of me.

So that is why I am making the decision to support it with this package.

Thank you.

Council, we have one item before us, Alderman Bell.

Uh thank you, Your Honor.

I too would have so do we know.

I mean, Mr.

McNaughty, maybe this is for you, but I'll address it to the chair.

Do we know?

Should this special use permit that this developers come in before the city council to get approved?

If it's not approved, do we know if that developer will continue to maybe pursue the purchase the property, but maybe have an alternative business plan or uh will this developer then walk away with this buyer then walk away and it would remain the same in the same hands.

Thank you, Mr.

Cagnoni.

So that's a little bit difficult to predict, so I can certainly share what we understand and what's been represented to us by the applicant.

Um the applicant stated that they worked in good faith to come up with the relocation dollars for the individuals that are there, but have stated that they're on their back.

So the special use permit would be denied.

I would anticipate that they would not move forward with the acquisition of the property.

Um their proposed plan is to transition from the existing, you know, non-conforming use to a conforming use at this location.

You know, this property was annexed, or I should say this property developed you know decades ago outside the city of Rockford, was later annexed into the city of Rockford, um, and never followed the what would be the typical city of Rockford development standards in regards to the overall infrastructure improvements and the establishment of mobile homes in the floodway and floodplain.

So the the development is non-conforming.

Over time, there's been you know deterioration of certain mobile homes, they've been removed.

Um, certainly there are a number of mobile homes that are still there that could be re-relocated, and so looking back to your question, whether this individual would buy it or not, I don't know.

I understand that he would not pursue it.

You know, whether the current owners would then follow the state statute and still you know advance the relocation or eviction of those individuals and then resell it at a future point.

I don't know.

All those are hypotheticals that could or could not happen.

It's just difficult to fully predict.

But part of the reason staff recommended approval and ultimately the zoning board of appeals was bringing us towards uh conformance uh with our zoning ordinance and the level of investment that what's going to take place on the site.

Thank you.

I just said I think uh at least my colleagues know where I stand on this.

Uh IMA no I won't belabor it, I think what I will say is uh this is this is just for me on an unacceptable uh item to come before us as an as a suggestive uh approval.

Thank you.

Thanks.

All the wrong frontie.

Thank you.

Um I've never moved a home.

Um cost 20,000 in the trailer.

Okay, thank you.

That's good my question.

All right, so you all can hear me.

I guess I was just wondering like how how much does it cost to move a home?

And then I just heard that it costs 20,000 to move a home.

You know, are there places where you can just move a home too?

Uh Mr.

Cagnoni.

Do you know if there's other places within Winnebago County that individuals couldn't move to?

So there are other mobile or manufactured home subdivisions within Winneva County, um, whether it's you know feasible for them to relocate and you know, into those subdivisions.

I don't know the answer to that.

Um thank you.

So if they take it, they get five times 5,625.

They don't take it, if they don't sign up, does that mean that they get nothing?

My understanding, and please staff correct me if I'm wrong.

Um, my understanding was I believe they have up until a year, they have a year to ultimately move.

And if they choose a shorter time period, they're incentivized to choose that shorter time period with uh the $5,625.

Staff, am I getting that accurate?

Yes.

So we have housing stock.

Uh how many families did you say it was?

Uh Director or Mr.

Cagnoni.

Number of total families.

It's just under 40.

90 days is commonplace.

From when they sign that agreement.

Okay.

Oh man.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Frost Alderman Frost.

Thank you.

Uh I said a question for legal.

Since the ZBA and staff have recommended approval of it of an SUP, and I agree with several of my colleagues that this I find this very disheartening.

Um besides the alternative of the of the buyer walking in the way of we as a city might this was denied.

Do we stand um untroubled bar with respect to uh you know future litigation for denying the basis?

So I I think there were enough chapters in the back of the app that was any one of the support basis of denying sign levels in strengths that have been raised.

And then I I don't know which who wants to answer this, but uh if if this was to be approved, uh is there any help that the city of Rockford can do to these 40 families with respect to uh helping them find alternative housing uh which we passed a lot of dollars around here, and I'm just curious is do we have anyone or specific department of content, someone that can help these folks be relocated?

Thank you.

Alderman Ross, um, we were at the table with um Alderman's remote and she might release residents, and we did talk about the services that healthy human services can potentially provide to them via our relocation assistance that we offer.

However, again, that is contingent upon there being um housing that is available.

There are so many factors to consider.

Um are some of the most affordable housing in our community.

So the reality is someone relocating from one of those spaces to somewhere else just because there's an apartment available.

What is that?

If they cannot afford it, or if there are folks that are unwilling to income, uh what we're seeing and the services we provide, many more are provided, um are requiring three times the amount of someone's income in order for them to move in with the deposit and first month's rent at that time.

So the the cost can get very absorbable.

So there are some resources that we do have available, but um it would not it does not meet the the full spectrum of their needs with regard to you know cost related to moving a trailer, whether whether a trailer is in the condition that it can move, whether or not that person works quite a bit of our resources may also be contingent upon that person's specific situation.

So someone who does work and they have income, they're eligible for a different type of assistance than someone who doesn't and it's on disability, so it's not just it's not black and white across the board for every situation, it would differ based on based on each individual um.

But we have the capacity to sit down with each individual owner of of a manufactured home or family and offer them advice and consult them on ways to pivot, or do we know somewhat, yes, and we've offered that, but we have not uh those requests have not come to us in that we have offered to meet with them to let them know what resources are available to identify what their situations are to potentially help with a password, but of course that was not a guarantee.

Um, and then also we are at the time um of the year when our state grants run out on June 30th, prior to the start.

So as a matter of fact, as of today right now, we are not offering rental assistance because what we had has been exhausted and funds will not be available until after July.

So we get replenished after you replenish after that just one last question.

If if the if the owners of the manufacturer homes, I think Mr.

Cagnoni mentioned it, they decide not to take the deal.

I believe it's by state statute um that if they're uh served with an eviction notice that they can possibly pull this up because they can stay there for uh for 12 months.

So I'm gonna give me information on that.

Is that accurate, Mr.

Cagnoni?

That is correct.

There's a state statute that regulates uh relocation and it is 12 month notice.

Thank you.

Alder Woman meets.

Well, thank you.

I just have a question out of curiosity.

Is it possible for us as a city to set aside funds to provide either loans or forgivable loans for these particular situations?

Um I don't know how that would really work out, but just it's a thought that just came to me.

Is that something that we are uh able to do?

I think the and correct me, team.

I think the answer is legally yes, we are able to do so.

Probably has to have a couple of different factors, like where are they moving?

Are they moving into moving into another place in Rockford?

Right, a lot of different factors, but I I think if unless I'm wrong, I think technically legally able to, I think the answer would be yes.

Okay, and if we were to do something like that, what fund would staff suggest it come from?

I'm looking at time.

I mean, my thought off the top of my head is we would need some time to figure that out.

Um just off the cuff, but Mr.

Kagnoni, do you have any thoughts?

Well, I want to work with Director Parham.

I mean um, you know, clearly city council had authorized you know $300,000 recently of unrestricted funds that her department could use that would be an eligible item uh that could help with relocation costs.

I'm sure she has ideas on how to use that dollar, so I wouldn't have our uh and would concur with the mayor, you know, could there be other opportunities, whether that be casino funds or other to help if it was you know this was an area in which city council was going to uh approve.

Just a question out of curiosity, thank you for answering woman printy.

Thank you.

Um you talked about the eviction process, and it's 12 months.

Can you just evict someone if they are how would that work?

I didn't know you could just I I thought that they had to be a reason for eviction and that was non-payment, or they director Hammer you're still paying.

So if I understand a license for last space at the location cash, so typically the contract it it's it's usually for a period of one year that the expiration of the year, but it's not going to be just month tomorrow.

So typically um you could uh give it someone on the month month notice, just make a basic account notice as required under the month lease.

Um in this instance there's a specific statute for the relocation that provides the year for that case with the statute.

So if they take this they have a potential meeting five thousand dollars plus if they don't take it in twelve months, they could still just be actually okay.

Council, uh we have one item before us.

Is there any discussion on the one item?

Alderman Frost.

I'd like to turn the written motion to use up the 200,000 dollars of casino funds to assist in qualified relocation.

So we would need uh hold up we would need it in writing, so Alderman Frost is gonna now walk it over.

Uh while he does that, would I have this council's permission to continue on with our agenda because our team will need to type up something, then you all will want to debate it again.

Uh I'm guessing.

Uh and so if I have your permission to do a stay on the item that we have and move forward with the rest of the agenda.

Is there anyone who objects?

Okay, director Hammer.

We need a both sides of motions before the diaspora.

You're a very smart person.

I appreciate you.

So we need a sorry.

I just want to make sure I'm accurate.

He's going to be providing a motion to amend.

I know he did, but he also didn't have it in writing to everyone.

But there's still a motion to amend by Alderman, should we have that as an assignment?

Oh my gosh.

I'm sorry, we've been debating and debating.

So first and foremost, we have a motion on the floor right now to bring those dollars uh as Alder Woman Torina stated up to 5,625.

Yes, sir.

That motion is before us right now.

Uh and so we need to vote on that, and then we can do a state and bring in the other dollars that Alderman Frost was discussing.

You sure can so 250,000 dollars 35 homes is 7,142.

Yep.

Plus maybe $5,000.

Yeah.

So they're still gonna have to come up with that $8,000, $9,000.

If they were to move it, yes, based on the cost that was mentioned from the audience, yes.

So if they don't choose the move, right?

And they get the five thousand, then they get the seven thousand.

I still would get the seven thousand too.

I mean, what is the what?

I mean, we have to determine all of that.

We have not had that discussion.

Okay, thank you.

So we have one item before us, the five thousand six hundred and twenty-five dollar is before us.

Is there any further discussion on that one amendment?

Clerk, please call the roll on just that amendment.

This is an older woman Terina's amendment up to five thousand six hundred and twenty five dollars.

Ross, uh granny, aye.

So that ten minutes.

Okay.

So now we have that.

Do I have your permission to continue on with the agenda and come back once we have this all typed up and in front of them?

Is there anyone who objects to that?

Excellent.

Next, we're appointments are laid over through uh after our meeting after July 1st.

We'll go to motions and resolutions.

We'll go to planning and development committee.

An alderman Durkey.

Thank you, Your Honor.

There's one item.

Uh committee recommends approval of the spaces to place this program, which is intended to reduce commercial vacancies and support small business growth by providing temporary rent assistance for new or expanding businesses.

City will reimburse security deposits and 50% of rent for 12 months for total funding level up to 20,000 per business.

The program will have uh $300,000 designated from the 2026 and 2027 casino funds.

So this is up for passion.

Okay.

We have uh one item before us.

Any discussion on that one item?

Alderman Toonberg.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh I would make a motion to lay this over.

We have a motion to lay it over.

Is there a second?

Second.

We have a second.

It's laid over.

Next.

Great.

This is the oh, I'm sorry.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We have a motion.

We have a second.

Uh is there any discussion on the layover?

Clerk, will you please call the roll on the layover?

Aye.

Nay.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Alder one fronty.

All right.

No.

So out.

No.

Aye.

Items laid over.

Uh next, we're going to go to code and regulation committee.

Alderman Logan.

One item.

Committee recommends approval of the request for authorization to allow the zoning officer to file text amendments for multiple sections of the zoning ordinance.

Proposed sex amendments zoning ordinance, table 20-1, Article 20-005 C, Table 21-1, Article 30-004, Article 35, Article 50-003, Article 50-016, and Article 80-003.

Places substitute approval.

Thank you.

Council, is there any discussion on the one item before us?

Seeing no discussion, Clerk, please call the roll.

Aye.

Aye.

Cross?

Aye.

Aye.

So guys.

Aye.

Next we'll go to finance and personnel committee alderman frost.

Thank you, Honor.

Number one, the committee recommends approval of the Board of District City Yards.

Wash bay drain replacement repairs to DPI construction amount of 118,630.

This is the one-time project, the funding source of the property fund.

Number two, the committee recommends approval of Board of Bid for Rails to Trails, Rock River Shoreline Repair to Copenhager construction in the amount of 570,580-46.

The contract raises through October 16, 2026.

The funding source is 1% different structure sales tax.

Number three, the committee recommends approval of one of the knockets of the contract for the purchase of two police vehicles to rock and report in the amount of $52,322 and 26 cents.

This is a one-time purchase of the funding sources of state drug asset to form Mr.

Folks.

Number five, the committee recommends approval of the authorization issued by request for proposals for the development of eight townhome units at 9664 Fourth Street.

Number six, the committee recommends approval of the authorization to issue a request for proposed for architectural design services to develop a minimum of three single family residential design templates for a new residential infill program.

I place these six matters before you.

Council, six items before you.

Any discussion on those six items?

Clerk, please call the roll.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

No in four, I on the rest.

Items one through three, ten, I said, and four, nine, nice, one, five, and six.

Next we'll go to new business and we'll go to code and regulation committee and alderman locate.

We have 13 items in front of us with items four, five, and six being laid over.

Item number one, an ordinance requiring that traffic on 13th Avenue be required to yield prior to entering the intersection of 17th Street.

Item number two, an ordinance requiring traffic at 14th Street to yield prior to entering the intersection of 10th Avenue.

Item number three, an ordinance approving a restriction prohibiting commercial vehicles on Guilford Road from Prospect Street to Alpine Road.

Skipping to item number seven, an ordinance approving a variation to reduce the required front yard setback from 30 feet to 20 feet and five inches in an R1 single family residential zoning district at 2520 to Driftwood Lane.

Item number eight, an ordinance approving a zoning map amendment from R1 single family residential zoning district to C2 limited commercial zoning district at 8539 East State Street.

Item number nine was reversed to approve an ordinance related to the sale of tobacco products in conjunction with the tobacco store in a C4 urban mixed use district at 714 Broadway.

Item number 10, an ordinance approving the sale of liquor by the drink and the sale of packaged liquor in conjunction with a cafe, restaurant, and bar in a C4 urban mixed use zoning district at 501 East State Street.

Item number 11, an ordinance approving the modification of an existing liquor license to include liquor by the drink with video gaming terminals in conjunction with a restaurant and banquet hall in a C1 limited office zoning district, C2 limited commercial zoning district, and C3 General Commercial Zoning District at 6075 use for recycling over.

Item number 12, an ordinance related to the sale of packaged liquor in conjunction with a liquor store in a C2 limited commercial zoning district at 922 Kilburn Avenue.

Item number 13 was a uh reverse in the affirmative an ordinance related to the sale of tobacco products in conjunction with a liquor store in a C2 limited commercial zoning district at 922 Kilburn Avenue.

Item number 14, an ordinance approving the sale of liquor by the drink in conjunction with a restaurant in an I-1 light industrial zoning district at 3222 and 3208 South Alpine Road.

Item number 15 was also reversed in the affirmative reading an ordinance related to the sale of beer and wine by the drink in conjunction with a restaurant and video game terminals in a C2 limited commercial zoning district at 7054 Walton Street.

Finally, item number 16, an ordinance approving the special use permit for a planned unit development for an RV and fifth wheel only community in an R1 single family residential zoning district at 2530 2710 and 2720 South Main Street.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Council, there's 16 items.

Is there anyone who objects to me just briefly holding item 16 so we can discuss items one through 15, and then we will come back and discuss 16, but we'll do it under a different section with the amendment that Alderman Frost has provided.

Is there an objection to that?

Okay.

So we have 15 items before us or 15 items before us.

Is there any discussion?

Uh Mayorman Bell.

Oh, thank you.

Mayor think item four, five, and six, and held out or lay over.

They were laid over.

Items four, five, six were laid over.

These are the only ones I can see that were laid over.

Okay.

Any discussion on the items that are up for a vote?

No discussion.

Clerk, please call the roll.

Aye.

Aye.

Ross.

Aye.

No one nine, twelve, thirteen, and fifteen.

Aye on the rest.

Aye.

So now nine, twelve, thirteen, fifteen.

I underrust.

Thank you.

I'm gonna keep going unless there's an objection and we can come back to that item that'll have, I'm guessing, quite a bit of discussion.

Alderman Durke.

Sorry, Your Honor.

Under uh new business.

Um, we skipped over that, I believe.

Did I do that?

Planning development.

Probably has an older agenda where we had code of racks first and I don't see that I missed it.

Did I?

I think called it to the ESP, but can any development it was on the previous agenda?

So the comment development is second.

Planning and development is up next.

It was flipped in order.

Okay.

My apologies to you.

Alderman.

Yeah.

So now we are on new business, planning and development.

Alderman Durkey.

All right.

Thank you, Renna.

Sorry about that.

Thank you.

There are three items.

Number two, an ordinance approving a grant of easement to Commonwealth Edison for city owned property located at 850 South Forest Avenue in Rockford, Illinois.

Property index numbers 11-21-377-03.

And uh number three, an ordinance related to the funding agreement with comprehensive community solutions to expand prevention and intervention program in collaboration with the city of Rockford's community healing center in the amount of 400,000.

The funding source is Canvas Funds.

An ordinance related to funding agreement with Angelic Learning Center Incorporated in Illinois not for profit corporation doing business as farmers rising in partnership with City Center Market for the establishment of a mobile grocery store in the amount of $622,000.

Funding source is $300,000, cannabis, cannabis, and uh $322,000 from the casino funds.

These are up for final passage.

Thank you.

Council, we have three items before us.

Any discussion on those three items?

Clerk, please call the roll.

I am two, no one three and four.

Aye.

Super?

All right.

Frost.

Aye.

Terina, no on four I am the rest.

No on four.

Granted.

Aye.

So that's aye.

Bell.

Which number?

Oh, aye.

Sure.

Excellent.

Next we're going to finance and personnel committee, Alderman Frost.

Number one is an ordinance approving a lien reduction request from Z financial for these lines on various properties and curvature.

1987 to 2017.

Number two is an ordinance approving a memorandum agreement with ASCII local 1058 regarding financial incentives to telecommunicators.

Number three is ordinance approving an intergovernmental agreement for the city and rock for housing forty.

An amount to be determined for whether I scattered site unit.

The agreement does not require a cost batch.

The agreement term is from the date of the execution of the potential one-year extension.

Council, three items before you.

Any discussion on those three items?

Clerk, please call the roll.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

So that one and two, no one three.

And one nine IO and two to nine three nine nine.

Thank you.

Okay.

We are going back to Roman numeral seven unfinished business and going to B code and regulation committee.

That item has been amended to reflect correct me, Alderman Torina.

I believe it's $5,625 for relocation assistance.

That has already approved.

We now have one item before us.

An alderman frost motion was motion to use up to up to $200,000 of casino funds to assist in you are an attorney.

believe it's five thousand six hundred and twenty-five dollars uh for relocation assistance that has already approved we now have one item before us and alderman frost motion was motion to use up to up to two hundred thousand dollars of casino funds to assist in you are you are an attorney uh I can it was an attorney or doctor's handwriting uh qualified relocation funds is that accurate that's correct and I apologize did we have a second on his motion okay uh we have one motion up before you is there a second on that motion second we have a second on that motion so council we have uh one item before you alderman toomberg thank you mayor uh I think that we all here on council have that uh have that uh a sense of sympathy for this situation um you know I I think with the casino funds and we talk about economic development uh various various uh ways that we use this funding I think this area here uh you know could be considered economic developments in a floodplain uh it's going to be used for a different purpose but uh in regards to being sympathetic to the situations I think it's a unique situation in the sense that this is a property that is owned by a private entity an individual in this case uh but these manufactured homes are very unique in the situation in that they don't own the land but they own the dwelling that they're living in so you know I think in in good condition I don't know I I just heard 20,000 I've heard other numbers at much less than that if they're in good condition but if they're in not in so good condition yes that I've heard that it's just not possible to move move these units so uh I know that we frequently on council floor are we have money coming through this chamber via grants most of the time that we're giving low income utility assistance low income rental assistance uh on a very regular basis these individuals are individuals who have worked uh and are are you know just in a in a unique situation like I said owning their dwelling but not the property it sits on um so these are individuals that have worked hard to where they get where they've gotten um and feeling like they've had the rug pulled out from under them I would feel comfortable as a city uh I know that this is a process that the that is being taken through the legal channels uh and yes I I can feel sympathetic to an owner who said who thinks you know I can't I can't sell my property uh that I want to sell I mean there is a basis to that at the same time these owners of these units uh these manufactured homes I think have a uh are in a very precarious situation so I would feel comfortable in looking at using some of our casino dollars in the form of uh economic development uh for this property and going to these individuals uh I think you would probably total correct me uh around 12 eleven five just over twelve when I did the math when I uh I think that would assist in moving some of these units if they are movable if they are not movable uh that there possibly is some other of these manufactured home parks around the area that this would uh help in a nice down pavement uh for another home but nonetheless whatever however they decide to use those funds I think this would would immensely help those individuals thank you thank you alder woman Torina do we have can we lay this over the not the whole thing being laid over not the whole the whole thing but I don't know I guess unlike because there's a lot of stipulations and things that we need to try and bet in this because there's a lot of different situations here like we have to make sure that people are not behind on rent we need to make sure that's some people don't some people own and something not there's a lot of can we just can we lay that over and discuss this piece later so director hammer uh what would be your suggestion and I alder woman Trina correct me if I'm wrong I want to make sure I get what I think you want done done um is there a way to move forward with the overarching item that included the amendment of the 5,625 dollars lay over the amendment for up to 200,000 so that we could have some sort of process or defining even of what qualified means that staff could come back to this body uh and say this is what we

Um is there a way to move forward with the overarching item that included the amendment of the $5,625?

Lay over the amendment for up to 200,000 so that we could have some sort of process or defining even of what qualified means that staff could come back to this body uh and say this is what we came up with based on the input so that we could provide more assistance to these residents.

What will if am I getting what you're yeah?

And I'm I'm asking that because again, there's two sides to every story.

The other piece of this is that yes, I I believe that there's a total, maybe I don't know what the number is, it's 35 or 40 families.

Not all of those individuals will be taking the package.

There are some individuals that have some deals set up to get apartments and warnings and things like that, and we're holding up that process too by continuous delay this item.

So it's like it's it's a lot of things on the stands.

So I'm just trying to see if we could get a decision made.

So we just need to make one.

Director Hank.

My recommendation is that we you all across the motion and to be set aside $200,000 casino funds to assist in qualified location costs and standalone item rather than tie it to a commission calendar to a stand pattern.

So that's properly.

Okay.

So with that being said, my understanding what you're saying is vote on the amended item B1.

And I believe on the 13th, we have committees, and we could shoot for having Alderman Frost's amendment come before that committee.

Right.

And do I need um Alderman Frost's approval to do that?

I would recommend that you assess a submittional order.

Is that okay?

Is that okay?

I want to make sure we're working on both of this.

Okay.

Uh so we have one item before us, item B1.

Is there any discussion on that one item?

I did have other people who wanted to speak, but I don't, I had Alder Woman Prunty, Alder Woman Meeks, but I'm guessing it was on the amendment.

On the amendment.

Okay.

All right.

I just don't want to skip you over.

All right, so we have one item before us, and then we will come back on the 13th to have the second part of this discussion.

Uh so we have one item before us that has been amended up to $5,625.

Is there any discussion on that one item?

Clerk, could you please call the roll?

No.

Two or granted?

No.

So that means I said it's a good thing.

So now we go forward to new business ordinances under code and regulation.

Item 16.

So council, we have one item before us, item 16 that has been amended, and to which we will come back and add to it on the 13th.

Uh is there any discussion on that one item?

Clerk, please call the roll.

No, no.

No.

We're voting on those.

Wait, so y'all are switching all these votes now.

It's making me concerned.

So I want to be clear.

And votes are fine, however, they want to vote.

Um maybe I'm doing it wrong.

I want to make sure I'm doing it accurately.

Item 16, which is the same item we just voted on, the RV and fifth wheel only community in uh R1 single family residential zoning district at 2530, 2710, and 2720 South Main Street, which has been amended to include the five thousand up to or the five thousand six hundred and twenty-five dollars that is included in this item now.

Uh that is included in this item now.

And we will also have the discussion on the 13th to add up to an additional 200,000 dollars of casino funds towards qualified relocation, to which we need to determine, and we will on the 13th.

Is that clear on what I'm doing?

Is there any questions on what I am doing?

I'm sorry to ask you questions while three have voted, so I'd need your permission to do that.

No one opposed to that.

Okay.

Alderman Toomber.

Yeah, I I'm sorry.

So I guess now it's my turn to be on the uh discombobulated list.

So just for clarification, mayor.

So we are voting on this tonight.

This right now, this vote, yep, where three of us voted.

Uh that this is for the for the amendment that Alder Woman Torina has already passed that is passed, and now we're voting on that portion that that with as amended.

Yes, sir.

So you have that item, the special use permit and plan unit development, plus Alder Woman Trina's amendment that brings that relocation up to five thousand six hundred and twenty-five dollars.

Okay, so that is all now before us, and we will also have a discussion on the 13th about the 200,000.

And we're not we're not in any way voting on that amendment that was brought on by Alderman Frost right now.

We are not okay.

It will make that amendment very difficult, by the way, to have a discussion on it if we don't vote.

So I would I would please uh change my vote to an aye is there, let me ask.

Is there any uh objection to the three council members now with that clarification having the opportunity to change your vote?

Is there any objection to that?

Okay, sorry.

I was under the impression that this vote right now is a layover vote.

That sounds like it's incorrect.

It is incorrect.

Okay, it this is a vote on that uh special use permit that includes the amendment that Alder Woman Terrina made okay.

Okay, do you want to start the roll again?

I don't like two first.

Right, isn't the proper procedure just to send this back to committee?

No.

We're voting we'll we'll be approving the ordinance.

So we already then will have an approved ordinance.

You're gonna send an approved ordinance back to committee.

Because this this is director hammer.

Thank you, right?

So under a limited law, we cannot tie funding to a zoning uh condition of approval.

So alderman cost uh votion to consider 200,000 dollars from the signal price in funding for eligible qualified location costs.

Would it have to be a single item?

Look for the financing personality actual actors, it's not proper to tie city funds to a zoning approval for special use for it.

Fortunately, confusion is only a state of mind.

I vote uh no granted, no.

So that meet I bell.

No aye.

Eight ay three notes motion to advertise.

So at this time, I'm very excited to offer all of you.

Is there a motion out there to adjourn?

So we have a motion, we have a second, any discussion, no discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Those opposed, have a great ninth.