Village Board of Trustees - Regular Meeting

you

Good evening, everybody. I'd like to call this meeting to order. This is the Village Board of Arlington Heights for the date of September 8th, 2026. And upon calling this meeting to order, our first order of business is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you could all please rise and join the Village Board.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. Thank you, everybody.

And next is roll call. Maggie, if you could please help us out with that.

Trustee LeBeds? Here. Trustee Schwingbeck?

Here.

Trustee Santa Maria? Here. Trustee Bertucci?

Here.

Trustee Gilbert?

Here.

Trustee Zick?

Here.

Trustee Dunnington? Here. Trustee Manganiello?

Here.

President Tenaglia?

Here. Thanks, Maggie. And we do have one set of minutes to approve. So this is from August 17th of 26, and are there any comments or questions from anyone on the board, anyone that needs to recuse or vote pass? Seeing none, is there anyone in the audience that has any comments or changes from the minutes? Seeing none, is there a motion to approve the minutes as they are?

I'll move approval of the minutes from the August 17, 2026 meeting. Second.

Motion made by Trustee LeBed, seconded by Who was it? Me. Santa Maria. Okay. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? None. Motion carries. And we'll move on to item five, and that's the approval of the accounts payable. We have a warrant register from 8-30-26, and I call on Trustee Bertucci.

Thank you, Mayor. I'll move approval of the warrant register for the check date August 30th, 2026 in the amount of $4,460,774.47. Second.

We have a motion made by Trustee Bertucci, seconded by Trustee Schwingbeck. Are there any further comments or questions from anyone on the board or anyone in the audience? Seeing none, this is a roll call vote. Meg, if you could please.

Yes. Trustee Schwengbeck? Yes. Trustee Zick? Yes. Trustee Manganiello? Aye. Trustee Gilbert? Yes. Trustee LeBetz? Yes. Trustee Santa Maria? Yes. Trustee Dunnington? Yes. President Tenaglia?

Yes. All right. Motion carries. Thank you. So we've taken care of a couple items of business. And before we move any further, I want to make a brief statement because this is the beginning of a week that is important to all of us in many ways. So I'd like to take a moment to recognize an important anniversary that our community and our country will mark later this week. This Friday marks 25 years since September 11th, 2001. And it's hard to believe that 25 years have passed. And for those of us that lived through that day, I think September 11th is one of those moments in life where you can still remember exactly where you were, who you were with, and what you were doing when you first heard the news. And I certainly know that I can. For our police officers, our firefighters, first responders, and others who have dedicated their lives to public service, this anniversary carries particular meaning. We remember the extraordinary courage and the selflessness of the first responders who ran toward the danger that day, as well as the sacrifices made in the days, months, and years that followed. So this year, the Village of Arlington Heights has been honored with an invitation to participate in a private remembrance ceremony at the United Airlines Network Operations Center, which is here in Arlington Heights. If you don't know that, United has an enormous facility on the north end of town where all of their headquarters operations are featured. Members of our police and fire departments along with village leaders will stand alongside united employees to honor the lives lost and reflect on the profound impact of September 11th. We are incredibly honored to have been invited to share that moment with them. And again, here in our community, we also want to provide an opportunity for residents to come together and remember. So at 7.30 a.m. this Friday, September 11th, the village will hold a public remembrance gathering at Fire Station 1 at 300 East Sigwald Street. That's the one right next door to this building. The gathering will include the lowering of the American flag, brief remarks, and a moment of silence and the playing of taps. Our board here invites members of our community to join us. 25 years later, we remember the lives that were lost. We remember the bravery of those who responded. And we remember a day that changed our country and each of us in ways that are still felt today. I hope you'll join us Friday morning as Arlington Heights remembers September 11th. If you have any other questions or you want to check into this further, there's more information on our website, which is vah.com.

Now we will move on to the rest of our agenda.

And I am thrilled to share some information regarding the 2026 Illinois Traffic Safety Challenge Awards. And for that, I think I'll call on our village manager, Rick Klaus for a brief introduction, and then he can introduce our department that if you look to my left, you'll see standing here at attention.

Thank you, Mayor. This is really a nice presentation. This is something that I think is one of the least known statistics in our community that I try to tell everyone who will listen is that If you look at our traffic crashes over the last 10 years, they've dropped by about 25%. And I think this town is unequivocally safer from a traffic perspective than it was 10 years ago. And a lot of people don't realize that. They don't see that. And it's not because of a drop in our population. Our population continues to increase. It has to do with the innovative and dedicated traffic safety unit that we have here in our community. And tonight we're going to be talking about how those innovations and that dedication is being recognized at a state level. So I will turn things over to Chief Pecora, who's going to talk a bit more about it.

Hello, Chief. Good evening, Mayor, members of the board. Mr. Reklos, thank you for those kind words. The police department is honored to be on your agenda this evening for this brief presentation. And I won't belabor you with that because I'm going to cut into somebody else's talking points. What I want to do is introduce the crew that I dragged over with me. Deputy Chief Greg Zernicki, Acting Deputy Chief Chris Sefton, Sergeant Tim Scanlon, and the three gentlemen that are their last, they're the ones Monday through Friday that are out there making sure that our streets are safe. They're our traffic unit. It's Officer Jeff Aiello, Officer Dave Lavin, and Officer Matt Bocek. And it was those four there under Tim's leadership and the three of them that keep our roadway safe. It is a department-wide endeavor, but those gentlemen do the heavy lifting. Without any further ado, I'm going to turn the microphone over to Mr. Scott Christensen. He is the director of the Illinois Traffic Safety Challenge. He's going to tell you a little bit about the awards that the department was bestowed upon. Thank you, Chief.

Thank you, Chief. Mr. Mayor, board members, as the chief said, my name is Scott Christensen. I am the program director for the Illinois Traffic Safety Challenge. The Illinois Traffic Safety Challenge is in its 33rd year recognizing law enforcement agencies across the state for their traffic safety programs. The Illinois Traffic Safety Challenge is not about a program on who writes the most tickets, who makes the most arrests. This program is designed as a comprehensive program that takes into consideration training, policy and procedure, of course enforcement, data-driven aspects to what they're doing as far as how they're doing their enforcement, in addition to what kind of response, as you heard, you guys are having with your traffic safety efforts. The Illinois Traffic Safety Challenge is a friendly competition between like-size agencies and type agencies throughout the state of Illinois. We ask agencies to put together a comprehensive review of everything that they've done in the past year in all those different categories so that we take a look at and determine what top agencies in the state of Illinois in each category there are. This past year, in 2025, we had a number of really top-notch agencies throughout the state make application for review and were recognized. Those different type of categories are judged and we recognize those agencies at an awards breakfast at the Police Security Expo that's usually in August. Previous year, winners from those different categories are put together each year to put the best of the best to compare them against each other. We look at what are you doing, in your community to address traffic safety and make it safer. And in this championship category, we look at regardless of size, what are you doing with the resources you have available? This year in the championship category, the Arlington Heights Police Department won first place in the state of Illinois over all the other police departments. Now these recognitions that I'm going to mention in a second here are not just recognitions for the police department. They are community recognitions because the police department is unable to do the job that they do without your support, Mr. Mayor and board members and the community at large. If it wasn't for the support of the businesses, community members and the board, these programs would not be as successful as they are. And they are successful. In addition to being first place winners for your category of champions, Arlington Heights won a couple of specialty awards. What we do is we look at the specific programs that an agency has that are related to a variety of different specialty traffic safety initiatives that they can put in for and saying, hey, take a look at what we're doing. Look at all these great things. And we then look at all those applications across the state and see who's the best of the best in those different categories. This year, Arlington Heights, the police department, but Arlington Heights, was recognized with three additional specialty awards. Those awards are the Bike Pedestrian Safety Recognition Award, Distracted Driving Award, and this year we had a brand new category. It was the Community Engagement Award. This recognition takes into consideration the outreach, and initiatives to help inform and bring together the community, both business, government, and civilians to help address traffic safety issues and bring it to the attention. They also won that award. And so Mr. Mayor, if you wouldn't mind stepping down, I'd like to present these awards to you and to the village on behalf of the Illinois Department of Transportation and the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police.

Well, I think that I can speak for every one of us up here on the dais that we already know that about these guys, guys and gals. The group that you see standing here and the other hundred of them, have earned the respect of everyone in our community because they respect everyone in our community. It's a love situation because the gentleman sitting that just spoke there, Chief Pecora, runs the department that way. It's a wonderful place to live. It's a wonderful place to work. And they make it better by being here. So I thank you for recognizing it and honoring them and honoring us the way you have, Scott. Thank you very much. Tell us what these are here exactly.

So what we have here is the first place award is the gold award here right in the center. That's for first place in the championship. Again, there were agencies from across the state, the best of the best from the previous year that went into this category, and Arlington Heights came on top for this year for the recognition. We have... All the way to my left, the bike pedestrian, that has to deal with a lot of the micro mobility, has to deal with pedestrian traffic, those type of things and safety issues that they spent particular attention to with their outreach, with their education. That's the important part. Everybody thinks it's all about writing tickets and it's not. Tickets are a small part of what these recognitions are. It's about the community outreach, community engagement. Next to that is we have the distracted driving. People know across the state that distracted driving is still an issue and these fine officers and department has done an excellent job at addressing those issues and bringing that information to the forefront with the village. And then finally, the Community Outreach Award. This is a special award, first year, the inaugural presentation of that, and we couldn't have found a better agency and village to present this award to. So those are the awards that you guys are gonna have to take a lot, people to hold it up and to get them back to the police department. So with that, I just want to say thank you very much. Again, from the Illinois Department of Transportation, Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police, you have one of the best, finest agencies and villages that are out there with your engagement to help make traffic safety. And as the village manager said, it shows results with the number of crashes and injuries that were prevented because of the fine work that this village has done.

I couldn't agree more. Chief, you want to come on up here and we'll get a photograph with your whole team?

Congratulations. Congratulations.

Congratulations. Excellent work. Excellent work. Excellent work. Congratulations. Here, I'm going to hand you this microphone. Do you want to introduce them all one more time?

Certainly. Absolutely. If they quit moving, I'll introduce them. To my far left, Officer Matt Bocek, Sergeant Tim Scanlon, Officer Jeff Aiello, Mr. Scott Christensen, Deputy Chief Greg Zernicki, Officer Dave Lavin, Acting Deputy Chief Chris Sefton, and everybody knows the mayor.

Yes, we will. Look forward. Are you ready? One, two, and three. One, two, and three. Let me do one more. Hold on one second. One, two, and three. Thanks.

We can't see you.

That was an excellent reminder of how blessed we are in this community. It makes me feel so good to know that we have folks like that taking good care of us every day. I don't think there are any further recognitions or communications at the moment here, and we don't have a public hearing, so we'll move on to citizens to be heard.

Excuse me, Mr. Mayor.

Yes.

I think this belongs in communication. I had wanted to have a moment to speak something to the members of the village and the audience present.

Okay, go right ahead.

Thank you. So in a joint event held by our Arlington Heights Memorial Library and our Environmental Commission, we'll be holding a and a Greener Living event on Sunday from 1 to 4 p.m. at the library. I am honored that I was asked to be on a panel there, and I'm as excited as I could be that our very own director, Chris Paperniak, will be joining me. It's gonna be a hyper-local event, talking about a lot of the things that we're doing within the Village and immediately around to advance sustainability and make our footprint a little greener throughout the village and the surrounding areas. I hope you're able to join. And unfortunately, they've all left the room, but if you're up earlier on Sunday, there is a charity softball event over at Methodist Park, the Battle of the Badges, between our local area fire and police department. So if you have a minute to drop by there and say hi, I'm sure they'll appreciate it. Thank you so much.

Very good. Thank you, Trustee Mangano. Anyone else, as long as we're on that subject here? That is true. To elaborate briefly on the Sunday morning event, it's a number of communities. It's not just Arlington Heights Fire versus Police. It's from, I think, eight or ten different departments from different communities around. It's a lot of fun, and the teams all have a great time. Okay, then we'll move on to citizens to be heard. And I only have one blue card here right now. This is for items that are not on the agenda. So if you want to speak about something that's on the agenda coming up here, certainly you can. But if you have a comment not on the agenda, now's the time. And I'll call on Robert Verdecky.

First off, I swear I didn't know that the IDOT recognitions were coming today, but this just works out as really good timing. And honestly, so what I want to do today is, you know, it's great that they're recognizing that our police department are getting this for helping to keep our streets safe and reduce crashes, but we know that it's not just policing that helps. It's good community planning and it's really good engineering that helps to lead to that. So on behalf of the Safe Streets Alliance for Arlington Heights, building on what we recognized earlier, we'd like to take the time to say thank you to both the village elected officials and village staff for all the work that they've done in the previous years and this last year implementing a number of Safer Streets measures to help us reach and protect these awards. So first to the board members for doing such things as making Alfresco an annual event and setting Safer Streets as strategic priority number four, thank you. Second to manager Randy and his team for coordinating with the departments to oversee a variety of projects and business plans to make this happen. Third to director Rodman and her team for incorporating pedestrian safety measures into projects such as the veil that prominent project. I know that that's in limbo at the moment, but there were a lot of good pedestrian safety measures in there as part of it. We hope that some of that in some form can make it or at least be used to push throughout other parts of the village. But of course the biggest thank you that I'd like to say today is to Director Chris Paperniak and his public works team. There have been numerous things that we've noticed around town lately that they've implemented to improve public safety and active transport around the village, including repainting numerous crosswalks around town, which with school year starting is really appreciated. Added at least two new bike racks in downtown, at least that we can see. Added a painted crosswalk and signage for the Campbell and Casper intersections. Added a pedestrian crossing at Windsor and Kensington. And then of course we have upcoming projects for next year, including the Windsor Street Road Diet. Hintz Road, well Hintz Road is a few years from now, but I know they're doing virtual forums and they're clearly taking the Safer Street Things feedback and implementing that. And of course the Campbell Street reconstruction upcoming. They're all in various stages, but they're clearly implementing more safety measures. The Village and staff have clearly heard residents like ourselves asking for streets that are safe for more than just cars. And although it's not a plaque or anything like that, we would like to recognize the team, the work that you've done. These updates, including the number, I see a number in the consent agenda as well for fixing some of the gaps and speed limits and adding some stop signs, will make it possible and easier to protect those awards in the coming years. So thank you very much.

Thanks, Rob, appreciate the commentary. I think that's all that I had a blue card for. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on an item that's not on the agenda? See any hands, so we'll move on to the consent agenda. And the consent agenda is gonna be, a group of items from A through M with one vote that we will vote for and take care of business with one motion to approve. I do know that we want to yank one off here. I'll call on Trustee Zik.

Yes, thank you, Mayor. I would like to pull off item D, resolution awarding contract for furnishing and delivering bulk rock salt in an ordinance amending the annual budget of the Village of Arlington Heights for the fiscal year beginning January 1st, 2026 and ending December 31st, 2026.

What item is that? D. D? Yes. Got it. All right. So D will be removed from this vote. Is there any other trustee that wishes to remove an item on the consent agenda? Seeing none, is there anybody on the board that is gonna vote pass or vote no on any of the items on the consent agenda? Seeing none, is there anyone in the audience that would like a trustee to remove an item from the consent agenda? Seeing none, is there a motion that can be made for the rest of the balance of the consent agenda?

I would move approval of the consent agenda A through M minus item D. Second.

Motion made by Trustee LeBed, seconded by?

Trustee Schwingbeck.

Trustee Schwingbeck, got it. Any further discussion? Anyone in the audience? Seeing none, this is a roll call vote.

Trustee LeBeds? Yes. Trustee Schwingbeck?

Yes.

Trustee Dunnington? Yes. Trustee Santa Maria? Yes. Trustee Gilbert? Yes. Trustee Manganiello? Aye. Trustee Sick? Yes. Trustee Bertucci?

Yes.

President Tenaglia?

Yes. Very good. Motion carries. And while we're at it, we'll go ahead and take up item D, and we'll ask Trustee Zik to share thoughts on that resolution.

Okay. Thank you very much, Mayor. You know, the Daily Herald did a pretty thorough article last month about the rock salt that's used for the streets and some of the issues that are going on with the costs and the bidding and the contracts and everything. And it was a very good article. It had a lot of good information. But until it actually hits you, you don't really kind of delve into it as much. And it hit us here with this particular item on the consent agenda. Typically, we spend about $300,000 a year on the rock salt. But because of some of the issues that are going on, this year it's actually going to be quite a bit more, potentially, $790,595. So almost... 500 000 more than what we typically that we typically spend so i just kind of felt this is one of these things let's talk about this a little bit let's understand the reasons why what alternatives are potentially out there what have we talked about and i know this is also we have to make an adjustment for the budget for this year i'm also kind of curious for next year are we looking into this is it going to also be part of the the budget as we go go forward next year to the plan so Leave it with you guys. Absolutely.

Manager Ratcliffe, would you care to...

I think Director Paperniak is probably the best equipped panel on this one.

Very good.

Thank you very much.

Just a little history to begin with. Every year the department attempts to secure roughly 10,000 tons of salt. That is through either multiple contracts, such as the state bid, or through our internal dome, which has about 4,000 tons. This year, around August, we were notified that we did not receive bids through the state contract. So the state typically will provide a contract to the municipality, and we select roughly 80 to 120% of our needs. In the last couple of years, we've been budgeting 80% of our SALTs, and that's worth a term of about $377,000 of an annual budget. Historically, we budgeted probably $500,000 just to be conservative, so we never had to went back to the board. And that was closer to the 120% estimated amount. In my history of 30 years, we have about, I'd say we have a crisis of some sort every five years. The salt comes from barges. The salt has mining. Mining operations is complicated. There's trucking union shortages, etc. I've seen salt in my time exceeding $150 a ton. So unfortunately, I was not surprised by this because again, every five years we see some type of salt shock. But we've had a good run. We've had excellent pricing around $80 a ton. And that's roughly 20% higher than our typical 5 to 10 average. It was running around $60 to $70 a ton, creeped up to $80. We did not expect this year's. What happened this year when we investigated why we didn't see any bids from the state, there are three main suppliers in the state. They bid on all the entities, park districts, school districts, municipalities, anyone that wants to participate. 250 municipalities, including us, did not receive a bid. One of the three companies opted out of the program. So that was a shock to the system in our supply and demand society. Once there's a shock to the system, prices go up because there's no full understanding of how we're going to provide that again. These suppliers don't have enough salt individually to supply the entire state. They together bid on these projects, pick and choose who they want based on locale, based on quantities, based on if we ask for 80%, 100%, or 120%, what best suits them. Again, we've had barge problems, we've had freezing of the river, we've had truck shortages in the past. This year when we found out, obviously salt is something we put on the roads, I'm sorry for not the basic, but it's a critical component of all of our salt and de-icing programs to keep the streets safe so the police department, fire department can all do their jobs. So we take this very seriously. When we first learned in August that we did not have a bids, we move. We don't respond, we don't react, we move. So we attempted to reach a contract terms with neighboring communities. We went to seek out what the pricing was. We joined other communities to try to be attractive bid, and we went out to bid. We thought it was the most sensible for this community to go out to bid. SALT is something just about anyone can get. We didn't think it'd be appropriate just to find a contractor and come to you. We thought a public, open, transparent bid was the most appropriate thing to do. Tonight we had before you 100% of our salt need to make it attractive because again we were concerned with all the pricing we received Numerous people contacted us and told us 135 150 155 we received notices all over from people willing to send that sell assault at very high pricing So we went out to bid we got the bids together. We had four bidders that supplied us we came around and reporting it tonight and to then offer, request a contract approval for next year's SALT bid. This year we have our dome full, and the full budget is expended, which is typical. Typically we get into a contract in September, October, with the state, and then we don't start spending the money until January 1. But again, the concern by staff was, what's the alternative? Could it be cheaper? There is an absolute possibility. I could find a cheaper salt selection. There's also a possibility I wouldn't find salt. This is something we typically take very seriously and we respond quickly to.

And that's what I have before you tonight. If I could more directly address Trustee Zick's question about the impact on the budget. The first point I want to make is this is exactly why we maintain reserves and contingencies in our budget. We've talked a lot about the last several months. This is a great example. Why? Because you're dealing with a commodity that depending on what's going on in the marketplace, it can be volatile. And it's something we can't just go without. And so there are times where you pay under market. There's times where you pay over market. This, unfortunately, is one of those. But we are, up until the time of the budget being finalized, we will fine tune what our assumptions are for salt pricing for 2027, looking at those factors such as what are the status of those mines going forward, what's the prospect. There are times, as Chris mentioned, when mid-season, if the area gets walloped with salt, it gets in demand. There can be trucking shortages. There can be, you know, frozen rivers. And then having a surplus, you look at, you know, is that something you want to share with your neighbors or not? And so it is very much a cyclical thing that we've gone through and we've gotten experienced staff. But this is definitely on the high end of these problems because no one is expecting that particular mine to be shut down this year. And that threw everyone for a loop.

Towards the end of last year, we saw some trucking shortages. So typically, we gave about a seven-day delivery. We had upwards of 30-day delivery times for salt last year. That's what the dome is for. So we had it filled, and then we would deplete it. But based on that, we had concerns with this year's cost pricing. So we did up the 27 operating budget based on some of the concerns we had to $715,000 is what you'll see in the current draft for next year. There's also discussions for the 2027 operation. There might be some tariff concerns. Canada is a major supplier. So there are a lot of rumblings that we'll still see higher prices as well next year. I don't think to this degree. I think a lot of these mines will now ramp up knowing that there are two major players in the state. They will naturally ramp up supply. They could not do so in such a quick time.

Okay, all right, thank you very much. You know, I wanted to bring this up because, you know, when you see a big increase like that, you want to understand, and I want everybody to understand, you know, where we are and why we're doing this. And also, Chris, thank you for the overview of what you've done. We are taking steps, and it is very important. So obviously, we have to have it. I just want to clarify one thing that you said. At one point, you had said, okay, so one of the four pulled out, you know, supply and demand. But for this year, we're fine because as you said, everything is stocked. We're stocked and ready to go for this season. Is that correct?

Well, I wouldn't say the season. Through December, sure. This season, this is salt for the season. So our dome can handle 4,000 tons. Typically, I would say the heaviest storm, our goal is always 10. 10 covers us for everything. Usually I'll have leftover, but we do not have enough for the season. This purchase will complete us for this season and then most likely fill the dome for next year. But again, this covers us because we know there's a salt crisis currently. Prices are going up. I don't know when they'll stop. And then again, as Manager Recklaus had said, a different forecast of weather can change the salt price and the quantity as well. So it's just something we take very seriously, and we try not to take any risks associated with it. We thought that was our job. Okay, so I hope that and and again, I totally understand the concerns and questions Typically, we would do a manager's report for this item, but we wanted to speed this up just to secure the salt So we did we did speed this through gotcha gotcha.

Okay. I'm fine Okay, is there anyone else on the board that wanted to discuss this anyone in the audience? If not, a motion to.

I will make a motion to approve the resolution awarding contract for furnishing and delivering bulk rock salt and an ordinance amending the annual budget of the Village of Arlington Heights for the fiscal year beginning January 1st, 2026 and ending December 31st, 2026. I'll second.

Okay, motion made by Trustee Zik, seconded by Trustee Manganiello. Any further comments, questions, anyone in the room? Seeing none, this is a roll call vote.

Trustee Zick?

Yes.

Trustee Manganiello? Aye. Trustee Santa Maria? Yes. Trustee Schwingbeck? Yes. Trustee Bertucci? Yes. Trustee Dunnington? Yes. Trustee LeBetz? Yes. Trustee Gilbert? Yes. President Tenaglia?

Yes. Motion carries. Okay, so we have completed the consent agenda section. Now we're on to new business. And the first item A is the appointment of Maggie Saraga to the Environmental Commission, effective September 13, 2026.

uh term ending april 30th 2027 and i'll call on trustee dunnington thank you mayor i move as i did in the committee of the whole meeting to concur in the mayor's appointment of maggie straga to the environmental commission effective september 13th 2026 with a term ending april 30th 2027. second

Motion made by Trustee Dunnington, seconded by Trustee Bertucci. Any further discussion from anyone on the board? Anyone in the audience? Maggie, are you here? There she is. Come on up to the podium. Well, I suppose we should vote first, right? We have a motion and a second. Is this a... You can do this by voice vote if you'd like. Okay, all those in favor say aye. Aye. None opposed. Motion carries. Now we carry on. All right. So Maggie, this might be the hardest thing you have to do. You have to repeat after me.

Okay.

I'm Maggie Sraga.

I'm Maggie Sraga.

Having been appointed to the Environmental Commission.

Having been appointed to the Environmental Commission.

In the Village of Arlington Heights.

In the Village of Arlington Heights. In the County of Cook. In the County of Cook.

Do solemnly swear and affirm.

Do solemnly swear and affirm.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the State of Illinois.

And the Constitution of the State of Illinois.

And that I will faithfully discharge the duties.

And I will faithfully discharge the duties.

Of the office according to the best of my ability.

To the office according to the best of my abilities.

Congratulations, I know you will. Come on up. So for all of you who don't know, Maggie is our wonderful farmer's market manager, owner, entrepreneur. She takes care of all the things every Saturday morning, and she does a fabulous job. And now she's going to be part of our environmental commission. So if you would take this over to the clerk and sign that. And then here's a pin that you get to wear, because we all wear it, and you're a part of us. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, and we'll move on to item B. This is 375 through 425 East Rand Road redevelopment. It's a rezoning and final plat of subdivision, PUD, special use permits and variations, PC number 26-022. And I will hand this over to Manager Reklaus.

And I'm going to, I believe we're going to have the applicant go first. So I think there's a representative present and they can kick us off.

All right. Hello, being from New York, I just wanted to say thank you for your kind words to start. It's really great to hear that Arlington Heights is remembering the tragedy of September 11th and none of my parents lost a close friend. So it's really glad to hear. I mean, it's something we should never forget. My name is Ben Baird. I'm with Core Acquisitions. We're the developer team. for this project. I have our civil engineer, Ian Louie, our traffic engineer, and a Dutch Bros representative here to answer any questions you may have. CORE has been involved with this project for about 18 months now. We really love the site. Our staff has been very supportive. through all our design phase, through the design committee, through the planning commission. So we really appreciate all the help that the staff has given us. Core is a preferred developer for Dutch Bros. We have turned over three buildings to them in the suburbs of Chicago and in central Illinois. We're under construction on four more, and we have 10 plus more on top of that in various stages of entitlements and permitting processes. With this site, Our managing principal was born and raised in Arlington Heights, so he knows the property very well. The Pep Boys building has been sitting vacant for a while, and along with Dutch Bros, we've worked with many national tenants, and we have some really good relationships with some good tenant rep brokers, allowing us to fill this Pep Boys building with a bunch of great tenants we believe that will fit well with the site, especially Old National Bank with the drive-thru on the southern portion of the Pep Boys remodel. These tenant relationships have really helped have us fill this multi-tenant building. And from what I've heard from the tenants, ourselves, and I ran into some staff at a Cubs game, ICSC event the other weekend, and really heard some great comments and exciting things about the project. And it's glad to hear that the other people besides ourselves share the same. I mean, that's it for, I really have, I mean, we're really here to answer any questions you guys may have. Yeah.

Okay, very good. We'll ask staff for the presentation that staff has.

Thank you, Ben. You can have a seat. Staff will present and then you can come back up for any questions you may have. So before the board this evening, as he indicated, is a request for zoning relief for 375 to 425 East Rand Road. We informally refer to this as the Pep Boys redevelopment as this is the former Pep Boys site. You can see in blue, that is the site that is outlined. That is East Rand Road to kind of the northeast of the site, and that's Palatine Road on the south end. The property is just shy of three acres. The existing zoning for the property is a combination of B2 and R1. So you can see here the current zoning. The majority of the property is zoned B2 and there's some legacy zoning of the R1 that is a portion of the property as well as the property to the west. The comp plan does designate the property for commercial use. This is obviously a major commercial corridor in the community so the commercial use is appropriate. The proposed zoning is for B2 to align with the surrounding uses. And this is the list of requested relief. It includes rezoning of the properties as I indicated to the B2 zoning district, a final plat of subdivision to consolidate the existing six parcels into three lots. That will be one lot for each proposed building. It will be developed as a planned unit development because there will be three lots under common ownership. And then they are also requesting special use permits for restaurants in the B2 district, as well as a special use permit for a bank with a drive-through and a special use permit for a restaurant with a drive-through. In addition to those zoning actions, they're requesting two variations. One is to waive their requirement for parking lot island landscaping for eight parking lot islands, as well as to waive a requirement for parking lot screening. And we'll talk about both of those in a little bit more detail. This is the proposed site plan. I realize it's a little busy, but I'll walk you through it. Up there on the north end, you can see there is something designated as a pad site that was initially anticipated to be a drive-through restaurant, a Wendy's restaurant. Wendy's is no longer moving forward, but they do have potentially another tenant that will be taking that site. So right now that site is just being proposed as a pad site and when they ultimately do sign a user for the site they will need to come back to the village to obtain a special use for a drive-through and approval for that final site. So that one you will see again. You can see then to the southeast that's the proposed Dutch Brothers location and then in the southern portion of the site that is the existing building a portion of which is being reused and remodeled to accommodate up to five tenants. And this is a slide intended to illustrate variances. And again, I realize it's a bit busy, but the variances they are requesting relate to parking lot islands. So you can see here those islands that are highlighted in red are the islands that will not comply with the requirement to include one shade tree. And there's various reasons why they're not able to comply with that requirement, mostly because there are some constraints for each of those islands. There are sidewalks going through them, there are trash enclosures, there are other limitations that prevent them from landscaping them in accordance with code. But in recognition of that, they are incorporating the trees that would otherwise go on those islands elsewhere on the site. So that landscaping will still be incorporated onto the site. and then the other variation they are requesting is that landscape buffer you see in purple there on the western portion of the site that is a buffer that is required because it is a commercial district currently abutting a residential district and in that case the zoning code does require substantial buffering But given that that property to the west is currently vacant and is anticipated to redevelop with a commercial use in line with the rest of the corridor and the comp plan, that landscape buffer long term will not be needed, nor are they able to truly accommodate a full buffer given the existing location of that building. And so staff is supportive of the reduced landscape buffer in that location. The Planning Commission did consider their request for the zoning relief that has been outlined and did recommend approval to rezone the properties, grant a final plat of subdivision, a planned unit development, as well as the special use permits for the bank and the restaurant, the drive-through, as well as the general restaurants within the B2 district. And they did also recommend approval of the variations that were requested. There were several conditions that were attached to their recommendation. Two of those conditions you see in five and six, they have already met, so that's why you see the strike through there. The other conditions are fairly standard, requiring that should they want to engage in any outdoor eating cafes with those proposed restaurants, they need to comply with our outdoor eating regulations. They need to comply with some final recommendations the design commission put forth at their May 19th meeting. We always require a construction plan, staging plan with building permit. And then there are some comments related to site drainage that they need to address as well. And then, of course, you're accustomed to seeing that last condition that just requires compliance with federal, state, and village codes. So the motion that is before you this evening is to direct staff and the village attorney to prepare final documents granting the zoning relief for consideration at a future board meeting for plan commission case number 26022, subject to the recommended conditions set forth in the agenda material for tonight's meeting.

Thank you, Ms. Rodman. Anything else from staff? That's it? Does the petitioner want to come back on up to the podium, please? And what we'll do next is we'll offer up the rest of the board for questions, and I have to ask one just to get started. Have you been personally involved in this project for quite a while, or is this new for you?

So I've been with CORE for about two years now. And for 18 months of that, we've been involved with this project. My role at the company is kind of to shepherd it all the way through entitlements and approvals. And our principals really handle more of the tenant relationships and financing and therefore. So yeah, I've been pretty involved with the process for all the way through.

Okay, great. Can you give us an idea of schedule? Because the reason I'm asking is, as I'm sure everyone up here would agree, a lot of questions. Why is it sitting the way it's been sitting with a tattered fence around it for as many months and years now as it has? And when will that stop?

Yeah, that's a great question. It's a pretty tricky site, all things considered. And one of the things we appreciate with the staff, with all the reviews, is how detail-oriented it's been. It's taken longer than expected to get to this point. And our goal is always to move as quickly as possible and get under construction as soon as we kind of get through the permitting process as fast as we can. So as soon as we can get all of our approvals and permits, we're looking to break ground, which is hopefully, I want to say before the end of the year, but it's looking more like the beginning of next.

So if you were approved tonight, your next step will be to go towards the building department for a permit, building permit. We certainly understand that. And then would you begin right away? Or is there more work?

With the permitting process?

Well, yeah, we'll start with that. Yeah, so we would begin right away. You'll begin with the permit process, construction documents. And which building of the... I guess it's of the three because the one's just a pad. So are you going to remodel the Pep Boys building first or are you going to do some work and build the coffee shop first?

The plan is to do everything at the same time. Obviously, the building will trail a little bit because we'll have to go through all the entitlements and approvals once we finalize our plan for that last pad.

No, I'm referring to the other one. I recognize, we all understand, number three was going to be the Wendy's. You've got some work to do there. You're going to prepare the site and get it ready. Yes. But the other two... You're going to move forward simultaneously together? Correct. Okay. And you'd like to do that this fall yet or winter, but you're thinking it might not be until the spring is what you're saying.

We're ready to go as soon as possible. All right.

I'm going to encourage you and ask you please to clean up that site. Get it looking like a construction site, not a mess.

Notre Dame will do. And I want to see you do that ASAP. I'll take it to our property management team tomorrow morning.

Okay, that's my main request for starters here. Okay, let's move this on to the board for questions, more specific questions than my general questions. Anyone on this side? Trustee Zik.

Thank you, Mayor. First of all, I'm glad that this is finally being done. I live about a mile north of here, and I drive past that every single day. So I'm glad that this is going to be finally taken care of. But I do have two questions, really. One is, and I know we talked about it a little bit in the report and everything, but I just got to ask this question out loud. That triangle there, that's awful, that traffic. It's like a devil's triangle, you know, going around here with the traffic. So obviously you're doing some great things here, but we're going to be bringing in even more traffic. I guess where do we go if we find out that this is, and I know we did, you know, you talked about the traffic study and the report and everything, but where do we go from here? Are we really comfortable that this isn't going to overwhelm that area that's already really, really crowded?

So staff spent an extensive amount of time with the petitioner, with our engineering division, and working with IDOT in evaluating the existing access. And as you noted in the staff report, the two main access points will remain but are both being modified. So the access on Rand Road will be a right-in, right-out access, and the access on Palatine Road is being moved west a little bit, further away from the intersection, and will be narrowed slightly. So we went back and forth for quite some time on the traffic study. That is part of what took so long with this particular project was making sure that our staff was satisfied with the study and that IDOT was satisfied as well as some of the conditions their tenants have. Obviously they have specifications that they're looking for in terms of access to their site as well. So we feel confident that the study is accurate, that it appropriately addresses potential concerns, but like with any development, until the development is up and active and stabilized, we won't have a true sense of whether or not that study actually reflected reality, and so we will have to monitor that once a stabilized development.

That's what I figured the answer would be, but I just want to get that out there. The other one I have to do is, since it was Pep Boys, is there any kind of environmental issues, you know, oil being spilled into the ground and anything like that at all that we have to be concerned about?

There were some environmental issues. Maybe Ben can speak more specifically to that on the site, but my understanding is that those have been addressed.

Yeah, those have been addressed. There's a small little barrier that we're having our general contractor install, and it's over the parking lot, so it's not really too much to worry about. And we've gotten phase one reports and a phase two report to help us understand those more, and it's nothing to really be worried about.

Okay. I am concerned about it. That's why, because I want to make sure that once this is up, that it's all safe and clean over there. So yeah, I guess I'm just going to echo what the mayor then said is, yeah, let's get this going quickly. It's been an eyesore over there for too long. And I'm sure Gatsby's next door is just dying to have that taken care of because that has to take away from them also too. So thank you. Anyone else on the side?

Mayor, can I make, One quick comment on Trustee Zick's comment. Again, one of the conditions is the petitioners agreeing that they're going to be complying with all local, state, and federal laws. And so that categorically includes all environmental rules. And so they understand and will have to adhere to all of the environmental regulations for that property.

Okay. Thank you.

I think the petitioner's comment, nothing to worry about, meant financially for them. They're going to be able to handle it without too much trouble. And you'll follow through with, as Manager Rakows just said.

Yeah, and we've gotten phase two reports and phase one environmental reports, and they laid out steps we have to take to kind of satisfy and make sure that, like you said, everything is safe and environmentally okay, and that's something that we have built into our budget to take care of. Great. Okay. Trustee Manganiello.

Most of the things I was considering have been asked, but the one that's left for me is there's a lot of surplus parking on this site. Has there been any discussion of something impermeable in place of the additional parking, especially with the considerations about groundwater and landscaping?

I'll start and then I'll let the petitioner jump in. So, I know staff did have conversations with the petitioner about parking specifically as it relates to some of those tenant spaces that are not filled. So, I believe that they have, as certain as you can be, three of the five spaces filled, but are still working on tenanting those other two. And depending on what use goes there, that alters the parking requirement. And I think it was important to them to be able to maintain flexibility with how they lease those spaces, and restaurant uses have a higher parking count and so they designed the site to accommodate a higher usage tenant which would be the restaurants should they populate those spaces with restaurants so it does on the face of it feel as though there is extra parking because when you look straight at the numbers it appears to be the case but until they have fully tenanted the building we won't know exactly what those parking requirements are and if you'd like to add anything please jump in

Not much for me to add there. I mean, yeah, the flexibility is really important for us as obviously there's two open spaces. We feel good about where we stand and hopefully deals and tenants should be wrapped up there soon. But to have the flexibility is really important for us there.

Thank you.

Thank you. Well, thank you for moving forward with this and as others have said, the sooner the better and the better looking it is will be wonderful for the community. I too have some concerns about the intensity of the use of the site and with the traffic because it is, you know, It's not a square. It's a triangle and there's a little shopping center. That's on the other side and part of it that I frequent a lot and so I I know that it can be, and there's actually a traffic signal opposite where the Jewel is, which helps in getting in and out of there. But I was looking over the traffic management plan that was part of the packet, and it seemed to talk more about opening day or special promotions maybe for Dutch Brothers. Maybe you could talk a little bit more about the traffic management plan and And the queuing, because I can't really tell from the, you know, this is a busy and for us a small picture. And in the packet it was kind of small. The queuing for the coffee shop.

Hi everyone.

I'm Tannen. I'm an operator in the North Chicago land area. I just opened up the Buffalo Grove Dutch Bros location down the road. Um, for per the traffic plan, when we open, we do expect to be a little bit busier cause it is grand opening. Um, and we have a higher traffic control and management during that. Um, after about three weeks, we drop about 50% of what we were doing in those grand grand opening, um, first times. And then with merch drops or whatever that may be, I will say we properly staff. We have statistics for a very long time. We are a publicly owned company. And I know that we are new to the area, but we have statistics on certain things of what we need to do to staff. For that reason, we make it so we have very few cars in line, that we are faster than what we're doing. We do fit about roughly... We have about 12 cars in line, and it's a double-lane drive-through, so it's not way too far out, and they can pull up next to each other. That merges into one to get their drink at the window.

Okay. And I noticed also there was some talk about, at least at your busy times, like the grand opening of having drink runners and encouraging people. to park in number one or number two or number three.

Absolutely, yeah. We do have drink runners if needed, but our always go-to is to get them, the cup is ready at the window when they can pull up to the window so they can move on out.

Okay, thank you. I appreciate that. I couldn't tell that it was a double lane, and that helps a lot because I know that sometimes with the Dunkin' Donuts here on Arlington Heights Road, at certain times of day when people really need their coffee, it can go out into the Arlington Heights Road, and we certainly don't want that happening here. I think it's even busier on RAND, more cars through the day. So thank you very much, and good luck with everything.

Thank you.

Anyone else on the side? None. Misdirection? Trustee Bertucci?

Thank you, Mayor. As I'm looking at this picture here, I agree with Trustee Zick that you are in the heart of, when I lived up that way, we called the Bermuda Triangle. And I also agree with Trustee LaBette that it's very compact. There's a lot happening in this property site. Trying to figure out where the entrance and the exits are and is there are these some of these pork chops or Okay, so there's just two spots, one on Rand Road and one on Palatine Road?

Correct, so up at the northwest corner, and I apologize, I don't have the standard site plan. It's in the next presentation. This one does look particularly busy because you see the trees and the bushes and everything overhanging the parking lot. But the entrance from East Rand Road is up at the northwest corner of the site. That is a right in, right out only. And then the entrance, the south end of the site is right above those words, East Palatine Road, and that will be a full access entrance. But it is being moved west slightly from where the current entrance is, and it is being narrowed slightly as well.

Okay.

Sorry, is it easy for you to switch back and forth between our presentation? I can, yes. Sorry, there's an easy diagram that makes it easier to visualize.

Well, that's coming up. During rush hour, the traffic on Palatine Road, for example, going westbound, will back up from Arlington Heights Road all the way to Rand Road. So if you're going what would be northwest on Rand Road and you're going to make a left onto Palatine Road to go west, Sometimes you'll barely be able to make that left turn without waiting. I mean, you're like, you know, that traffic gets backed up. So, you know, with these, just these two accesses, it just seems like there might be an issue there during rush hours. And has that been taken into consideration or?

Well, um, something I, so I pulled up this, um, on our presentation because it outlines the access and kind of traffic flow. It's easier to visualize. Um, and with the Palatine road, um, right there, it's going to be both of the access points are going to be right in, right out. Um, Palatine has that median there, so you can't go in from the left or anything. Um, and I understand the, um, concern about the traffic, um, If it really is that backed up, that's kind of our access is pretty far away from the traffic signal.

Well, listen to me for a minute. And if you haven't been up there during rush hour, I would suggest you do that. So let's go to Palatine Road there for a moment. Okay. And I'm just concerned that you're going to have traffic or you're going to have cars backed up into your property. So if you go to... the lower right, as you're looking at the screen, and you're coming up Rand Road, and you're gonna make a left onto Palatine Road, because I've done it many times. My office is over here, and I'm gonna go, if I was gonna go towards 53, or say, meet somebody at Palm Court, you know, after work. So, as I'm coming up Rand Road, and I'm gonna make a left onto Palatine Road, The traffic light from Arlington Heights Road on Palatine Road will back up traffic all the way to Rand Road. And so as you're making that thing, you can hardly get in. So with that being said, the... for your property as people are trying to get out of your property they're going to have to wait their turn so to speak and wait for the light at arlington heights road to change and you you might have a little bit of a backup if you're going to have movement so to speak to make that right turn onto palatine road to go west Have you ever, have you been there during a rush hour at end of day, or rush, evening rush hour?

I have, personally, and it's, sorry, it's kind of hard for me to visualize, because I haven't ran into that problem personally. I'm not saying that it doesn't happen. I just haven't seen it.

I mean, I know it happens, because I experience it on a regular basis, so.

Yeah. Good evening. Louie Abuna with KLOA. We're the traffic consultants. Yeah. And I'm very familiar with this area. I live close by. I go to a lot of these places on a regular basis. And I agree with you. It's a highly trafficked triangle. And that's one of the reasons why Dutch Bros and similar uses want to locate here because of the high amount of traffic.

I get it.

And during the rush hours, you know, most of their traffic is captured from the existing traffic. So not too many people will go to, for example, Dutch Bros as a destination during the rush hour. They'll capture it from the traffic on Palatine on Rand Road. So in the morning, if people are going Westbound and Peloton to get to 53 to go to you know to their offices or whatever they come in make a right-hand turn enter the site pick up their coffee exit and right hand side right turn and go west on Peloton Road so it's it's more of a convenience stop you know during rush hour as opposed to a lot of destination trips but I don't disagree with you this is a highly trafficked area And it can get busy during those certain times. And, you know, if you're at the light at Rand and Peloton and making a left-hand turn, you could wait a couple of cycles to be able to get through that intersection.

Right. Correct. Well, thank you for your understanding of that part of it. So is, and I'm not familiar with Dutch Brothers other than your coffee and energy type drinks and that kind of thing. So is that something, do you have, is most of, is it like the coffee places where most of your activity is in the morning or in the evening?

I don't know if Dutch Brothers may want to answer that.

Hi. We're open from 5 a.m. to 10 p.m. Monday through Thursday, and 11 p.m. on Friday and Saturday. We do have certain types of peaks, but they, since being in the company for 15 years, being out here, the peaks are a little bit different. But I wouldn't say that they're, they last about, they're in the morning for about three hours. But it's nothing too major crazy and we staff enough to get them through on that part Okay, so you don't have a lot of traffic than in the in the in the evening rush.

I

Um, no, it's, it's, it's very, it's just consistent. I would say it's very consistent. Okay. Okay. Every shop is different.

Okay. So it's the more, the bigger concern will be what goes in the old Pep Boys building then. Um, and what kind of, what kind of in and out and traffic in and out that you're going to have there. So, um, I mean, I think, you know, God bless that you guys have taken all that property and have, have you know, have the ability to fill it and make it active. And I applaud that and want you guys to succeed. I just wanted you to be aware. And I appreciate the fact that you're from the area so you know what kind of traffic can happen there and how it can back up and, you know, what your experience will be there, so.

One more thing I would add. A lot of the customers would be also local or live in this area, so they'll understand the traffic patterns, and they'll know when to avoid and which intersection to be at. We all learn in time how to navigate these highly trafficked intersections. So that would be part of the, as this development stabilizes over time, customers will learn when the best time to come in and what's the best way to get in and get out. It'll be a learning process, but they'll figure it out.

I agree. Well, welcome to Arlington Heights. Welcome to the Bermuda Triangle. We wish you well.

I'm looking forward to having a lot of these experiences.

Yeah, all good. Trustee Schwingbeck.

Thank you, Mayor. Well, first of all, thank you for developing this property because, as I've always said, land sitting around empty or in disrepair is not doing this village any good. It's not doing us any good from a property tax standpoint, and it's certainly not bringing any sales tax, so I appreciate that. Really, just one comment, because I like the project that you're doing, but just to maybe piggyback on what Trustee Bertucci said, I think whenever you're developing a site and there's traffic flow issues as consumers, you're going to, if you see backups, you're going to avoid the area. If there's too many cars going through a maybe the drive-through and you see that as you're coming up to it, I personally just pass right by. I sit there and say to myself, I'm not going to wait in line when there's 15 cars there. I'll come back another time. So I think these things are going to dictate how people are going to come into that property and use it. And if it's not a good situation, really, It may hurt the area a little bit, but you're certainly developing it and you've got some good folks that want to move in there, so I know you've considered it already. But for me, when I look at maybe congestion and a lot of, traffic in a particular area. That's a good thing, but I think people are just going to avoid the area as well. So I want to thank you for coming in and developing this property in Arlington Heights. I'd be happy to put a motion on the floor.

Go right ahead, please do.

Yeah, I would move to direct staff and our village attorney to prepare final documents granting the zoning relief for consideration at a future board meeting for PC number 26-022, subject to the recommended conditions. All is set forth in the agenda for tonight's board meeting.

Second.

Okay, we have a motion made by Trustee Schwingbeck. Who is a second?

I'm going to make one of us.

Trustee Santa Maria gets the call. And did you have comments you wanted to make or was it Trustee Donington?

I have a question.

Trustee Donington? Go ahead.

Okay. Thank you, Mayor. I'm excited for the Dutch Bros to come to Arlington Heights. I'm a big fan of it and glad to see it here. On the traffic plan for Dutch Bros, the document that we have shows some, yeah, some yellow arrows and green arrows. And so I was wondering if you're on Rand Road and you're coming into the property, Do you then have to drive past the property with the five tenants to get to Dutch Bros? Like you have to go down and then like back around? Or can you get into Dutch Bros a little bit easier kind of like in that middle section?

So the yellow traffic line, the yellow traffic pattern, this is only for like overflow traffic on a normal, any normal day when it's like, like Tennant said, when it's not a crazy stack or anything, like you just go right into the drive-thru lane. This is, Dutch Bros takes their traffic very seriously and always like to prepare for a doomsday scenario, which never happens. will never really ever happen so that's just what they showed here so if there is any crazy backup with the green the green line is where the stack would go and that's how you would flow in and get to the green stack and they would have traffic controllers and third-party traffic officers out there to direct and help manage the traffic okay great thank you very much anyone else i did

Okay, we do have a motion and a second. Is there anyone in the audience that has comments or questions on this particular proposal? I see a lot of head shaking, no. Okay, so if there's no other commentary, I think we'll go right forward with the vote. Is this a voice vote? It can be, Mayor. As noted, this is just direction of the draft, so you can do this by voice. Okay, so all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? None, okay, motion carries for the preliminary approval here like this. Now you might wanna just stay there, because I think you're on the next item as well, if I'm not mistaken. So item C is 375 through 425 East Rand Road sign variation, DC 26029. Manager Raklaus, you wanna fill us in, or is that? I think Director Rodman's gonna kick this one off. Rodman will do that as well? Okay.

Ben, did you have anything you wanted to share on this first, or would you like me to start?

You can start. Okay, thanks.

So before you this evening is the request for sign variations related to the development that we just spoke about, but this is specifically for the Dutch Brothers drive-through restaurant. So Dutch Brothers is requesting five variations. They are variations related to the size of ground signs, variations related to the number of wall signs, variations related to the number and location of menu board signs, and then also requesting to be allowed to install what they are referencing as snap frame menu signs as well, which we don't allow under our code. The initial request, which is this request here, was to allow multiple signs of the various types and the design commission considered this request and they made a modified recommendation and the petitioner has agreed to the modified recommendation. So that is reflected here. I will walk the board through the details of those requests, but wanted to put up here for you that the petitioner has modified their request As it relates to the ground signs, they were initially requesting 116 square feet, and they are now requesting 80. They were initially requesting six wall signs, and now have agreed to five. They were requesting four menu boards, which the design commission did support, and a menu board facing the public right of way, which the code does not allow. The design commission also supported that, and they have reduced their request from eight snap frame signs to four.

Was that also approved by the design commission before?

Yes, what you see up here is what the design commission recommended and the petitioner has subsequently agreed to.

Got it.

And you'll see this slide again in a similar form. So this is the site location as you have seen and the overall site plan. So what I'd like to draw your attention to on this plan is the proposed multi-tenant ground signs. So you can see there is a proposed ground sign at the southeast corner and then a proposed ground sign at the northwest corner near the entrance. Village code does allow one ground sign per building, so they would be allowed more than two ground signs, but they would only be allowed to be 66 square feet, not the 80 that they are currently requesting. This is just a depiction of what those ground signs may look like. They obviously would need to be permitted separately, but we wanted to give you an indication of what they may look like. And this is a picture of the proposed rendering that was considered by the design commission for the multi-tenant building, just to give you a sense of what that signage may look like on the building. This is Dutch Brothers signage plan. I realize that this is impossible to read at this scale, but just wanted to give you an overall sense of where the signage is located. These renderings give you a much better sense. These are the renderings that have been revised per the design commission's recommendations. So this reflects what the design commission recommended, which are wall signs, A total of four wall signs. You see two on the north elevation, one on the south, and then one on the east and west elevation. You can also see on the south elevation in particular, the menu board signs and snap frame signs that are located there. A total of five on the south elevation. And then there is one menu board sign on the north elevation. This is just an example, an existing Dutch Brothers drive-through. You can see how that signage is placed and the type of information that they're displaying on the signage. and wanted to walk through staff's recommendation as it relates to this proposal. This was a little bit tricky. So the petitioner came in with their initial request and as staff does, we made a recommendation based on that initial request. So our recommendation is outlined in the design commission report was to deny the request for the oversized ground signs. to limit the number of wall signs to four signs. And I would like to make a note here that when this request was brought forward to the Design Commission, we only allowed one wall sign for drive-through restaurants. But if you'll recall, the Village Board recently approved an amendment to the code within the last six weeks or so allowing two wall signs. So I just wanted to make that distinction. So it says one because that is what they were applying under. But technically, if they were applying today, they could have two. So, staff was recommending four as opposed to the six. As it relates to the drive-through signs, we were recommending approval of three menu board signs and not allowing a menu board facing the right-of-way at all. And then we were recommending allowing four snap frame signs as opposed to the eight. So this is the design commission recommendation. As you have seen, uh, wanted to draw your attention to the conditions that design commission also attached there to their recommendation. These conditions are basically outlining which specific signs they wanted eliminated or which specific signs they were going to allow. And then this is the last slide related to the recommendation, just juxtaposing the design commission's recommendation with staff's current recommendation. So as it relates to the ground signs, staff did initially recommend denial of the ground signs, but upon the design commission's deliberation, listening to the petitioner's explanation, and with the understanding that the petitioner does not intend to install any additional ground signs on the property, staff did feel that it was appropriate to support this request for the 80 square foot ground signs. So we have changed our recommendation related to that request, so long as the petitioner continues to agree and we add a condition that they will not install any additional ground signs for the property. As it relates to all of the other variations, staff essentially still continues to recommend what we did initially, despite what the design commission recommendation is. So just wanted to share that with the village board that was in your packet as well. So there are really two motions before you this evening, two for you to consider. One is that you could direct staff and the village attorney to move forward with preparing final documents in alignment with what the design commission has recommended. But I would note that we asked that you would add a condition saying any additional ground signs on the property would be expressly prohibited. Again, the petitioners already agreed to that. The second option would be for the village board to direct staff and the village attorney to prepare final documents in alignment with staff's revised recommendation as reflected on that recent slide. I realize this is a little bit confusing, so I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

All right, thank you, Director Rodman. I couldn't help but notice A couple of the signs, can you go back to the pictures or the renderings that show what those signs might look like? Here you go, this one. A couple of those are, it's the Dutch windmill. Right? That's what those little white diagrams are? Yes, that's correct. Is that like a company logo? Yes, that's correct. Is that a standard that'll be on every building that Dutch Brothers operates in? That's correct. Okay. Do we as a village ever have consideration that somehow identifies and separates out... a logo that has no words in it versus the other picture that we have here where it says Dutch Brothers Coffee with the racing stripes on there. Is that something that we hold firm on or is there opportunity there for us to consider in the future?

That relates to regulating content of signage, which we, uh, tend to avoid doing. And certainly the village attorney could speak more to that. Uh, but from the sign code perspective, whether it's the name of the business or the businesses logo, it's viewed the same. We're simply looking at size and number and location, not necessarily the actual content of the sign.

Okay. Just for my own personal preference, I feel like sometimes those logo signs are more decorative than they are informative. And they're sometimes good for wayfinding when there's really nothing to read. And it could be, I know there's a lot of businesses who have these kinds of signs. Components that keep people coming and going So it's just a thought that maybe maybe something to consider. I don't want to get into a big dialogue on it right now We're going with it the way you have it and as you presented it. It's either a motion to concur with the design commission for which this petitioner has agreed to conform with or Go with the staff recommendation, which is a little more strict am I correct and

Those are the two motions staff has presented. Of course, the Village Board always has the option to pick and choose amongst the relief that's requested. Could modify it. You could do that as well.

But I think tonight what we're looking for is if we have some sort of a unanimous vote or consideration for one of those would make some sense. So we will start on this side this time. Trustee Bertucci.

Ms. Rodman, can you put the text verb, not the text verbage of the motions, because I understand that, but the difference between the design commission and what you wanted to add. Okay. Staff continues to recommend denial. Number four. A variation to allow one wall mounted menu board to face Rand Road where menu boards are required to be located away from the... So tell me in your own words exactly what staff is asking for that's different from the design commission.

So we, for each of these or specifically for the?

Just in general, what is the difference between the two?

In general, the design commission is allowing more signage than staff recommends.

Okay. I mean, I'd be more, you know, based on how busy that is going to be, and it didn't seem like they were going too far overboard, as I would agree with the design commission and the minutes from there. You know, I would be probably in favor of allowing and going towards more the design commission recommendation. And that would be motion one, which I'm going to wait to hear from others before I throw anything on a motion out yet. But it just seems to me, almost to the point that the mayor was saying, is as you're pulling in and you're trying to figure out that site that's got a lot going on on it, And if I want to go to to the Dutch brothers, you know what as I'm trying to turn off of Whatever you know what is that? What would that be ran road as I'm going south or whatever and I'm taking a quick glance to see Where I go once I get on that site. I mean in some ways to me the more signage the better for Read response time so that that's my thought I

If I could add something to that quickly. Within the designer view, of course, it's all based on the design, but a lot of the topic was discussed was traffic and how the signage does help with traffic, as you mentioned. On every other Dutch Bros site that we're working on, they have a standalone monument sign. We're getting rid of that in this case because they do have such great real estate. They'll be on the ground sign with all the other tenants and they view their building as its own monument sign in a sense. And eventually when Dutch Bros is around for a while, they view that windmill as the logo, as you mentioned. will almost be like the McDonald's M. You see that, you know it's Dutch Bros, and one and the same. So that was very important for them to have, and we eliminated some of the signs to help conform with what the design committee recommended. And with the wall signs, Dutch Bros is drive-thru only. There's walk-up windows, which is on the south side. And those are the menu boards that were there. And the one on the Rand Road side, that's where the drive-thru window is. And because there is no indoor... There's no indoor seating or anything that's how people know what to order what's on the menu and that was really important for Dutch Bros because Other than that, then there's not many other places to know what they serve Thank You mayor Well, we're certainly gonna have

Ms. Rodman, many more discussions on some other signs at this location as well as we move forward. I certainly respect some of the things that our design commission comes up with and really look towards staff on a lot of these issues. So if I understand this correctly, Dutch Brothers came forward with a request Our design commission modified it a little bit, and they've agreed to those modifications. Have they seen what staff is recommending?

So what we came forward to the design commission was the Dutch Bros prototypical building design and building signage. They really hold strong for what they get. And because our relationship with Dutch Bros, we were able to have them kind of compromise in a sense with the design commission to, of course, have what the village wants, but also have Dutch Bros still feel comfortable with coming here with their signage and all their branding. They have not seen what staff recommends as the design commission was really excited about what we had agreed upon. And it was something that we felt was a great solution to everyone's kind of issues then.

Well, and I'm always a big proponent to try and help our businesses as much as we can. It's a lot of signage. So I guess my question would be to Dutch Brothers is having really not seen what staff is recommending, and we are certainly tonight, would they be okay with that?

Could I interject, if I may? They should have seen it. What staff recommended was included in the design commission report and was presented by our design planner at that meeting.

Sorry, I might be confused. Are you saying the new recommendation or the previous one?

The only thing, so to clarify, Ben, because I don't mean to, not a trick. So they would have seen staff's original recommendation. The only thing that is different in this recommendation from the original is that we are no longer recommending denial of the ground signs. So in that case, that would be in Dutch Brothers' favor, so I presume they would not take issue with that.

Yeah, I just wanted to know, would they be okay with our staff's little bit of reduction? I mean, is this a deal breaker?

It's really something we had to fight for and leverage our relationship with Dutch Bros to kind of get it to where the design commission landed. And that's kind of where I can kind of... say there from now i i can't really i don't know how dutch bros would feel about taking it down more and i know from our side it was we really did have to leverage that relationship to forfeit some of the wall signs and menu boards that they have prototypically throughout the country okay all right thank you

Sure, thank you so much. And thank you, please tell your principal owner welcome home to Arlington. We're excited that he's here. I agree with the first motion to, I think it is a great compromise between the design commission and also Judge Brothers. Specifically where it's located, I think it's important to have that signage with the amount of traffic that will be there. So I'm in favor of the design commission recommendation.

Thank you. Anyone else on this side? Trustee Levitz.

Thank you. I, too, am in favor of the design commission's recommendation. And to speak to the logo signs that you brought up, Mayor Tenaglia, I recall it might have been the Chase Bank nearby or something we had a long discussion about. Or it might have been another site. I remember having a long discussion of the logo as separate from the sign itself that says Dutch Bros. And like you said, it becomes... The thing that people notice, like the McDonald's M, if you're driving down a highway and you're looking for a McDonald's, you don't look for the sign. You look for the, whoops, sorry, the M. So now you're going to have to go, if you want some coffee, look for the windmill. So to me, it makes sense to have it, and that's why I'm satisfied with that. Certainly the two ground signs, considering, you know, the windmill, the two, Palatine and Rand, you need to have both of those. And I appreciate your explanation. I didn't realize it is a drive-through or walk-up only, most likely drive-through given its location and not a lot of people walking around, except people who are frequenting maybe the other businesses or work in the other businesses in the Triangle area. It makes sense to me now why those snap frame menus are there. And at least we're not talking about an electronic sign tonight, which we wouldn't need. So I am in favor of the design commission's recommendation, and I would be happy to make that motion.

I think you should.

Okay, I would direct staff and the village attorney to prepare final documents granting the requested sign variation relief as recommended by the design commission and subject to the additional condition that any additional ground signs on the property are expressly prohibited, all as set forth in the agenda materials for tonight's board meeting.

Second.

Trustee Santa Maria.

Motion made by Trustee LaBette, seconded by Trustee Santa Maria. and other commentary, Trustee Gilbert. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you guys for coming here.

I think this is great. A couple of questions. I don't know that I heard this answered, but why does the staff have a different recommendation than the design commission? What's the rationale for that?

So as it relates to, I'll just walk through very quickly, the wall signs number two where we're differing. Again, we don't feel that five wall signs are necessary. The code now allows two wall signs. We have, as the staff report indicated, and I have the numbers right in front of me, but a majority of our drive-thru restaurants do not have five wall signs. So we don't feel that five signs is necessary. And while each of these cases are reviewed on their merit, once you allow five wall signs for one restaurant, the next restaurant points to that as well and says, well, they got five. So we like to be conservative and thoughtful when we're looking at these to think about how these requests may come forward in the future. As it relates to the drive-through sign, the menu board signs, we recommended three. That's because there is a menu board sign that they are proposing that is on the other side of the drive-through window. So, you drive up to the drive-through window, there are menu board signs there, you get your item from the window, and then there's another menu board sign on the other side of the window, which we didn't feel was necessary because at that point you've ordered and received your drink. It just felt like additional advertising that didn't need to be there. So that's why we recommended three as opposed to four. And the wall-mounted sign... Relief for three and four kind of go together. So if you recommend approval of four signs, one of those signs is the one that is mounted facing the right-of-way. Again, we like to prevent those menus from being visible from the right-of-way. We think that they should be tucked and faced interior to the site. And so that is why we don't support those menu boards facing the right-of-way. And then as it relates to the snap frame signs, You know we felt eight was excessive in that case the design commission also agreed with us because they made the same Recommendation that we did so that's why we differ really on those three items I guess it's two three and four that we differ with the design commission on all right.

Thank you I appreciate the thought that staff puts into this you know as I say sit here and look at this You know I it's you know Dutch brothers knows what they're doing I think nobody knows how to sell Dutch brothers better than Dutch brothers and they've come here, they want to be a part of Arlington Heights, which is fantastic. Happy to have them. Love that they want to be here. And it seems like we're trying to, in a sense, tell them how to operate, which is cumbersome. I'm looking at this. This was done on May 19th. We sat here and we want them to move quickly. We want the developers to move quickly. But it's been almost four months just to get here to talk about the signage. And I'm not sure that there is an adequate why these barriers are here or what the pushback is for this. I can't tell you If five wall signs or one wall sign is enough, I would typically look to the business to say, what do you need? How can we help you be successful? And if Dutch Brothers thinks they need these signs to be successful, I feel like we should be helping them to try to do that, not making it even harder for them to reimagine what they've already done over and over and over again. I mean, this is tried and true. They've done this. They know what they're doing, as far as I can tell. So I'm excited to go to the Dutch Brothers location. But I'm also wondering, is this something that turned Wendy's away? Did Wendy's run into these roadblocks and decide it just wasn't worth it? And so we're talking about precedence here. And I think that the four months of precedence to get to the board, we could probably do better. And in terms of supporting businesses that want to come here, I think that we might need to take a look at that and say, these guys know what they're doing. Let's listen to them. If it gets to a point where it's obnoxious, or if it's a problem, or if it's creating problems, then potentially look at scaling it back. But I think that when these businesses come to us that have done this before, with an idea, with a business plan, in order to help turn a dilapidated Bermuda Triangle property into something that's profitable, that creates jobs, I think that we can do better in terms of allowing them to get where they need to be and in a much quicker way. And I hope that we can expedite this so that to echo the sentiments of my fellow board members here, we can move this property along and get down the tattered fences and start putting up some businesses that people will go to. So I concur with the motion that's presented, but at the same time, I I can't say that I would be opposed to trying to go more in line with what Dutch Brothers wanted to do at the beginning of this process. Because I want them to feel welcome here. And I don't want to feel like they have to pivot before their doors are even open. So that's all I have to say about that. I welcome you. I hope you enjoy your time here. I hope you enjoy doing business here. And tell your friends. Thank you.

Trustee Maganaro.

Thank you. I am really glad to see this property proposing development and getting close to approval as well. And I'm also concerned about precedent, which is why I'm leaning towards the staff's recommendations. I think as board members here, we have to be prepared to do the same thing for every other coffee shop up and down Rand and Palatine and in the area. if we're going to grant this relief, just in terms of allowing fair competition. And so I think we have to ask ourselves if we want this level of signage on every front in the area. I think there are reasons, I think this is a lot of the reasons that staff proposed what they did. And I think that if Dutch Bros hasn't been apprised that those staff recommendations were a possibility coming out of this meeting, I'm really concerned about that. I'm fairly sure that the majority of the board is willing to go with the design commission's recommendations. I can't support it just because I believe it would create an unfair competitive situation for Dutch Bros, and then I believe we would be compelled to allow it for anybody that comes after Dutch Bros and asks for the same thing.

Trustee Zik? Yeah, thank you, Mayor. Listening to everybody here, I agree with the majority of what's being said here, but what Trustee Mangano said here, I'm kind of leaning that direction also. And here's the thing. Yes, we want businesses to come here, and yes, we want to be, and the four-month thing is definitely a topic, I suppose, for conversation, but we do have to be concerned about precedence. We've got certain codes for a certain amount of signs because of the type of image that we want to have here and what we want to do here in Arlington Heights. That's why we set these up in the first place. So we have to sit back and think about Doing one, what does it do down the road? Obviously, we want to try to help businesses do this as quickly as we possibly can, and yes, they know their business, but we also have to realize we know Arlington Heights too, and we have to make sure that we're doing what's best for the community as a whole. So now we go with five of these. and the code says two, now the ones that have all said five, or we've only allowed two, do they come back and say, well, wait a second, now we want to make this change. We're starting to open up something here, because there are possible conversations that can't come up. And if we start doing this, we're allowing this, and we see there's too many signs up there, now we have to pull it back if it starts to get... gaudy or whatever the correct terminology wants to be. So I do appreciate what staff is trying to do, is trying to help them, Dutch Brothers Coffee, get what they want, get closer to what they want, and go past what we've already said what we want as far as recommendations. We are allowing them to go past, but we are also saying, but this is as a community, this is what we want, and this is what's best for all of us too. Sure, we're playing both games here. We're trying to do what's best for the businesses and get them going, but we're also trying to do what's best for Arlington Heights. And I think what the staff recommendations did were very good. So at this particular point, yeah, it's funny because if I vote no against this, it sounds like we're going against the business wanting to do something to open up here, but that's really not the case. We want to give you things and give you more than what we've given others, but maybe not that step farther. Thank you.

Well, let me offer this to you. There are times, and I'll say this because Trustee Mangano and Trustee Zick are both not as old on the board as a couple of us are, and there are times when those kinds of issues during a vote come into play, and it's not totally unusual. You can vote to approve something with comment. And then it gets recorded that way that your reason for either voting in favor of something or against something, this is why. So that it's on the record as to what your thoughts were and it doesn't turn your vote into something you didn't want it to be. So whatever you decide to do, that's part of your entitlement as a trustee to speak in that manner. I would like to say that every development is unique. in character, location, in so many different ways. And the reason our community is set up the way it is is for exactly this reason. When a development comes in, it's a tight site. There's a lot going on here. It's always been tight. It's always been where it is. It's just that it was a single user. Now it's going to be more. And staff has a job to do every time, every single time a development comes through those doors, is to share perspective, share examples, and come to some sort of a recommendation. And their recommendation is worthy and valid, and it's because there's this manual called our zoning ordinances. you're going to deal with the next set of manuals called building codes. But for now it's zoning ordinances. And this is part of the zoning ordinances and it's their, their job to share with you what those are, but it's also their job to then kind of identify where it might be okay to ask for variations from those zoning ordinances, which is what you've done. Your first step then after staff tells you what, they believe is appropriate is go up the ladder and go to the design commission, plan commission, and ultimately here tonight. And each one of these commissions will give you their perspective on what they think is appropriate. And you've heard a few different ones even here tonight. But that's the job of this policy. And over time, things work out. And everyone is different. And I think for those folks who are going to use whatever happens here tonight as precedent, they'll have to prove why they're worthy of whatever benefits you were given tonight. And maybe they won't be able to. And that's okay, it's perfectly fine. Every site is different, every project is different, and the way I vote on this tonight is gonna have zero impact on how I vote on the next project. So this is the way I see government working the best way it can, from all these different directions, Thanking you for being here, going through it, and doing it. Could it be faster? Sure, I'd love it to be faster. I know you would too. And that's fine. We'll get there. We'll get there together. So we have a motion on the floor by Trustee LeBed, seconded by Trustee Santa Maria, and that is for, could you bring that up real quick? That is for motion number one. And I think what we'll do is we'll do a roll call vote on this.

Mayor, can I ask a question? You know what? I'm sorry.

I have to ask for the audience first really quick. Is there anyone in the audience who wanted to make commentary on this? Mayor, can I ask a question? Of course.

Thank you. The additional ground signs on the property, the staff had said that they're ground signs per building. Typically, as it sits now, they would be able to add more. Was that right or wrong? Did I misinterpret?

Correct. So ground signs are permitted to be 66 square feet in size. Okay. And they are allowed one per building per street frontage. So they could have additional ground signs on this property. They indicated in their application that they would like the two multi-tenant signs larger than what code allows and that they would if that was granted, they would not seek additional ground signs. So staff is okay with what the design commission has recommended for a larger sign at 80 square feet, but we would like to hold the petitioner to their assertion that they then would not seek additional signage. We do not support the larger ground signs if they're going to have more than two.

And these are located on opposite streets, near the opposite entrances, so that no matter which direction you're going, on which road, you can see the different tenants that are in this development. Do I have that right? Correct. Okay.

And that was the main concern when we brought this to the design commission is for the multi-tenant building, the tenants that are on the northern cap, they're really tucked into the site. It's really internal. And their only visibility to the to the streets are from these multi-tenant signs. And by code, like we have mentioned, we would be able to really have three. We kind of decided to shrink that into just two monument signs and have this act as like a whole shopping center to just really have each tenant have the visibility they need to succeed at this site.

How many would you like?

Two.

Okay.

Trustee Riccucci.

Just one other point. I don't be surprised if some of those tenants in that old Pep Boys building that are, like you say, the only thing is going to be the monument signs, if they're not telling their customers, when you see Dutch Boys, go in there, and then we're behind, you know. So that's another reason why I'm supporting it, because you're going to act like a landmark for some of those other businesses.

Anyone else? Trustee Johnston.

Thanks, Mayor. I am agreeing with staff recommendations. I think there is such a thing as too much signs. And with this being such a busy intersection, I'm concerned that too many signs is overwhelming. We know that there's going to be signs for the property that's undeveloped on that very corner that's currently zoned R1. And so I do think that we I'll be voting for the staff recommendations.

All right, anybody else? All right, so the motion is, again, Trustee LeBetz, seconded by Trustee Sanaray for motion number one, which is to concur with the Design Commission and the petitioners agreed upon number and location of all signage. Did I say that correctly?

Yes, essentially.

Okay. So is any other further dialogue? I already asked audience and I saw no hands. Anybody else up here? If not, a roll call vote is appropriate.

Trustee LaBette? Yes. Trustee Santa Maria? Yes. Trustee Bertucci? Yes. Trustee Zik?

No, based on my previous comments.

Trustee Schwingback?

Yes.

Trustee Manganiello?

No, with comment.

Trustee Dunnington? No. Trustee Gilbert?

Yes.

President Tenaglia?

Yes. Okay, if my math is correct, you have six positive votes. Is that correct, Megan? Yes. All right, so your request is granted on the signage. There are three trustees who feel as though that less signage would be better, so I'm going to suggest that you be very careful and mindful of all of this information and don't make it anything that it doesn't have to be. Of course. Okay? Yeah. And I think that's about it for now. Thank you for your time and the dialogue. I appreciate everything I heard tonight. Good luck to you and the operator. I hope that you guys have an overwhelming success. Thank you so much. Next item on the agenda is item D, and that is 207-209 East Valley Lane, which is Shelter Inc., and it's for an expansion in use, not in structure. Special use permit variations, so I'll hand this off to staff for a Petitioner would go Trustee Santa Maria wanted to make a comment. Oh, I I knew that I wanted to call on trustee Santa Maria for a commentary

Sure, so thank you, Mayor. Because of my current professional relationship with Shelter Youth and Family Services, I have a conflict of interest regarding this agenda item, and I will therefore recuse myself from the discussion and the vote, and will step away from the dais while the matter is discussed.

All right, very good. And then we'll call you back in for item E?

Yes, please.

All right. All right, so as Trustee Santa Maria is exiting, does staff want to open this dialogue, or should we call the petitioner up?

I think the petitioner can probably start the conversation. All right, we'll do it that way.

There is a clicker up there for you, too, as well.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and board members. Thank you for the opportunity for having us here tonight. My name is Gina Shula, and I'm the Chief Program Officer at Shelter Youth and Family Services. I oversee all of our programs at our agency. Our mission for the last 50 years has been protecting children, strengthening families, and transforming communities. And tonight, I will talk to you about a program that does exactly that, right here in Arlington Heights, our transitional living program, or as we call it, our TLP, located at 207 and 209 East Valley Lane. So why are we here tonight? Shelter Youth and Family Services is seeking to expand usage of the TLP property at 207-209 East Valley Lane by allowing four additional youth to join our program, bringing our total capacity from six to 10. We're asking for this expansion because the program has been genuinely successful. Over the last five years, we've built a strong track record at this home, and as a result, we currently have a long list of young people waiting to get into the program. There is a real unmet need in our community that we have the physical space to meet. We just need your approval to do it. I also want to note that our application has already gone through a thorough review. Village staff reviewed our request and made a positive recommendation to grant the special use for four additional youth. And separately, our Arlington Heights Police Chief, Nicholas Pecora, has applauded Shelter for the way we manage and mitigate issues directly, which has considerably reduced the need for police involvement. Let me start with what this program actually is and who it serves. The TLP serves young people who have overcome abuse, neglect, and abandonment. Youth who through no fault of their own didn't have the stable foundation most of us take for granted. What makes this work is structure. We have credentialed on-site staff who enforce accountability and behavioral requirements around the clock. This isn't a loosely supervised group home. It is a professionally run program with real expectations. And ultimately, this strengthens our community. When we help a young resident become a productive, contributing, independent adult, that's not just a win for that individual. It's a win for Arlington Heights. So how does the program actually work? The TLP is a two-year voluntary program for young people ages 17 to 21 that helps them achieve self-sufficiency and independence. It's voluntary. These young people who choose to be here and choose to do the work. Many of them enter the program lacking basic life skills that the rest of us take for granted. How to budget finances, how to apply for a job, how to grocery shop, even how to do laundry. These are fundamental things and without someone to teach them, young people aging out of the system are set up to fail. The TLP teaches these vital foundational lessons. When participants complete our program, they leave with the knowledge to sustain their independence and flourish as adults, not just survive, but genuinely thrive. It's worth pausing on why young people choose this program in the first place. They join because they want to lead the normal, healthy, productive life that they were denied through no fault of their own. That's it. That's the motivation. And I want to emphasize, these youth are already a part of the fabric of our community. They attend local schools, they are active members of the Arlington Heights workforce, working as waiters, grocery store staff, retail clerks, and more. They're not separate from this community, they're already in it. What they want is to become even better neighbors, coworkers, and friends. The TLP is what helps them make the goal a reality. I know that for a program like this to earn a community's trust, accountability has to be real, not just a talking point. So let me be specific. The TLP is effective because of strong accountability measures and professional management. The program's staff are qualified and state accredited, and they closely monitor all participants while enforcing strict behavioral requirements. Here's a concrete example for you. Staff enforce a midnight curfew. Any young person not back by the required time is immediately reported to DCFS. There's no leniency here. This is a hard line and it's enforced consistently. Accountability isn't just about behavior, it's also about building real personal responsibility. TLP youth are required to meet personal responsibility milestones on their road to independence. This includes maintaining at least $500 in their bank accounts at all times. To do that, they have to hold down a job and learn to budget carefully. This isn't optional. It's a condition of staying in the program. And participants understand there are real life consequences if they don't comply. If they don't meet these requirements, they're asked to leave the program. This is what makes TLP different from simply providing housing. It's actively teaching independence and real stakes are attached. I want to take a moment to look back at what's happened since this program came to this home in Arlington Heights. Four years ago, this village had faith in our young people and welcomed them into the community. The results have been inspiring. Youth in the program have assimilated seamlessly, working at local establishments and contributing to the community around them. Over 15 youth have successfully completed this program. They've graduated high school, gone on to college and trade schools, and are now thriving in careers, including nursing. That simply would not have been possible without the TLP and this community's support. And maybe most importantly, neighbors who originally had concerns when we moved into this location are now friendly and supportive. That shift didn't happen by accident. It happened because these young people have genuinely woven themselves into the neighborhood and the community. I don't want you to just take our word for this. I want you to hear from the Arlington Heights Police Department directly. Because of the TLP's strict accountability and in-depth selection process, police calls are down considerably, and the calls that do occur are for minor issues. Chief Nicholas Pecora put it this way. He applauds and commends staff for managing and mitigating an issue before it ever reaches the point where someone is dialing 911. He specifically noted that the valley location has not generated activity anyone near what the Arlington Heights Police experienced at the former facility on Gulf Road. And he thanked us for the effort that went into achieving that. The number that captures this is that police calls are down 75%. That is a direct result of accountability structure that I've walked you through. Now let me talk about the specific request in front of you tonight. Currently we have six youth that occupy the unit at 209 East Valley Lane, which has three shared bedrooms, two bathrooms, a kitchen, dining room, and a living room. The adjoining unit at 207 East Valley Lane has the same layout with three bedrooms, two bathrooms, a kitchen, dining room, and a living room. But right now, it's used exclusively for staff offices and supervision space. Excuse me because the program has been remarkably successful We're asking to allow for additional youth to join which requires your approval tonight They would reside in two of the bedrooms at 207 East Valley Lane while the third room would continue to be used for staff To put this in context in 2021, the village granted occupancy for six youth at that time, the current duplex has the physical space to give four more young people that exact same opportunity to build a better life. We're not asking to change the footprint of the property or add a new building. We're asking to use the space. We already have more fully for a program that's already working. For the last four years, these youth have proven to our residents that the program helps them become productive, independent members of the community. Embracing and welcoming four more young people will help us even more positively impact the next generation, and it will help ensure the continued success of what we've built here in Arlington Heights. I'd like to give you a look inside of the home itself so that you can see exactly what the space looks like. These are staff offices and common living rooms in the property, a professional, well-maintained space where our credentialed staff work directly on site with residents every day. This isn't a converted space that feels institutional. It's genuinely comfortable and well-kept. Here you can see more of the living spaces in a residence bedroom. As you can see, these are normal, comfortable living spaces, the kind of home environment that supports the sense of stability and normalcy these young people need in order to focus on school, work, and building their independence. The video that you're gonna see is Christian, who's one of our young people whose life has been changed by our program. Christian's story is one of many, but is a powerful reminder of what actually is at stake in the vote in front of you tonight. Not just beds in the house, but real futures for real young people in our community.

I like football, wrestling, track. I love sports. I love outside. I love physical work. I also love reading. I was in an orphanage in Poland. Then obviously I got adopted and we moved over here. I didn't know where I was going to go or I didn't know what I was going to do. I didn't really have much hope after my 18th birthday. There was a safety net up to 18, but after that I didn't know what were resources that I could pull for myself. So I had no idea what I was going to do when I turned 18. Definitely overwhelmed, stressed, anxious, but also very lonely. With coming to the TLP, obviously all the skills, all the life skills that I would learn, I finally, I kind of felt relaxed when I heard about it. Like that stress was kind of relieved. It was a huge weight off my shoulders. which is the whole point of this program. They don't want you stuck in the same place for months on end. They want to teach you something and then build on after that, learn a skill that would just build on. The environment, I love talking about the legal system, about law, so it really clicked with me. It became a passion. to me. So that's why I want to do law. And the psychology is kind of just like an aspect of it that I would think would benefit being a lawyer in a courtroom. And I can have the goals that I want to have now because of TLP. I can think about finishing high school and then going to college. I can think about doing what career path I want to do or go down. Be comfortable with my situation. And my future looks a lot different because a year, two years ago, I didn't think I would have a future. I had next to no hope. Everyone here is just trying to move forward in their life and buying that house or moving to that house would be easier and better for us. We just want to finish high school and move out and get our own life started.

Thank you for your time and consideration tonight. Our team is happy to answer any questions you might have about our program.

Okay, very good. Thank you. Is staff prepared to share thoughts? Thank you.

Okay, all right. So as the petitioner indicated before you this evening is a request for a special use permit and also some variations related to 207 to 209 East Valley Lane. This is the property location. You can see it's primarily surrounded by other single family homes. It is about 8,000 square feet in size. The existing zoning of the property is R6, which is a multifamily dwelling district. It does allow for shelter care homes, which is what this use is characterized as in our zoning code as a special use. They have an existing special use in place for the six residents, and so they are seeking a new special use to allow them to expand to 10 residents. Some of this background you have already heard as it relates to their prior location that was in place for over 10 years on Gulf Road. They did receive the current special use permit in 2021 to locate at Valley Lane. That's been operating since late 2021, 2022. They did initially request 12 residents at this location, but after review and based on some resident concerns, the board ultimately approved only six residents and essentially said, let's see how that goes. And if it goes well, please come back and we can reevaluate a request to increase the size, which is what brings them before you this evening. So they are requesting the expansion of their shelter care home from six to 10 residents. And then there are two variations that go along with this request. One is to waive the requirement for a traffic and parking study. And two is to reduce the required off street parking spaces from nine to two. The property, as they've shared, currently houses six residents. I won't go through the structure of the building as she's already done that. But essentially it is an existing duplex with two entirely separate units. So they do have the space that is in compliance with the building code that would allow them to increase their occupancy by these additional four residents if approved by the village board. One of the things that they have shared is their staffing model. The facility is staffed 24 hours a day. They would be hiring additional staff should these residents be added to the facility. So they would have two staff members on shift at all times. They split those amongst three shifts, and they went through their screening process already. They do screen the potential residents fairly rigorously, monitor them regularly, and ensure that they are complying with not only their program requirements, but DCFF requirements as well. When they occupied this particular location, they did upgrade the security of the location as well. They replaced all the windows. They put in a new fire alarm system and a sprinkler system. And they do have a comprehensive security camera system as well. traffic and parking. So, the code does require that they have a space for each staff member as well as two spaces per three residents. So, under our code, nine parking spaces would be required. However, most of their residents don't own cars. They are not in a position to have their own vehicle, and so they really only need the two spaces for the staff. In the case that they do have a resident that owns a vehicle, they have an agreement with an adjacent property owner, Village Bank and Trust, to allow their residents to park their vehicles in their parking lot. I believe they've told us that only three residents have owned cars in the past, so we don't anticipate that parking is going to be a challenge on the property. And given that they don't have cars, that's why they're requesting the variation from submitting the traffic and parking study and staff is supportive that there will not be an increase in traffic as a result of increasing residents at this location. Most of those residents are relying on public transportation, rideshare, and parking. WANTED TO TOUCH JUST BRIEFLY ON THE POLICE CALLS. THERE IS EXTENSIVE INFORMATION IN THE PLAN COMMISSION STAFF REPORT RELATED TO THIS, BUT WANTED TO NOTE THAT IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS, ESSENTIALLY SINCE THIS LOCATION HAS BEEN OPERATING, THERE HAVE BEEN 56 POLICE CALLS. there was a spike in 2024 and 2025 and shelter inc has indicated that the vast majority of those calls were due to a particular resident in the program who has now transitioned out of the program as you can see this year as of mid-august there were only three calls from this particular residence One thing that I think is important to note is all of the calls that are generated for this property are coming from the property itself. So the police department has not received a single call from the neighbors related to this property. It's all been calls from the staff at the location. And this gives you an idea of what the calls are for. Majority over 20 of the calls are related to a missing person. So someone not coming home when they're expected to come home, them notifying the police, and then obviously when they do arrive home, notifying the police that the person has come back. So that is a vast majority of the calls is related to them obviously monitoring their residents and wanting to know where they are. Some other calls obviously related to ambulance calls and well-being checks as well. So the staff initially recommended in our staff report the approval, excuse me, of the increase from six to 10 residents, as well as approval of both the variations that they requested. This request, of course, was considered by the plan commission. There was some public present at the meeting. I will note, what's not noted on this slide is staff did ask Shelter Inc. to hold a neighborhood meeting, as we do with many of our projects. They did hold that neighborhood meeting. They did notice all property owners within 250 feet of their property. No one attended the meeting. No one reached out to them in advance of the meeting. No one reached out to staff in advance of the meeting. So just wanted to make sure that it was noted that they did have that meeting and give the neighborhood an opportunity to speak with them directly. However, there were some residents that did speak at the plan commission meeting. They did share concerns about the proximity of the home to schools and particularly bus stops. Some concerns about not current challenges with traffic and parking, but the potential for there to be increased challenges with more residents. Concerns that there could be more police calls and that just in general adding residents while things may be going well now, adding residents and adding four residents specifically could increase the likelihood that things may not go as smoothly as they're going now. The Plan Commission also shared their thoughts, of course, on the proposal. Some of the concerns that they expressed was that 12 people may be too many people in this particular structure. That would be the 10 residents plus the two staff. The staff are not sleeping there. They don't live there like the residents do, but there are always two staff, obviously, in the home. They did suggest that Shelter Inc. consider acquiring another location and I will let them speak to that if the board has that same question and express some similar concerns to the public as it relates to potential increases in calls. There were several commissioners that did comment that they felt the increase to 10 residents was reasonable, but did not feel like they could get commission support for everyone to support the increase to 10. And so the commission found a compromise at eight. But there were a few that did want to go on the record as saying they were comfortable with the 10. So this is the recommendation that came forward from the plan commission to approval of expansion of the shelter care home from six to eight residents. Some conditions attached to that, no less than one staff per five residents to be present. The staff must be trained in the CPI and think trauma training. The petitioner must continue to follow the screening procedures they have in place. MUST FOLLOW THEIR TRANSITIONAL LIVING PROGRAM HANDBOOK, CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AS IT RELATES TO ON-SITE SECURITY. AGAIN, A CONDITION RELATED TO NOT PARKING RESIDENT-OWNED CARS ON THE PROPERTY, MAINTAINING THAT AGREEMENT THEY HAVE WITH VILLAGE BANK, AND THEN, OF COURSE, COMPLYING WITH ALL FEDERAL, STATE, AND VILLAGE REGULATIONS. Staff I will note does have a slightly different recommendation than the Planning Commission did. Staff believes that you know based on the data that we reviewed from the Police Department and our discussions with the Police Department as well as the measures that Shelter Inc has put in place and the fact that we have not received complaints from the neighborhood in the past five years that we think you know, or that we are supportive of the application for the 10 residents. So we continue to recommend, um, the increase in residents to the full 10 that they requested. Despite the plan commission's recommendation of eight, uh, we would attach the same conditions. The plan commission has attached. So the proposed motion before you this evening is to direct staff and the village attorney to prepare final documents granting the zoning relief as outlined either in accordance with the plan commission recommendation of eight or the staff recommendation of 10 for consideration at a future board meeting in compliance with the materials that are in your packet this evening. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Rodman. Okay, pretty well-defined program here and petition requests. Manager Ricklaus.

I just wanted to add another piece of context. This property has been a topic of discussion between me and Chief Pecora for a number of years, even before they were at their current location. I think because we've got a lot of new faces here, folks may not realize that when this property was located on Gulf Road, we did have a lot of issues there back in the day. It was quite a bit, and over a similar period, we had a couple of hundred calls for service. Since they moved to this location, they really enacted a number of mitigation measures. And since they came in, given the amount of interest we had from the neighbors, this has been a regular source of conversation between Chief Pecor and I. Consistently, he has said that this has not been a problem. The worst fears that were expressed in a version of reality that existed on Gulf Road is just not happening here. And as Director Rodman indicated, The reason why there were even as many calls as there were, and they were really kind of spiked during a particular year, were just due to that DCFS requirement that if someone doesn't show up by curfew, that generates a automatic call for service. But the other thing I want to hit home is because of how our incident management system works, there is one call for service when they are missing and a second call for service when they're found. So there's two calls for service for each incident of the person being out past curfew. But there are not issues of, you know... Folks who are living this facility out, you know, I guess doing wrong in the community Causing police issues in any way shape or form and I did have a follow-up conversation with chief Pecora this afternoon about this knowing this was on the agenda he reiterated this is not a cause for concern for the police department based on the Recent history since they've relocated.

I just want to make that point very well Thank You manager reckless All right. Does the petitioner have anything else they want to add before we go to the village board here? I see a head shaking. No. Okay. Very good. Let's go this direction this time. Anybody over here have questions? Thoughts? Trustee Gilbert? I see a hand.

Sure. Thank you. I don't know where this room is gonna go with this, but for those of you watching at home and all the ships at sea, this is a relatively divided topic. I can tell you that my inbox was probably fairly split of people who are against this and people who were in favor of it. So all of you who are here today to speak, I applaud you for being here. I think it's one of the hardest things to do, and I really appreciate your voice. But I just wanted people to know that this is an issue that the community is still a bit divided on, and they let us all know about it. I had the opportunity to tour this facility. And personally, I think the work that they're doing over there is absolutely fantastic. You know, I'm a huge advocate for the kids in the community. I spend most of my time volunteering, helping the kids in the community. And I feel like my dad, when I called these individuals kids, because they're 17 to 21, but they're kids. I guess I'm just getting older, but I still consider them to be kids. And I'm a huge advocate for them. And I think that, again, this is an opportunity for us to help more kids, you know, to become, you know, upstanding members of society. You know, we're... These kids don't have the advantages that a lot of kids in our town do. And I'm proud of the fact that we can help provide them with stability. I would very much be in favor of leaning towards the staff or voting in favor of the staff recommendation here. I sincerely hope that the one resident of this facility who was living there in 24 and 25 is doing well and has moved on to a bright future. And I hope that this home helped that person in some way. And I just want to make a comment on some of the emails that I had received and some of the comments. And I think that You know, we look at a lot of these police calls. As far as I can tell, you know, and from what we've heard from police staff, there is no issue from them with being able to service the calls at this facility. I believe that, you know, a majority of these calls are for, you know, people who aren't coming home when they're supposed to. And I personally think that a call to the police in that situation is a very worthwhile call. You know, we're trying to find somebody that it's hard to find. You know, I think people lose that perspective. You know, in our own homes, If my son doesn't come home, it's usually relatively easy for me to find them. They're trackable. It's easy to know who their network is. And that's not something that's afforded to the people who are necessarily managing these homes. And they also have a different standard than we do in terms of when they have to call. And those checkpoints are there for a reason. And I think they're there for a good reason. We're looking out for the well-being of these families. And and these kids. And there's families in town that have some of the same issues that they deal with at these particular homes. And when the police are called, and they come into your neighborhood, and there's a family that's having issues, I don't think to myself, I really hope that family moves out of here. My heart goes out to them. And I hope that they are able to stabilize their situation. And you want to help them, because we are the village of good neighbors. And I think that that that that speaks to all of these homes, you know, whether they be single family or whether to be a home like this, you know, and in terms of, you know, the commission and their concerns about too many people in a house. Maybe it was just me, but I feel like that's not a lot of people for 17 to 21-year-olds living in a home. In college situations, there's that many people living in homes all over the country, and it's just fine. I don't think that it's an overcrowded situation whatsoever. Shelter's not asking for us to do... anything but provide compassion for these children. And I am fully prepared to do that. And thank you to the shelter people for all that you guys do. I think you're a very valuable part of this community and the fabric of our community. So thank you.

Trustee LeBetz.

Thank you, and thank you, Trustee Gilbert, for your comments. I really appreciate them, and I am also supportive of the staff's recommendation for the 10 residents in here. I think one of the, I do, let me also preface that, that I also, I think as we all have, received many emails and such from people, both pro and con on this, and I appreciate hearing from everyone. try to respond as much as possible. But when they start coming in late in the day on a board meeting, I don't always have that opportunity to sit down at my computer and respond. I think one of the things that's important to me is that we're going, if we have 10 people, we're going from a ratio of one staff member to six people to one staff member for five people. And I think that's an important consideration. I think also there was comment at the plan commission or at least a question to the shelter staff of whether having eight people would be financially feasible and it's my understanding it would not be. And I see some heads nodding in the audience from the shelter folks. So that's another reason that I'm supportive of the 10 residents here. And finally, the fact that trustee, I mean, excuse me, Chief Pecora continues to say that things have drastically improved. And I understand people saying, well, it may be improved now, but what about next year or next year? But I think that the shelter folks do a great job of screening And that makes a big difference. There's a lot of different kinds of transitional living programs. This happens to be one for youth 17 to 21. There's also the ones that we have here in town that are for families or for families at risk of being homeless, such as the organization Family Forward, as they try to support and mentor. And there's a similarity to all of these. And the similarity is that there are people working with the residents or the members of a transitional living program to help them learn to, as said previously, budget and shop and hold down a job. and complete their education so they can better themselves. And I think that it's really important that we support these programs. And I know many of them, we've had transition, I've actually been kind of involved in some of them since, I think the early 90s with, well, it's Northwest Compass now, but what it was before then. But they are generally very successful, and I think this is too, and that's why I support this request and the staff's recommendation.

Trustee Maganaro?

Thank you, President Tenaglia. I will just preface by saying I also agree with the staff's recommendation based on the facts and the data that are available. I'll try not to repeat the things that I've heard from Trustees Gilbert and LeBeds too much. I do agree with pretty much everything they have said. I want to harken back to what Ms. Chula said Without a program like this, we are setting up young people to fail simply because they've turned 18. And I really am not willing to do that because I do not see data that shows me that there's a risk of violent crime, of calls being generated. What I'm hearing is the calls are being generated from within the home to maintain the rules that shelter has set up and that they have really improved their program since they moved from golf. My understanding, both from reading minutes and speaking with some of the former trustees that previously voted on this, is kind of along with what Director Rodman said a little earlier, was the intent of the board, I believe at the time it was approved, was that if things went well, that they would be allowed to expand. And then I think lastly, I'll kind of reiterate what Trustee LeBed said a little bit, that We just were in a conversation about trying to find a business, a scale, at which it could operate profitably and effectively. Now, we're talking about a nonprofit organization, but it still has to pay bills. They still have to bring in staff. And the things that they are doing for these young people to give them the life skills to succeed are do cost money. And so we have to consider their need for scale in their operations. Mr. President, if I may, I would like to ask the petitioner a question.

Sure.

I mentioned being pretty driven by data. You talk about, and I would reiterate what Trustee Gilbert said about the individual that didn't do well in the program. You've got a 91% success rate with the folks that have been through. Do you have any information or data about the outcomes for a young person who's able to go through a TLP program compared to the ones that are not able to get access to such a program?

I don't have that right off the top. I didn't look at the average across the state, so I don't know it, and I apologize.

No, I wasn't necessarily expecting to have you. That was partly a rhetorical question. In my mind, I can't imagine that the outcomes are anything like as good. I would really like to have the data to back myself up on that. Maybe I will do the research.

I think a lot of times we look at 18-year-olds, and yes, we say they're legal adults. But I know with even my own two kids who became that age, they weren't ready to be on their own. They still needed guidance. They needed my support to go to college, to come home to someplace, to budgeting their money, learning to pay their own bills, buying their first car. And that's, I think, what our goal is, is to try and help them that they're not going to be out at 18 on the street, most likely committing crimes or ending up incarcerated or homeless. we're there to try and teach them these things and help them move into the next part of their life.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Trustee Zik? Thank you, Mayor. as my fellow trustees have said here. I actually do agree with the recommendation that staff has thrown out here. I am curious and looking forward to hearing from those people that would like to speak about this. But I'm impressed with what Shelter has done here. I mean, you've taken something that is a really good cause and a really good situation that you're trying to help these kids, as Trustee Gilbert said. And maybe there were some issues that were going on, and you got it resolved and taken care of to a certain degree. Now, I do have a few questions. Some of them are going to come to you, but Ms. Rodman. This, the parking situation that we're talking about, I live right in this area. I go down valley once or twice a week, you know, and I've never seen a particular issue with parking as it is right now. But the whole parking issue and the amount of parking we have, that's because it is an organization, correct? Because if it was actually homes, the residential living, this wouldn't become an issue, is that correct?

Correct. It is based on the fact that they're classified as a shelter care home versus a single family residence.

Okay. Because with a duplex that you've got there, you've got, um, you've got three bedrooms. I believe they were, they were both three bedroom duplexes that were there. So you could potentially have five people living in there and you could potentially have 10 people, you know, as, as it is as just a home. But now the concern is because of, because of the whole shelter situation. Um, You've been doing this for a few years now, and you've done 15 people. Would I be correct to assume that there's a wait list to get into here?

There is. We generally have five to six additional youth on our wait list, which is why we're looking to expand so that we can provide a placement for those kids that are waiting out there. Some of them are usually in foster homes where they have to leave, or they might be in group homes or residential settings, and they're aging out at the age of 18, so they need to move on.

Are there other homes like this in the northwest suburbs here?

No, which is why we're kind of a desired location for people, because most of the transitional living programs are inner city, and a lot of the kids that we have, and I say kids, and I'm sorry, they're young men, when they come to us, they're desiring to be more in the suburbs, because they themselves came from suburban settings. Not necessarily in our immediate area, but none of them grew up in the inner city of Chicago.

Okay, and the reason why you have to make these calls when they miss the midnight curfew, is that a shelter rule or is that a DCFS or an Illinois rule?

That's our rule.

That is your rule?

That is our rule. It's our way to make sure because a lot of the kids that are in the home have to wake up early to go to work, so we require people to be home by midnight so that

They're not disturbing kids that are going to sleep so that they can get up for the next day And it's just also just accountability wise us being able to say we know exactly where they're at Okay, okay So the next question I have to ask it you know we look at the police reports and as a director Rodman said the all the increases that you had in 24 and 25 was due to one to one kid correct correct, okay, so Since then, what have you guys learned? Has anything changed? Because obviously that was a situation that you wish didn't happen. But what has happened since then?

I think, again, it's us looking at our screening tools, making sure we're following up when we're reading case files. We're looking at unusual incident reports in their files, talking more extensively with the case workers that manage that use case prior to them coming to us. So I think it's us just making sure we're continuing to screen as kind of hard as we've been doing.

Okay. Yeah, I've seen the questionnaire that you're asking. There's a lot of pretty tough questions that you're asking these kids, and I think you're using it in the right way. Overall, the situation with all the police calls, and I know that's a sore point for some people, and it's absolutely something you should be concerned about. But as you look into it deeper, and the data that we showed, and the fact that not one resident has, and going back on data and everything, that's a strong data point for me, that not one resident from the area has called and made one of those police reports. I think that That, to me, just tells a lot. And I have contacted, you know, we got a lot of emails, but I also reached out to, because I do live in that area, I know some people, not right next door, but in that general area, and I contacted them just to kind of get opinions on what they thought. And I was actually surprised at how many of them didn't even know the home was there. But there was a lot of consensus, though, that, you know, they've been doing the right things. Sure, six years ago or four years ago, whatever it was, you know, we gave you six people and you've done a good job, you know, with that. And I think a lot of that also, if I read in the reports, too, was a lot of it had, sure, come on back, but, you know, see how it goes. But I think a lot of that had to do with the parking and they were concerned about the parking. Does that sound correct?

I don't know specifically.

I mean, I think there were concerns about parking, and I think that they, you know, the truth of the matter is there just really aren't vehicles that are, you know, used by the residents, which is very limited exceptions. But I think the fact that they made a decision to make an arrangement with the adjacent bank in case that does play itself out, I think it, you know, it was a goodwill gesture. But it just, you know, again, I don't want to speak for them, but it doesn't seem like

The vehicles you know being operated by residents is really materialized in any substantial way Yeah, so so I think you do my whole point of that is I think we're going down the right path and I want as I said earlier I I'm I do want to listen to the residents, but my gut feeling and this is stuff that I've seen so far Does the staff plan is is is the right way to go?

Very well, we'll go down this direction Trustee, Dunnington Thank You mayor

First, I want to thank Shelter for giving us the opportunity to do the tour of the property so we could really see where the residents would be living and what the setup was like. I think that was really helpful. I am fully in support of allowing 10 residents in the property so that you can fully utilize the building. I think that shelter has demonstrated a strong history of responsible operation and there hasn't been any reported neighborhood disturbances. Also, I believe as a community, if we want successful adults who contribute to society, these are the kind of things, this shelter is what we need to support so that It gives young adults the opportunity and the skills to thrive and be responsible members of our community. So I think we should definitely give these four more youths the opportunity for a better life. And I would make a motion for the proposal.

Please do.

So I would like to direct staff and the village attorney to prepare final documents granting the zoning relief as outlined in the staff recommendation for consideration at a future board meeting for PC26-0-13 and subject to the recommended conditions. All is set forth in the agenda materials for tonight's board meeting.

I'll second. Second.

All right, motion is made by Trustee Dunnington. And the second was Trustee Manganiello. I heard that voice first. All right, so we have a motion and a second. We'll continue on with dialogue. Trustee Schwingbeck. Thank you, Mayor. Well, I certainly didn't want to have a fight up here on the second.

Not to go into all the other things that my fellow trustees said, but Ms. Rodman, thank you. Gina, thank you for the presentation. The thing that really got me to support this is, one, I had gone through it years ago when we first approved it for six, and I got to see the residents. And then coming back again last week and hearing about it many years ago, I heard some different things. So I guess first of all, seeing it for the second time last week, the property has really been improved. There was a little discussion earlier about windows and things like that, but just the landscaping alone and going into the backyard and seeing what you guys have done with the property, to me, I saw being good neighbors. Whether it's your property or anybody else moving in there, the job of a good neighbor is to keep up the property and make it look attractive. Secondly, my inbox is a little different because years ago when this resident was first being discussed, I got a tremendous amount of emails on both sides. And this time I haven't. Um, I've, I've gotten a lot that are in favor of it. Um, but really only one or two, uh, that were against it. And I went back to all the, um, emails that I had saved from the prior, um, discussion. And so when I look at your neighborhood meeting, whether it's our planning commission or whether it's zoning board, you have to go out so many feet from the property and ask for neighbors to come and comment if they want. And a good telltale sign for me is when nobody comes to those meetings. So being on the zoning board for four years, we would get a lot of people, and we do here as well on a lot of topics where we get half the room in favor of it and half against. And I wasn't seeing that in my emails and certainly what you said about the meeting in the neighborhood where you only had a few people come. That's a good sign. And I know when I came and visited your site, your neighbor directly to the, I believe, to the east is really, I think, melding well with these young adults, which is also good to hear. So I'm very much in favor of this. Seeing the property, you certainly have room there. And I don't see any issue at all expanding to what you guys requested and what staff is recommending. So I'm certainly in favor of it as well.

Thank you.

Thank you. Justin Bertucci.

I just want to make sure I'm clear. So the staff recommendation is to go from six to eight, correct?

Staff is recommending six to ten which is Shelter Inc's original request. The Planning Commission recommended eight.

The Planning Commission recommended eight. Okay, and Trustee Dunnington, your motion was to go from six to ten.

The staff recommendation.

Yeah, okay. Okay. I just needed that clarification. Thank you. Yep, that's it. Okay.

I'll just be really brief. I remember this discussion like it was yesterday. There were a number of concerns. There were a number of board members that had very, very legitimate perspectives on this as to why it was a concern. Certainly fear of the unknown. But now the unknown is known, and the work has been good. But I think the job is unfinished. You cannot walk away from this meeting tonight thinking that the work is undone. or that the work is done, excuse me. The work still needs to be finished. These residents need to continue to be good neighbors. The workforce in the house needs to continue to do excellent work with these youngsters. They are kids. They're not 12 and 14. My kids are all in their 30s. These are kids. And they need our help. And God bless you guys for doing what you do. How do they get to where they're going without some help like mom and dad and aunts and uncles and grandma and grandpa? And if you don't have that... but you have your support crew that does what they do. It's not because you're selling cheeseburgers. You're there helping humans become humans. And God bless you for doing that. But don't ever quit. Don't ever give up on it because that's when problems start. Your rules are good rules. Keep doing and keep enforcing all of them. Now, I did get a fair share of emails from folks who are still concerned about And it's understandable. But at the time when we talked about this the first time, this was the way I looked at it. Let's see how this goes. And it's gone well. So as everybody else has spoken on here, it feels like it's all going in the right direction. So what I'm gonna do next is let you sit down and listen. I have maybe, let's see, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven blue cards here from folks in the audience. And I'm gonna suggest this. If you are, when I call your name, if you are a proponent of this request, Say what you feel you need to say, but maybe all you need to say is we agree with what we've heard and we're a proponent of it. It's 10-20. Now, if you are a concerned resident and you have points you want to make that we all need to hear, by all means, give us everything you've got. I'm going to give you three minutes to tell us all that you need to tell us. So, Maggie, are you ready? All right. The first person I'm going to call up is Pamela McGrath. Did I say that right? McGrath. McGrath.

My name's Pamela McWraith, and I live near Valley Lane. I do want to note, I never did receive any letter, community letter, saying there's a meeting. And I live in the cul-de-sac right by this building, this home. It seems like the board has already made a decision, and this happened back in 2022. And I'd like you to respect and hear what we have to say. That is why a lot of the community members did not come tonight, because they feel like it's already been a decision made. I respectfully request the village board to deny the request to increase the occupancy from six to 10, or even six to eight. This increase in occupancy to 10 with unrelated residents, they're not family members, they're unrelated residents, is 67% increase, or if you have, let's say, eight members that you add, that's 33% increase. This property is located in a residential neighborhood, my neighborhood. I've been there 34 years. I've only come here once before, and that was in 2022. to present what we feel is our neighborhood. And again, the village did approve a maximum of six back then. They are adults. They're 17 to 21. They're grown individuals. They're not children. I'd also like to know what evidence justifies changing existing six-person limit. You've been saying how well they've done. I haven't heard anything about what they've done as far as this location. Before the shelter was there, there was only one call to 911, okay, before the shelter was there. Now, after the residency in 2022 escalated to 56 calls, okay, yes, they've kind of said what those are, but those are 911 calls. With an increase of, let's say, four more people, you'll have an increase in those calls as well. I wouldn't expect that from any other household in the Ivy Hill neighborhood. You're not going to have those type of 56 calls. That's not heard of. And you can ask the police commissioner again. You're right. The neighbors are not calling on it because I can see from where I live when the police, when the ambulance shows up. We don't need to call. The police and the ambulance do arrive. We do see it. We don't have to say anything. Has the village board addressed the issue of unrelated individuals living together in a residential dwelling? Does the village code limit the number of unrelated persons who may occupy a dwelling or distinguish between a traditional household? That's not usually heard of, where you're going to have 10 people, unrelated, living together. I understand if it's your children, but unrelated. again the board should address the parking not just for the residents as we're told they they won't have cars but visitors staff delivery service providers this activity impacts our surrounding streets neighboring properties and traffic flow on this already dangerous corner and again you're talking valley and arlington heights road you said you're very familiar with that when you come around there They're lined up, their delivery, their Amazon, the staff who's coming, the doctors that come in and out, their visitors. It's lined up with cars along the street there. And what analysis has the village performed regarding other impacts of substantially increasing the number of people living in there? You'll have trash, noise, emergency access, staff, visitors. And what evidence has been provided demonstrating that the increasing occupancy from six is appropriate for this household?

Pam, I'm going to have to ask you to please wrap up if you can.

Okay. I would just like the board to look at what we're saying, where we're coming from. And again, I don't want to have to keep coming back if the shelter comes back again and says, now we want 12. The board originally said six, and they gave the maximum. And I live in the area. I live down the street in the cul-de-sac. I can see what's going on. And I want to thank you for your time.

Thank you, Pamela. Next is, I'm not sure what the first letter is. Szymanska is the last name? Could you help me on the first? Is it Jolanta?

Jolanta, yes.

Oh, okay, I got it.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and members of the Village Board. I also feel like you already made a decision, but I still would like to present. I live at 303 East Napier Drive. I was resident for 13 years. And my home is only about 100 feet from the shelter INC property. I am a healthcare worker. My husband is a US Army veteran. We spend our lives caring for and serving others. I want to be clear that my concerns are not about the people shelter INC serves. People in need deserve compassion, dignity, and support. My concern is about expanding this operation so close to our homes and the impact on our neighborhood. Because I live 100 feet away, I experience these changes personally. When I come home after working all day and see a police car in our neighborhood, it makes me anxious. Before shelter INC move in this property, the village reported only one police service call in five years. Let me repeat this, it was one police service call in the five years. Since shelter move in the property in the spring of 2022, we understand there have been 56 police service calls. I understand that not every call represents a crime and I'm not saying every call was caused by the shelter residents, but the increase is significant and deserves serious consideration before approving the expansion. I also want to address something said at the August 26 meeting. It must be okay because no one is here to oppose. I respectfully disagree. Please do not mistake the absence of residents at the meeting for support. Many people in our community are seniors, others are caregivers for disabled family members, some are working, some have family responsibilities that make attending meetings, especially that late, difficult. And some residents have simply lost faith in the system. They no longer believe that speaking up will make a difference. That doesn't mean they support this expansion. We are here tonight, not many of us, because we still believe our voice matters. Finally, the original special use approval includes a six resident limit. You guys approve a six resident limit. That condition was part of the approval under which this property was allowed to operate. Please respect that condition unless there is a compelling and well-supported reason to change it. Please listen to the residents who live just feet away. Please do not assume that silent means consent. And also please vote no on the proposed expansion, even though I believe you guys already made a decision. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Thank you. So, if you haven't been here before, that's just not allowed. Okay? We respect your voices, and we want to hear your voices. We're not going to listen to that. Okay? Thank you. I appreciate you. I appreciate your...

I'm not listening to our voices.

I'm not having this dialogue with you. Okay. Thank you. Next is Eric Poelek. Eric, come on up.

I'll keep it short and simple as you requested. I live on Valley Lane. I am 100% supportive of the expansion of the sheltering TLP.

Thank you, Eric. Next is Donna. Donna Ackerman.

With reference to the proposed shelter expansion, which is located around the corner from our home, we are against expanding the initial six residents to 10 residents. from the residents benefited to expand beyond six adults in the six bedroom duplex would create an overcrowding condition, which in turn creates more tension in the living arrangement. Increasing to 10 residents from the current six would exacerbate the current living conditions, possibly quadruple the number of police calls and decrease the safety of the six residents currently and therefore increasing and decreasing the safety of the neighborhood. With the present number of 56 police calls since the home's inception in 22, it's a high probability of increased police calls added to the disturbance of the area and the liability of the neighborhood. Your current six residents are attempting to manage their daily lives without having to deal with increased strangers, sharing an overcrowded living and sleeping space. By adding new residents, it is not mandated that those new residents will not be a problem like the one you've had in the past. We therefore oppose the expansion, and we ask you to please vote no for this expansion.

Thank you, Donna. Next is Arlen Gould.

I'll be short and sweet. As a board member of Shelter, I fully support this request. It's an organization doing God's work, and I thank you for your consideration tonight.

Thank you, Arlen. Next is Janice. I struggle with this last name. Help me out, Janice, when you come up.

It's spelled funny, but it's like Ferris, like the wheel.

Janice Ferris. Very good, Janice.

Thank you. So my neighborhood's sometimes rowdy, sometimes quiet, but it all comes to this. Most homes consist of responsible adults or adults with children in their care. How many people should live in a home, in your home, How many children should you have? Do you need permission from your neighbors or the village? Should you plan to have more children? Due to economic reasons, what if your own adult children move back home and they too have kids in tow? Do we need permission for such changes in our homes to look after our families? The operative question isn't how full or empty our household should be, rather what kind of neighbors are we? Consistently loud and obnoxious or caring and kind? A chart, a graph, a head count tells us nothing of the human residing within. Families come in all forms, and some are not connected by blood alone. The size of any family, including the shelter family, should not be restricted. Thank you.

Thank you, Janice. And the last card I have here is Linda Wasey.

I represent a faith community that is here tonight, and we strongly recommend and support the increase in residents from six to 10. Thank you.

Thank you, Linda. Now, for those of you who clapped, that didn't fill out a blue card, now is your chance. Please feel free, raise your hand, I'll call on you. You're welcome to come up and share your thoughts. Sir, come on up, give us your name.

My name is Peter, last name Potapo, P-O-T-A-P-O. I don't want to add more arguments to opposites, but I have one question for you. Because we have a significant number of phone calls since four years and we assume if you approve, the proposition, we expect even more phone calls. And now, those four years, I feel like it was a trial for a shelter and they took care much more of the facility. And what's going to happen next? Let's say you approve and they will stop caring and we'll get like 200 phone calls every year. What are you going to do about it then? That's my question.

That's fine. Your name is Peter, is that right? Yes. Peter, that's a really good point. I think your comment about what was discussed in the initial meeting several years ago, they originally asked for a large number of residents, larger than what we approved that day. And I think the The motive of our board back then was to allow a smaller group and see how it goes. And there are things that we do like that up here all the time. They're called pilot programs, whether it is a business or something else. And if it's successful and everybody works together and gets it done right, come on back and we'll see about adding. That's how I remember that meeting from that night. And what we've learned here together is that, all right, there was an issue. There was an issue and it was an unfortunate arrangement with one of the residents and the majority of those calls were based on that resident. Maybe there's a learning curve there and maybe now Shelter knows a little bit more about their screening process and the next several residents, if it's four, as we're talking about in this case, It'll be a little easier process of determining who gets the fortunate position of being one of the four in here. That's what I'm hoping for. I would say this, if it doesn't happen that way, then we all lose. Everybody in this room is embarrassed by that. So that's why it's on you guys, the owners, the developers, the caseworkers, that's your job now. Prove everybody else wrong. Prove anybody who thinks that this is not a good idea wrong. If it was my neighbor, I'd be over there with snow shovels in the wintertime teaching these boys how to go make money shoveling snow. Cindy would make spaghetti dinners once in a while. We teach these kids how to be good neighbors. So it's everybody's job, I think, but your job mainly. So I hope you do it, and I hope you prove all of us either wrong or right about how this goes. Anybody else in the audience? Yes, ma'am.

Good evening.

Tell us your first name.

My name is Anna.

Anna.

And I live a few houses away from the shelter location. I am here tonight to ask you to vote no on the request to expand the shelter at 207-209 East Valley Line. Please keep the limit at six residents. This is a quiet residential neighborhood. We have families here and we are just down the street from Ivy Hill Elementary School. This increase is too big for a block where young kids walk every day. If we let go to eight residents now, what comes next? It opens the door for more growth later. Where does it stop? And what is the final limit? Since the shelter opened, police calls to the house have increased a lot. Seeing flashing police lights on our street causes real fear and anxiety for our families. On top of that, East Valley Lane is a small street. It cannot handle more traffic, staff cars and delivery trucks. Packing eight people into a small duplex will also create stress and friction inside the house, hurting the people who live there. It easy for outside voices to ask for this change when they do not live on our block and do not have to deal with it. I also want to explain why so few neighbors are standing here tonight. The empty seats are not a sign of approval. Many of my neighbors stopped coming because they no longer believe that their voices are being heard. They feel ignored. We just want to shelter to keep its original promise to our community. Please vote no. And keep the limit at six. Thank you.

Thank you, Anna. Anybody else in the audience? Okay. Back to the board here. Trustee Bertucci.

Gina, would you mind coming back up? Thank you. So, Gina, right now you have, there's two staff members for the six, correct?

No, right now we have one staff member for every shift.

For every shift? Correct. Okay, so are you going up to two staff members for every shift, if it would go to ten?

Correct, we'll have a one to five ratio, yes.

Okay, okay, so right now you have one per shift, you'll go to two per shift. Correct. Okay, great. And then from a standpoint of the rooms, you have two units with three bedrooms each? Correct. Okay. Two separate units, yes. Right, and the one unit now has three offices?

Yes, staff are in one office, and then right now we just have a spare room that's not used, and we have one that was just used for, like, if the therapists meet with the boys.

Got it, got it. So what'll happen is those two, the staff one will stay, and those two will be turned into bedrooms.

Correct. Got it. Okay.

Okay. So I was just trying to picture to see, number one, that we were, in fact, I wanted to confirm that we were going to increase the staff. And secondly, what the layout was going to be. So thanks for coming up, Gina. You answered my questions.

Thank you.

And just to be clear, it's a duplex. All those buildings along what I would say is the south side of Valley Lane. Could we bring that photograph up with an aerial photography? So all of the buildings that you see along East Valley Lane on the south side,

are all duplexes.

And everything on the north side are single family homes. Now I don't pretend to know about what goes on on the inside of any of those homes, but if they're like this home, it's two units of three bedrooms each. So theoretically, it could be a mom and dad in one room and a couple of kids in each. You could have six people. You could have 12 people living in any one of those buildings and no one would know anything. Now, granted, there's a difference between a family of six. I totally understand that. These are not brothers that live together here, but maybe they have to learn to behave like brothers. But that's the makeup. That's the architecture of that. And you're not using the one whole half of the building to its fullest capacity right now because you weren't allowed to. What you were given in the initial approval was six. And they're all on the one side. Okay. So we're not overcrowding the one side. We're going to just use the other side now. Got it.

All right, anybody else on the Village Board?

Mayor, I have a question. Yes, Trustee Gilbert.

Thank you. Just in response to the police calls, regardless of whether or not this passes, I'm wondering if there's a way that we can minimize the police rolling up with their lights on for all of these calls, because I do feel that that could be traumatic for some people that live in the area, and perhaps this is a conversation to have with the police force and staff, but perhaps they don't have to go to these calls with lights and sirens blaring and all of the stuff that comes with it. Perhaps that would help

Why don't we ask the staff, what is the protocol right now? Let's say someone was to show up by midnight. What happens?

So when they're not home by midnight, then we try to call them on their cell phones. They all have cell phones. If we're able to reach them, then it's just we have them do like what we call an overnight form. They tell us where they're staying and everything like that. If we can't reach them, then we will call the police. We've worked with Chief Pecora, the residential director, Caitlin and I, we meet with Chief Pecora maybe like once every year just to kind of check in. And so what we talked about is if we could do a way where we fax them a form that the police don't even have to come to the home. He has told us like he's, He wants them to develop this so it answers all of their questions and they have it the way they prefer it to be with all the information. We just don't have that set right yet, but that's something that we've talked about extensively with him.

And per Trustee Gilbert's comment and question, are Vehicles showing up with lights flashing and alarms going when this goes on when they show up or no I I have personally not been there but I've been told by staff that the lights are not on and Chief Pecora says they generally do not have lights on if they're coming from a missing person Is there someone from the building that can speak to that precisely come on up

I'm Caitlin Learman. I'm the residential director at Shelter. No, the lights are not on for missing persons. It's not necessarily an emergency. It's not urgent. They understand what we do in the facility. They're where we have to call. So it's not typically emergency lights.

So why do they come? What is the benefit for a police officer to come to the building when the young person is out there somewhere?

That's their protocol on taking a missing persons report. So they'll ask us maybe for a picture of the youth, a description of what they were last wearing, what we know about the situation. So they're just taking information.

They're just coming to investigate.

Correct.

If I could, Mayor, it's kind of the interplay between DCFS and the police department that drives a lot of the protocol because DCFS requires a missing person report. That's an official act by the police department, so they have to do that. But I think, as was mentioned, I know that there's discussions underway about a way to generate a missing person's report without an actual call for service. Um, and we don't obviously don't want to minimize it while all of these things have been minor, you know, one never knows. And so we still have to track it to, to, um, follow the law. But, um, but that's, that's the reason why that's, what's driving that.

Well, I think it just is part of the whole dialogue here about being good neighbors. I think it's unnerving to see a police vehicle there. Sure. you know, more often than it should.

Yeah, absolutely.

So I would encourage you to keep working on that. Like I said before, work isn't done. It will never be done. You just have to keep doing it.

Yep, thank you.

Anybody else? All right, I think that's it for the dialogue on this. So we have a motion by Trustee Dunnington, seconded by Trustee Manganiello. This will be a roll call vote.

Trustee Dunnington? Yes. Trustee Manganiello? Aye. Trustee Gilbert? Yes. Trustee LaBette? Yes. Trustee Bertucci? Yes. Trustee Schwingbeck? Yes. Trustee Zick? Yes. President Tenaglia?

Yes. All right, that's a unanimous yes, and I think you've heard loud and clear how the neighbors are concerned, and so are we, but we want you to keep doing good work, so keep it up, and... surpass all of our expectations please okay we're going to move on uh to item e item e is a presentation of proposed of a proposed art mural ordinance and i'll hand this off to staff

Okay, while Trustee Santa Maria is returning, tonight I just want to manage expectations. We are not looking for a vote on an ordinance. We're just presenting the concept of the ordinance that was worked on by the commission and by staff. Let me stop you. Is someone grabbing? Yes, Emily went back to grab her.

So hang on just a second. Let her get back here so she can have the benefit of hearing what you're saying.

okay um tonight we're not going to be looking for a vote on an ordinance this is a a draft concept for an ordinance based on the work between staff and the commission um and and so we're looking for a little bit of feedback questions direction and i'm going to interrupt you one more time can we have the conversations go out in the hall please

Everybody, thank you. I'm not trying to avoid conversation.

Just do it out there. Thank you. So tonight we're looking for feedback, and if the board likes these concepts, staff will regroup and develop a proper ordinance for review. But with that, our Deputy Director of Planning, Mr. Lissacatos, is going to kick things off.

Fair enough. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Trustees, and thank you for indulging me at 10.48 on this presentation. I'll try to be as brief as I can, but give you all the information I can at the same time. So our village staff work with our arts commission cooperatively to develop the art mural ordinance. The process stems from the village board's strategic priority support enhance the village's efforts related to the arts. The initial draft ordinance The initial draft ordinance was developed by the Arts Commission and refined over several meetings with staff over the last few months. The definitions, provisions for the installation of the murals and private properties underwent a number of changes leading to a clear process and purpose for an ordinance. After a final review by our village attorney, the Arts Commission made a formal recommendation to the village board to amend the municipal code. to incorporate the draft meal ordinance as you see in your passage tonight. The research that went into it involved looking at some of the policies and ordinances to some of our neighbors in the state. A few of the communities and mural project examples are on the screen in the next couple of slides. Each of the policies provided insights, whether it was the purpose, governing rules, or implementation that we thought would fit Arlington Heights. And you can see a number of the murals here that were the result of those policies, whether it's Evanston Highland Park Skokie See a number of the ones here as well in Oak Park Brookfield and Elmhurst Some of the projects shown here were commissioned art pieces between private property owners and artists Some of them were actually economic development initiatives. The photo you see on the bottom right is actually a economic development initiative in Brookfield that allows for pop-up art sales and they also use the murals to promote those efforts. As mentioned earlier, the ordinance extends from the Village Board's strategic priority related to the arts. The effort works in concert with the development of a public art plan, which is underway right now, which is in the 26-27 business plan. And it provides important insights for us in terms of a framework between public and private arts initiatives and what that process can look like and what that interplay is. The Arts Commission focused on three goals. which each address a challenge that was presented to us in the questions that have been brought up about installation of these murals from some of the private property owners in the village. The process of defining an art mural and what that was was an important one for the Arts Commission. It took into consideration the types of projects that might be installed along with the work that the Arts Commission has done over the years to try and cultivate new arts projects, whether they're paintings on the walls, projected images, things of that nature. We also did a lot of work to differentiate between an art mural and some of the commercial message signing. You'll see a couple definitions that are up here. This section also calls out two really important distinctions that I want to highlight to the board, and this might be ONE OF THE MORE IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF WHAT WE TALK ABOUT TONIGHT. THEY RECOMMENDED A PROHIBITION ON COMMERCIAL AND POLITICAL MESSAGING WHICH ARE BOTH DEFINED HERE AND YOU'LL SEE IN THE MIRROR ORDINANCE THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKAGE AS WELL. THESE ASPECTS PARTICULARLY THE POLITICAL MESSAGING COULD POTENTIALLY LEAD TO CHALLENGES TO THE POLICY IN THE FUTURE. WE DISCUSSED THESE WITH OUR VILLAGE ATTORNEY AND They gave us insights into why they could be challenged or how they could be challenged in the future. But ultimately, the Arts Commission decided to include those provisions in their recommendation to the village board. And we welcome your insights and discussion tonight and possibly expand on that discussion we had with our village attorney. We'd also developed a number of guidelines for applicants on what we want to see, what we don't want to see in these projects. They address things like suitability of the materials, application methods, or even the buildings themselves and how they screen those. It also includes a prohibition on messages that could promote violence against a person or a group, along with the commercial and political messaging that we talked about earlier. They also contemplate permissions from the owners and actually prohibits paying an owner of a property specifically put an art mural up. This really should be something that the property owner wants to have on their property, whether they're commissioning it themselves or working with a business that wants to have it commissioned and put onto the building. It's not something that they expressly get paid to just use their building as a canvas. One of the pieces that staff really bore down into was application process as well. We worked with the Arts Commission closely to develop something that would be focused, clear, but also predicated on all the materials we would actually need to review something in detail. One of the provisions we have in there is actually a design review, which would look at some of the past design commission reviews of buildings and architectural elements that we wouldn't want either impacted or reduced by the application of the mural itself. Arts Commission understood the importance of these requirements. They did express a little bit of concern about if they were going to be too much or confusing and they offered to develop application guidelines or videos or even different pieces of material that would help guide people through the process. FINALLY, THE LAST PEOPLE, LAST SECTION OR LAST PORTION OF IT IS PERMITTING MAINTENANCE OF THESE PROJECTS. WE WANT TO SET UP A PERMIT PROCESS OF WHEN WE COULD DOCUMENT THE OUTCOMES, WE COULD HAVE INSPECTIONS OF THESE PROJECTS AND ALL THE DOCUMENTATION THAT WENT INTO THE APPLICATION. and ultimately hold them accountable for completion and maintenance of these projects over time. There's also provisions in there and fines potentially if they're not kept up or if they need to be removed and who's responsible for those. So we really try to come up with every aspect of a potential program. At this point, welcome your questions and comments.

Thanks, Michael. I think this is a great start. I may have missed it, so I'm going to apologize. Did you go back a couple of slides where you talk about either political or commercial messaging? Should we have it also identify religious messaging? I mean, that could be very combative, depending on what it is. And people can be offended one way or another for seems like the smallest of things these days. So I'd want to be mindful of what's allowed and what's not allowed. And these are two really good, important perspectives. But I think... Religious might also be one that the consider.

You know Mariano if attorney Passman wants a comment on Content neutral the contract neutral issue broadly. How do we do that sure um?

How do we do that? I'm not sure that we can and and mr.. Sakatos alluded to The issue, starting with commercial and political messages, but it applies also to any type of restriction on the content of a mural. The simple baseline is that if and to the extent this is private speech, and I'm framing that way for a reason that I'll come back to, then restriction on what can be displayed what can be part of the mural could implicate the First Amendment. Some communities have allowed murals only when funded, promoted, done by the municipality itself. And that way, what they've done is they've said, well, this is not going to be someone's private speech. This will be our public speech. And that's one way they've controlled it. I'm not suggesting you should or shouldn't do it that way. I use it to illustrate the point that if a community allows a certain type of expression, it's potentially problematic to start to live with that in any way. I recognize saying that I haven't given you any actual direction yet. And that's because it's highly fact-specific. It's still a changing area of law, not specifically the murals, but just some of the most contentious and challenging constitutional disputes that we have are over the First Amendment. I think all of us know that. THERE ARE SOME THINGS WE CAN DO. THERE ARE SOME TYPES OF RESTRICTIONS THAT OUR OFFICE IS MORE COMFORTABLE WITH. CERTAINLY THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND NONCOMMERCIAL SPEECH IS ONE THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT HAS UPHELD. SO THERE'S A WAY TO EXPLORE THAT. STAFF AND I HAVE WORKED ON THIS. SO THE COMMERCIAL MESSAGE RESTRICTIONS, THAT'S THE EASIEST OF THESE THAT'S PART OF THIS DRAFT ORDINANCE. POLITICAL MESSAGES START TO GET A little tricky because you have to define what that is and you have to look at a message and you're not quite sure which way it falls. That's, again, possibly an issue. We can continue to work on this and try to hone it. I'm wary of, candidly, Mayor, I'm wary of telling a would-be muralist, you can paint something there, but you can't include any religious symbolism. not because anything that you suggest the mayor is incorrect, but because now we are, now we're really getting into what is a core of speech and a free speech. So, uh, we can certainly look into it. Um, but I think one thing I would suggest that the board grapple with and perhaps embrace if you're inclined to, to, you know, direct further work on this ordinance, is that allowing murals is going to open the door to artwork in the community that will make some people uncomfortable and will make some people upset, essentially.

So is it the goal of this ordinance to allow anyone to put whatever ends up being in the language here on their own, uh, canvas on their own building, own private property, and as long as it meets these certain guidelines, it's fine? Or is it the goal to create an ordinance that allows our art commission to engage and repair and develop these things? Where are we going with this?

I think there's a lot of different ways we can go. A comment that I have is I think from a staff perspective, it would be ill-advised to set it up where the village board is voting on each and every mural. Because then the village board is, you know, essentially responsible for everything that, you know, goes on there. I mean, the example that I'll give is when, you know, while the village owns the Metropolis Theater as a structure, there's a conscious decision to have a different board managing the organization and making artistic choices because there are, you know, there could be a play with profanity or, you suggestive language or something, and I don't think anyone wanted everyone to come to a meeting and debate those artistic choices. I think there's an argument that there should be the Art Commission or some other entity making those artistic determinations within the bounds of what the attorney passed.

That's what I'm asking. I'm asking, not that I want to be voting on artwork up here, ARE WE PREPARING SOMETHING THAT OUR ARTS COMMISSION IS GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERY TIME?

SO THE SHORT ANSWER IS YES. THE WAY IT'S SET UP RIGHT NOW IS THE APPLICATION PROCESS WILL COME TO STAFF. THERE WILL BE DESIGN REVIEW, MAKE SURE IT'S COMPLETE. THE ARTS COMMISSION WOULD LOOK AT IT AND COMMENT ON A NUMBER OF ELEMENTS, WHETHER IT'S THE LEVEL OF ART, PROFESSIONALISM, APPROPRIATENESS, THOSE KIND OF PIECES, LIKE THE PHYSICAL PIECES OF IT. but they also would weigh in as they're essentially our subject matter experts. Right now, it's written that the village board has the final approval, but that's easily changed. So it could be something more like our ZBA, where they make the final decision, and then it's memorialized, and it moves forward to permit at that point. So it can be either way. It can take into consideration what Manager Recklaus said, that... You don't have to necessarily see that. You have your subject matter experts. You have your guidelines, which can be the piece that you look at and approve and say, these take into consideration all of our concerns. And then they can manage that with staff. So that easily can be how we set it up. And this essentially looks at private property. So it's not contemplating public projects that we would execute essentially on public property or situations where you have an easement on even on a private property. These are strictly for, as you alluded to, private property owners approaching the village saying, I want to paint this on my wall.

And if I could, just to reiterate, we are going to be coming back to talk about public art, which may include murals on public property, which would be a very different animal because that would be something that essentially the village would be permissioning, much like the mural in Village Hall that kind of by the grand stairway when we walk in.

So they're kind of two different things. Yeah, and the public art plan, we'll expand essentially on this. This is a small piece of what that framework and that process that we're talking about. We'll expand on that for our public art projects, priorities, priority locations for those things. So it's sort of a broader universe. And maybe one has to wait for the other one to be done to fully understand the impact and process that we wanted to fit into that puzzle. One second.

All right, so I understand, and I would say before we go any further with dialogue, I do not want to get in the business of battling over this kind of stuff is my biggest concern. I want to encourage murals and public art, but I don't want to make this become some contentious thing that is going to upset 50% of everybody every time something is built. So I don't know how we do it. I hope we can. Hope we can find a way. Trustee LeBetz.

Thank you. Mr. Passman, a question. Whose speech is it? Is it the muralist's speech? Is it the property owner's speech? Or does it not matter?

For constitutional purposes, I don't think it matters to the extent that the government, the village, is telling whoever the speaker is what they can and can't say. I will say also I'll take that opportunity trustee the beds to jump off of a point of the discussion the last few minutes I'd also be wary of any type of whoever is doing the review any type of standards that get into the subject of the art it's one thing I think it's very clean to say hey if we have standards it has to be on a certain type of material if it has to be a certain kind of whether it's you know painter or whatever other medium I think those are much easier and they're content neutral size of a mural. You get the idea. Those are easier. I get a little nervous when we say we're to have somebody, anybody scratch their head and talk about whether they like it or not, or if it's appropriate or not. We, we, we, we've all, you know, we've read the stories, you know, the, the, the lawyers or, or lawyers adjacent on the board have read the cases. It gets really sticky. Yeah.

can imagine thank you this is one of those where you just like I would love to see murals but I'm afraid of this I feel like these waters are murky and and it's just scary I don't know where it would go and i think that we could potentially be putting ourselves at risk with some of this just you know like i said i would love to see more public art but you know looking at this from a government perspective is is is different and so it just it scares me that's all i'll say i don't know what else to say but it's it's extremely i i i I feel like I'm talking slowly as heart in this, because it's like with every word, there's something that could be unearthed, but the waters are muddy.

They are, and I should say, I am speaking a little slowly. It's uncharacteristic. Yeah, but I'm with you, and I'm not even trying to.

It's just...

It's important to note, and I painted a little bit of... I painted a dire picture. How do you like that? But thank you. Don't encourage him. What's that?

I said don't encourage him. It's too late.

Too late. You know, staff identified several communities in the area that have these ordinances. It's not as though there's a wave of lawsuits and conflicts and fights. My law firm represents several of the communities that are identified there, and I can tell you firsthand, they're not having... THESE TERRIBLE FIGHTS AND DEBATES, LIKE I SAID, COULD HAPPEN. THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT WON'T. WE CAN TALK ANECDOTALLY OR HYPOTHETICALLY ABOUT THE LIKELIHOOD THAT A PROPERTY OWNER, LIKELY BEYOND BUSINESSES, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT RESIDENTIAL, MOST BUSINESSES ARE NOT INTERESTED IN WAITING INTO THOSE KIND OF FIGHTS. THAT'S JUST LIVED EXPERIENCE THAT I THINK ALL OF US HAVE. but one of them could. One of them could, whether it's the pictures we saw on the prior slides, I don't think anybody just glancing at it would think anything of it. Maybe someone in those communities doesn't like the mural, whether it's offensive over the line. My first guess is probably not. Someone could take a mural and try to imitate something they saw in Belfast, which is, and I say that as a community famous for its very political murals. We have to be prepared for that. And one answer is that we're not going to wade into the type of concerns that do spark some emotion in people. I mean, in some respect, that's easier. But that's something that the board and the community have to be prepared to accept.

So, Hart, what is the safest, in your professional opinion, what is the safest way to avoid that type of antagonistic POTENTIAL? HOW DO WE DESIGN THIS SO HOW DO WE DESIGN THIS SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SOME OF THESE THAT WE CAN MAKE SOME OF THESE THINGS HAPPEN WITHOUT GOING THINGS HAPPEN WITHOUT GOING DOWN THIS PATH THAT COULD BE TOO DOWN THIS PATH THAT COULD BE TOO VOLATILE?

VOLATILE? I THINK, MAYOR, THE ANSWER I THINK, MAYOR, THE ANSWER IS A LITTLE BIT LEGAL, BUT IS A LITTLE BIT LEGAL, BUT IT'S PROBABLY MORE RELATED TO IT'S PROBABLY MORE RELATED TO UNDERSTANDING ART, AND I AM NOT UNDERSTANDING ART, AND I AM NOT AN EXPERT IN THAT, AND I'M A TERRIBLE AN EXPERT IN THAT, AND I'M A TERRIBLE DRAWER. But it's, I think, and I'm actually curious, I think staff may have some insight having done a lot of research and looking at these ordinances. Some of it comes in having objective standards, like I said, materials, size, type of material, location that discourage the type of murals that either someone will just want too much in this building to prohibit or someone looking at the mural will get too offended by whatever, wherever that line is. I know some communities and I know of other communities that my firm represents that are also looking at mural ordinances and thinking about, well, Maybe they should only be in certain business districts. Maybe they should only face a street, or maybe they shouldn't face a street. Maybe they can only be so big. The idea being that by playing with some of these factors, it can discourage

THE BAD ONES, WHATEVER THAT MEANS. I JUST WANT TO TAKE A STEP BACK FOR A MOMENT AND PROVIDE A LENS IN WHICH WE WERE ASKED TO LOOK AT THIS. WE WERE ASKED TO LOOK AT THIS MAYBE BECAUSE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE INTERESTED IN THIS. HOW COULD WE ALLOW THIS ON MY BUILDING? I WANT TO PUT WHATEVER IT IS ON MY BUILDING. WE KIND OF LOOKED AT THE MOST complete framework for that where people are putting them on private buildings now I think we did a good job putting together things we would want to be aware of but here in the discussion tonight as we go through the process we may have to kind of back that up for a second as you alluded to go through the public art plan and maybe there's another framework to do that I think Randy talked about maybe we have identified the locations where we would want these pieces of art maybe there's 20 different locations whatever the number is And we work with the property owners to have them offer up their buildings essentially as pallets, and we have a public-private partnership. And then they're essentially, we could do a call to artists. And it's actually a public project at that point, which we are saying we want... a mural here that hits these themes. We want a mural here that hits a different theme. We can look at frameworks to do that. And that's gonna be a lot more control process, predictable as to what we wanna promote, the types of art we wanna promote, And it's almost a public project at that point, and not private, even though it's working with private properties. So we can look into that type of process as part of our plan to find out how that can work. So it's a little bit less, it's a little more tethered, if you will.

And I was going to say, if the board This is a road we can go down and, you know, express the concerns, but also acknowledge that there are towns that have gone down this road. The other road is, you know, we do a timeout, mix this in with the public art discussion that's coming in the relative near future is informed by this. That's the other thing we can do, and then kind of regroup.

All right, well, I've spoken too much, and I don't want to be the only one, so go ahead, Trustee Bertucci, we'll go through it all.

So I just need some clarification. Are you just talking about putting this on commercial buildings?

What we have in the draft ordinance right now is commercial buildings.

Okay. So this would not be allowed on a residence?

No. Right now it expressly prohibits that. And what we've written, again, those things could be changed. If you want to start allowing it in certain instances, that's totally up to you.

Yeah, I'm not liking it on the residence. I'm not even sure for all the reasons stated. What about, does it have to be on the building or could be on a fence?

It's a good question. It doesn't say that it necessarily has to be on the building per se. I don't think we get into that detail. So yeah, it could be. Anything essentially could be a POW. It could even be projected onto a building. It could just be light. It could be a number of different things. So we tried to keep the definition. It's a good time. The definition's up here. To keep it essentially broad so we can include different types of art and promote what the Art Commission's been working on. So that's a good point. It could be an element of the building that's there, an element of the structure.

I think we need some clarification there, though, whether we would allow it on a fence or a building or some structure attached to it or whatever. um and then what about the amount within a certain area you know what if we had two property you know one property owner put something up and for whatever reason another property owner says you know i really don't like that but just to battle back i'm going to put my you know and and now you've got you know the the war of murals in a certain area that

As a yellow cat, you're a green cat mural.

Yeah, I mean, just so is there going to be some limitation on how many can be in a certain area or whatever?

We don't have any limitations on that, and I think that speaks to the public art plan. I think the public art plan would do a better job talking about that, whether we identify sites or say maybe there's three sites per block or whatever that goal is in the public art plan to promote it and make it something. Again, you also don't want to put too much of a limit on things. It is art in the end, and a lot of these really successful art districts... and mural programs have a real connection between the properties and the owners, and it becomes something that really has a life of its own. It's not just a stand-alone project. We can look into those.

It seems like the public art piece that you're talking about also putting something together about, it seems like these two things should be looked at together. and brought back together with some kind of a coordination. That would be my thought.

That's all I have, Mayor, thank you.

Thanks.

Trustee Donington. Thank you. I'm counting on great advice from you now.

I'm hearing everyone's reservations but I really feel like we're looking at like the worst case scenario because so many towns have these art murals and I would be interested if there was any information about these potential lawsuits that are happening in our area but it's really there's a lot of towns that have thriving art programs so really think that we should push ourselves to do this and not be too afraid and put up a lot of roadblocks and be too scared to do this. I think that we can do it smartly and that it will really add a lot to our town. I do have like a couple of kind of specific things about the ordinance that we have right now and that was under the requirements. Sorry, my computer went to sleep. Okay. On the application and review process, I had asked previously to the village manager about number three and number four, that if we needed both of those items. And so I'm wondering, I just don't want to make the application too cumbersome. on the artists, and so I'm wondering if we wanted kind of before and after, and if we could do, would photos suffice as kind of that before and after?

Yeah, I think we can be flexible on that, and I think whatever ultimately makes it into an ordinance is sort of the code, right? You have to meet this requirement. how we do that and developing guidelines and an application process and an actual document that they would review could be a lot easier to follow. This is sort of like our minimum threshold. So yeah, we can work with that to be a rendering before and after or a photo before and after. And a lot of that gets to one of the points I made earlier. A lot of the buildings in these commercial areas, specifically downtown, have gone through a very detailed design commission review and there's architectural elements that were called out or required as part of that review. We want to be careful how much we diminish some of those elements and identify the important elements that that could be affected by a mural project. And maybe that's where we get into those provisions of percentage. It can cover certain types of buildings or locations. You know, it can't be, this is where we want the really big ones. This is maybe the more subtle one. So I think the public art plan can help guide that and understand the relevance of what has to go into that code.

Okay. And I would add to number seven, it asks for a professional resume or portfolio of the lead artist. And I actually think that we should have both of those things from the artist instead of or. And then number nine, it says a five-year maintenance plan for the art mural. And I know that it specifies later, but I just think it should specify that the maintenance plan would be by the um owner of the property and not the artist yeah i think that's relevant it kind of sits with the property right it lives with the building yeah i have looked at a lot of other ordinances in nearby towns and it this seems like it definitely is similar to that and pulled ideas from those plans it seems I would say pretty standard. And then my question was going to be for the political message or commercial message, who would be the person to decide that? Would that be the art commission? Would it be staff?

I think that's the crux of the question. So I think But I think the ordinance does what we were asked in terms of let's contemplate private property owners being able to put murals on their project. But as we go through that process, it's a learning process. And we're embarking on the public art plan actually tomorrow. We'll be talking to the Arts Commission about that. And how we embark on that how we're going to be looking to what's relevant to Arlington Heights What are our goals in that regard maybe we need a little bit more of that context to say? What is the ordinance or the rules that fit the place we want to go? So we're maybe maybe the carts come before the horse at this point Maybe it'll help us sort of clarify where we want to go for and open up some of that we can do a little bit more research into How does that public-private partnership work best to avoid some of these issues, but to also get projects out there as fast as we can?

And then I would ask of the Art Commission that the plan that they're working on is a plan that's for the whole village and not a downtown art plan, but a town for everywhere. Because I think that residents sometimes feel like we only care about downtown and there's lots of opportunity on buildings all throughout town. And so that it should be, we should identify sites all throughout town.

We're gonna be making that distinction clearly tomorrow. And the original work they had been looking at was downtown, but we are gonna be asking them to kind of pull out to look at the whole village. And some of the research in the past, to be fair, has looked at that. So I think it'll be an easy shift to look at the whole village and maybe really help us come up with some of these examples.

Okay, thank you. I'm just gonna say let's be bold.

Anybody else down here? Anybody else down here? Trustee Manganiello?

Just quickly, a couple of questions. As I'm understanding it, we are talking about, for this ordinance, privately funded on a commercial building. I'm not sure that beyond commercial we have any, I think your statement earlier was very germane, that if somebody who is operating a commercial building is putting something out for everyone to see. It's kind of their problem if it's offensive to others, and I do think that's an issue for the village to wade into. If I'm understanding things correctly, if we fund it, and if it is public art, it is almost by definition village speech. And I'm kind of looking at Attorney Passman.

I think, let me take that last point. Yes, if it's our speech, then like any speaker, we can decide what we want to say. We have other restrictions, and village funds can't be used for you know, the political electoral purposes, something I know everyone here knows, but otherwise, you know, we have, we have those, those rights as the speaker, um, a privately funded, privately commissioned mural on a private building does enjoy some first amendment protection. And again, I don't, I did not want to suggest that we, Oh my gosh, we can't do this. What do we think? It's be prepared that we may have to accept murals that someone doesn't like. Well, THAT'S THE CRUX OF IT. THAT'S THE CRUX OF IT. THAT'S THE CRUX OF IT. THAT'S THE CRUX OF IT. I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

SAYING. SAYING. I AM PREPARED TO ACCEPT THAT. I AM PREPARED TO ACCEPT THAT. I AM PREPARED TO ACCEPT THAT.

I THINK THAT IS THE PROPERTY I THINK THAT IS THE PROPERTY I THINK THAT IS THE PROPERTY OWNER'S DECISION. OWNER'S DECISION. OWNER'S DECISION. SO I THINK TO SORT OF PUT A SO I THINK TO SORT OF PUT A SO I THINK TO SORT OF PUT A FINE POINT OF WHAT YOU'RE FINE POINT OF WHAT YOU'RE FINE POINT OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, IF WE GET TO THAT ordinance or policy, whatever you want to call it, that basically says private properties can have murals. Maybe the ordinance needs to sort of take a step back. And all we're talking about that the Arts Commission would look at is physical aspects. It's appropriate to the building, the materials they use, things of that nature, and then All bets are off, kind of. That way we're not endorsing anything one way or the other.

There's a lot of ways you can do it. I mean, and again, there's risk with this. I mean, you certainly could have something on there making sure there's nothing that, a definition of obscenity. You know what I mean? And I think, you know, while we could weigh in on and... Colin Hart may disagree, but one may argue there's a difference between a giant mural that says, re-elect Jim Tennelli, a mayor, and one that says, you know, fight global warming. Both, depending on who you talk to, may be seen as a political message, but one is a little bit more overt. And so, I mean, you're talking questions of degrees, questions of risk. And that type of thing. But again, we're trying to take the temperature tonight. We're not looking for like a definitive answer.

And then just last thing is, how is what you've proposed tonight pretty consistent with some of these other local ordinances? Are they making, the commercial seems to be pretty straightforward that we can do that. Are they making those distinctions about political or anything else?

Some of them are, some of them are not. Some of them are leaving out, they're just talking about the commercial, they're not really speaking to the political. And there's no big issues from what we understand.

That's a fair statement. As I said earlier, I think that regulating, restricting what we're generally calling political message here, I don't want to be too hung up on this definition, that is tougher. There may be a way to accomplish some of it, and I need to do a little more thought on that. Commercial is a lot easier. Not easy, but easier.

And I think all that said, I think less is more on this, and I will go along with Trustee Dunnington that I'd like to see us be bold on it, because we do have people that want to do this, and I think it has a lot of value for our community.

Anybody else tonight?

Trustee Zik. Sure. Thank you, Mayor. So, you know, as I'm listening to this and the concerns and everything, and I get the concerns and I would love to see murals around the village that add to the village. Part of me is kind of like, well, you know, you're talking about this public art program. That seems to me to be the most straightforward and safest way for us to go ahead and do this. If we want, because we can control, you know, we say we want this mural on this certain area and this is the type of design that we want. This is the theme, you know. So that seems to be the easiest type of thing. This is going to be the... one of my biggest non-answers of anything probably. I think I do want to see what comes up of doing a private, some type of private mural. What does that look like? What do the rules look like? I am concerned about somebody putting something up on a wall right out here and saying, you know, and other people having a lot of issues with what goes up there. So I would like to see what the design commission comes up with as far as that. And this might be my brain at 1127. And if I ask this weirdly, I apologize again. We talked about this is only for commercial, but not private homes. And my brain, I was reading this too, my brain went to, well, you're allowed to paint your house right now. I want to refresh the color of my house. I'm allowed to go out and hire somebody to do that. So I want to hire somebody that's a mural painter and put something type of mural up on my house. But why, how could we stop that?

Currently, we consider mural signs, and that's how we regulate it.

That's how it currently is. That's why there haven't been any put up, right? Essentially, or seriously, like the bill is sanctioned once. We're allowing it to go.

I'll amplify that. Right now, because there is no distinction, we can prohibit signs outright in a residential district. That's content neutral. So we can say you can't have a sign on the side of your home. You can't turn the side of your home into a sign. That's the top.

So if somebody wanted to put multiple colors up, it's not really a sign. They just want to put stripes of a rainbow up on the side of the house.

It's, yeah, we also have design commission review, so something like that. We have a number of provisions in design commission review that talk about appropriateness of facades on residential homes, so we ask homeowners to consider different color palettes all the time, so it probably would fall under that purview. Okay, thank you.

Trustee Santa Maria.

Maybe I'm making this too easy, but in my head it's like Coco and Boo decides that they want a mural of people drinking coffee on their building. That would be acceptable because it's a commercial building. It's a private business.

It would not under this. So we're restricting that under what's proposed. That would not be okay. The village board could say, We have no problem with a mural being a commercial message either. So we proposed this because there was this sort of push for murals that go into public buildings that will be looked at strictly from an artistic standpoint. So they really shouldn't be signs. But we could be open to that.

So then I guess they could put something on their building that shows people in the community hanging out.

Absolutely. OK. Yep. Yep, but I mean a number of canes. So canes was not allowed to paint their cane sign on their location on Palatine Road. Or if you look in other communities, they do have sort of like a mural, like they'll have the dog or the cane sign painted on their wall. Because that was a sign for us, so they didn't do that in this location.

Oh, my God.

So again, some communities have commercial signs that are murals. So I think it's all up in the air. We tried to kind of provide a construct that would give you food for thought and things that the Arts Commission could get their hands around as our subject matter experts. But we obviously can take this back, as Randy said, and sort of take all this feedback and maybe it needs to go into the larger construct to really give us the context we need to do it.

And not at 11 o'clock at night. Let's put this earlier on the agenda next time so we have fresh brains. I personally, I'm ready to explode. Anybody else? All right.

Thank you very much. Thank you for your feedback.

This is a great conversation. It needs to happen.

Anything else? We have a, and I promise, very brief closed session. And so staff would respectfully request the board enter a closed session for 5ILCS 120 slash 2C21. Discussion of minutes lawfully closed, whether the purpose of approval of the minutes or the semi-annual review of the minutes.

So move. Second.

Second.

Motion made by Trustee LeBeds and seconded by Trustee Schwingbeck. All those in favor, roll call vote. I knew that, I'm learning. Roll call vote, please.

Trustee LeBeds? Yes. Trustee Schwingbeck? Yes. Trustee Santa Maria? Yes. Trustee Bertucci? Yes. Trustee Gilbert? Yes. Trustee Zik? Yes. Trustee Dunnington? Yes. Trustee Manganiello? Aye.

trust president tenalia yes all right we are in closed session we will not be reporting out afterwards thank you everyone