City Council - Regular Meeting

City Council for July 14th, 2026 is hereby called to order at 6 p.m. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Alderman Barrero. Alderman Garza. Here. Alderman Maciakos. Alderman Nunez.

Here.

Alderman Franco. Here. Alderman Seville.

Here.

Alderman Benuelos.

Here.

Alderman Smith. Here. Alderman Buck.

Here.

Alderman Bade. Here. Alderman Larson. Here. Alderman White. Here. Mayor Lash is present.

OK, there's a need a special vote. Alderman Ben-Welles requests permission to participate remotely per section 2-80 based on a reasonable anticipation of an extended illness. Is there a motion to allow Alderman Ben-Welles to participate remotely? A motion was made by Alderman Seville, seconded by Alderwoman Garza. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries by voice vote. Record reflect that Alderman Ben-Willis is participating remotely. Next, is there a motion to approve and appoint Sergeant at Arms for this meeting? Second. Second. Motion was made by Alderman Smith, second by Alderman Franco. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries by a voice vote. And finally, I'll ask, are there any Aldermen who would like to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance? Alderman Franco, thank you. Last crowd, please stand. Thank you. Now we'll move to the mayor's report. Take it away, John.

Thank you so much, Mayor. We have multiple recognitions to get to here tonight as we begin with Disability Pride Month here in the city of Aurora. Round of applause for Disability Pride Month here in Aurora. The month of July bears this designation following the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act, as this month serves as a time to celebrate the achievements, contributions, and resilience of individuals with disabilities. At this time, we're going to invite up members of our Advisory Commission on Disabilities, as well as representatives from the Fox Valley Special Recreation Association and Weston Bridges to accept the official proclamation from Mayor John Lash. Round of applause again for this important month.

And welcome as well to our Senior Disability Services Manager, Karina Boatwright for being here as well.

Okay, I'm going to slide in right behind you just to read this real quick. Okay, so first of all, thanks everybody for coming down here today. I'm going to read off the proclamation for Disability Pride Month, whereas the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed in July 26, 1990, to ensure the civil rights of and prohibit discrimination against people with disabilities. And whereas today, Disability Pride Month serves as a time to celebrate the achievements, contributions, and resilience of individuals with disabilities, and to promote inclusion, acceptance, and understanding of disabilities as a natural part of human diversity. And whereas the City of Aurora acknowledges the challenges faced by individuals with disabilities, including societal attitudes, built and architectural barriers, lack of accessibility, discrimination, and unequal opportunities, and is actively working to promote a community that embraces individuals with disabilities, acknowledging their invaluable contributions to the fabric of the city. And whereas it is essential to promote a society that embraces disability with dignity, respect, and equality. and where barriers to participation and inclusion are eliminated. Whereas the City of Aurora extends its heartfelt appreciation to Senior and Disability Services Division of the Aurora Advisory Commission on Disabilities, Weston Bridges, and the Fox Valley Special Recreation Association for their tireless efforts to advance the rights, independence, and well-being of individuals with disabilities and to create a more inclusive and accessible world for all residents. Now, therefore, I, John Lash, do hereby proclaim July as Disability Pride Month in the City of Aurora, Illinois, and encourage all residents to ensure the responsibility of creating a community that is safe and welcoming for all people, regardless of ability. Let's give it up for Disability Pride Month. Did Molly want to say a few words?

My name is Molly Martino.

I live at Weston Bridges. I've been living at Weston Bridges for about two years now.

So my favorite part about Western Bridges is going off campus to the coffee shop. And I work at All Pets Wellness Center working with dogs. And I like hanging out with my friends.

Hi, I'm Anna. I do Fox Flight Special Rec Special Olympics. What I like about living in Aurora is having people accept people with disabilities. Thank you so much to the restaurants and business people that accept people with disabilities. So thank you.

Katrina, do you have anything?

This is such a huge honor. I work with all of these partners and all of the residents and their clients and customers and partners and everybody that supports disabilities. This is a big honor for us and for them. So we're very excited. Our Advisory Commission on Disabilities works hard to partner with me to advocate for all the families that have a person that may have disabilities. And we know that that continues to approach us even as we age or from birth is so vast. And so we're so excited to be honoring, recognizing, supporting and advocating for persons with disabilities. And we're excited that you've made this a proclamation this month for the city.

Another round of applause for Disability Pride Month here in the city of Aurora. Thank you again to all of our wonderful organizations. Thank you to Katrina for all her hard work, the board's hard work. We really appreciate everybody coming out here for Disability Pride Month here in Aurora. Up next for tonight, we are celebrating the City of Aurora's IT Department and GIS and Data Analytics Divisions for earning the second place AITP Chicagoland Most Effective Technology Team Award. Round of applause for IT, GIS, and Data and Analytics. All of them in the building here today. This award is highlighting the team's outstanding innovation and technical excellence within a number of different projects, including the award-winning Aurora Open Data Portal and the Public Works Excavation and Restoration System. Our team actually went up against some of the best of the biz, not just in government, but the private sector, too. They beat out Kraft Heinz, CNA, First Student, and more. Give it up again for the City of Aurora's IT department. National award winners. We have members of the GIS and the Data and Analytics team in attendance, as well as our CIO, Ram Tyagi, and our Deputy CIO, Jeff Anderson.

That's me as well. That's me as well.

That's me as well.

You guys can back up a little bit and balance it out. How's that? So we're not all weighted. So it's good news getting the text message that we won an award. So impressive effort by our GIS data analytics division for the second place 2026 AITP Chicagoland most effective technology team award. Your dedication, collaboration, continued commitment to excellence make the city of Aurora proud. So very thrilled to see this award coming back to the city of Aurora. And if you want to say a few words.

So, thank you so much, Mayor and Council, and I'm really honored to hold this trophy. As Mayor said, this belongs to both the teams and entire IT departments, but thank you, Tim, your team, Carolyn, Carolina, Eric and Matt, and then your team, Dan and D.R., and we have Tamira and William. I think their technical excellence, their innovative spirit, and also their collaborative spirit, along with their dedication to the community engagement is the reason that we are winning these kind of awards, and we are bringing the transparency through Open Data Portal and other tools that they are developing and, you know, with their hard work that they are doing every day. Also, this award is like not the only award we got. We also were nominated for the Open Data Portal for the IDC's National Award. We were the finalists there. So kudos to these folks for the great work they are doing. And we are not stopping here because we won this award. So we are also one of the finalists for the National Championship. So we will not stop here. We'll keep representing Aurora there as well.

Oh, we gotta do a photo. I forget the photo.

Yeah, a little closer to the front. All right, guys, ready once you smile.

Congratulations again to the city's IT department. And finally here tonight, just a special thank you and recognition to our dedicated city staff on all of their hard works running last week's storm cleanup. The entire Public Works Department, especially the Street Maintenance Division, Parks and Recreation, Water and Sewer Maintenance and Downtown Services teams Really worked around the clock to expedite that cleanup process for the whole city. We had APD, AFD, and EMA working hard with barricades, road closures, traffic control, and, of course, responding to emergencies related to the storms. And thank you again to our MyAurora311 team for keeping up on those mobile tickets, those online tickets, and, of course, the phone calls that were coming in. It really was a team effort, and it really showcases the power of teamwork in responding to such critical incidents. So with that, that will conclude the mayor's report. Thank you.

Thanks, John. Just to continue to highlight IT's impressive effort, a lot of people don't know, but last week, up near the interstate in Downers Grove, somebody bored through one of our fiber lines in 60 strands, and the entire city lost our internet ability, and especially The help desk team stepped up to try and get people to work remotely off of their cell phones and make accommodations. And then the fiber and network team worked with the state's vendor on that to get us back online and came up with a temporary solution for the following day. But they all worked collaboratively and professionally to get the city back in a moment of crisis after all of the storms that we're all acutely aware of. So I just want to acknowledge their work on that front as well. okay moving on that concludes the mayor's report there's no mayoral appointments if anybody was here for just awards and you want to take off you're welcome to do so if not we will move to public comment madam clerk do we have any members of the public wishing off our public comment we do mr. mayor and can you please read the rules of public comment

Pursuant to the Open Meetings Act, all persons shall be permitted an opportunity to address public officials under the rules established and recorded by the council. Under our rules, any person may address the city council for up to three minutes with a maximum of 30 minutes allotted for all public comment. No person other than the timekeeper or the chair for the purpose of maintaining order may interrupt a person recognized for public comment during his or her comments. Members of the city council shall not engage with nor respond to a speaker during the time set aside for public comment. Staff is directed to follow up with members of the public with respect to any concerns raised during public comment within the scope of the city's authority following the adjournment of this meeting.

Thank you, Madam Clerk. Will you please read the name of the first person wish to offer public comment?

Maureen McCain.

Take either side. Welcome, Ms. McCain. You have three minutes beginning now.

Thank you. I'm Maureen McCain, a resident of the fourth ward. And I'm here to represent the Aurora Sundowners Track Club. The children we serve come from every one of your wards. ASTC has been winning races for 56 seasons. The current children are ages six to 18. I was lucky enough to watch them at the two state regional qualifying meet a few weeks ago. A little girl came up behind me reading the back of my shirt and she goes, Oh, are you with the group that has Jack Coy rough? I've never seen him lose a race. And I said, yeah, me neither. You guys recognized him. For all those years, Sundowners has produced winners, many taking medals at the National Junior Olympics. This year, that meet of the nation's best will take place at Drake University the first week in August in Des Moines. I know Sundowner history because I wrote a book about their founder. Coach Wilbert Walters. The book asks the question, how did he produce winners? How did he teach the principles of successful life? How did he turn underserved youth into super achiever adults? Coach did all that while saying repeatedly, it's not about winning. His legacy lives on because he used sport as a model for life and for social justice, and the current coaches do the same. ASTC is a 501c3. The coaches have never received a penny. You will find if you look into youth athletic clubs that they are generally very expensive for the families, keeping them a playground for the well-to-do. Sundowners, by contrast, is an opportunity for all the kids in your wards. Back to that regional meet. 15 of the 26 sundowners at the meet made the cut to go on to nationals. But here's the real win. It's about each child's own personal best. Did you do better? In this race, if not, what detail do you need to address next time? At regionals, 23 of the 26 children achieved a new personal best under the pressure of a major meet. At Sundowners, every child counts, not just winners. So we are here today because we want to fund the 15 kids to make that trip to Drake, to stay in a hotel, eat meals, register for the meet. If we fund all of them and the coaches, the tab will be $10,000. We're not asking the older persons for all that. We are asking that you each give a portion to keep the lights on and to acknowledge your support for this legacy of Aurora Testament to youth. If you have questions, ask Mike Saville, because he has been our loyal supporter for most of that legacy. Thank you.

I'll ask clerk to please read the name of the next person we should know for public comment.

Ramona Smith.

Welcome, Ms. Smith. You have three minutes beginning now.

good evening honorable mayor and members of the city council i am ramona smith i am one of those underserved youth that was served by the aurora sundowners track club a long time citizen of aurora east aurora graduate aurora university graduate i've enjoyed a very satisfying 25-year career as a east and west aurora teacher and coach i choose to share these accomplishments with you tonight because i'm acutely aware that many of them would not have happened had not I been involved with the Aurora Sonomas Track Club. I'm here tonight on behalf of that program, an organization that, as you heard, has proudly served the lives of the youth in our community since 1970. I'm thrilled to stand here before you to share with you a monumental accomplishment, the same as Maureen did. Fifteen extraordinary athletes qualified for the AAU Junior Olympic Games and had the opportunity to experience competition on a national level at a huge university, which will provide them with experiences that money can't buy. These dedicated competitors, they range in age again from seven to 18, and every single one of them lives in this community, goes to our elementary, middle, and high schools on both the east and west side of Aurora. They have practiced all summer. They are ready. They're committed to being better at every practice and every track meet. They are the epitome of hard work, discipline, and civic pride. Tonight, to highlight Jacoy and just a couple of them, Jacoy Ruff and Aria Watson, they are ranked in the top 10 in the nation, which is quite a feat. Jaquoy, as you know, has already garnered three national medals, gold medals, and breaking national records along the way. These children are not just local success stories, they are national contenders representing the best of Aurora on a massive stage. My purpose of speaking with you tonight is to procure the funds that is needed to assist the families in sending these athletes to the National Junior Olympic Games. Sending a child to a national competition is an immense financial responsibility, and we believe that no athlete should be left behind. due to the lack of funding after they've earned their spot to compete at a national level through sweat and determination. An investment in these athletes and it is an investment in the spirit and the future of Aurora. They are carrying our city's name to a national platform proving that great things can grow right here in Aurora. We would deeply appreciate your support in helping these athletes cross the final finish line this season. Thank you for your time, your leadership, and your continued commitment to the youth of our city.

Thank you, Ms. Smith. Last clerk, please read the name of the next person wish to offer public comment.

Vernita McGee Andrews.

Welcome, Ms. Andrews. You have three minutes beginning now.

Thank you. Good evening, Council Mayor. I never comes up here with a script, because what comes from the heart reaches the heart. I just had an event on Saturday, a veterans tournament, and I would like to thank you, Mike Savelle, for showing up and supporting the vision, the mission that we have for stable ABLE. I have sent each of you out an email, and I think Just a response would have been nice. I want to also thank Alderman Dan Burrell in his absence, but he did respond out of all the emails that I sent each of you, I got one respond from Dan. And speaking of Dan, he have given me more to have supported StableAble more financially than this whole city. StableAble is not looking for a handout. I'm looking for a hand up. And what I'm doing in this city and not being from this city is much needed and it's meaningful. I just want to say that I'm having an upcoming event, which is a grand opening, and I want you all to save the date. September the 12th will mark my two years of starting StableAble, and you all know as maybe starting a business or just doing anything from scratch is not easy, and I just want the city of Aurora to recognize the need that's here with homelessness, health care, and hunger. And so we feed every Thursday down at the Trinity Church. And as they feed, I begin to clothe the people. So I was blessed to have plenty donations given to Stable Able, all brand new stuff, and when people look good, they do good, they feel better. Only thing that I'm missing from giving these homeless people, and so I'm pro-veteran all the way, and It's just for me again, I will always say it's unheard of for any veteran to be homeless, right? And so with what I'm doing in this city, I think each of you should be able to see and know how how I can help. So I'm just challenging each of you to go and take a ride through the Hesit House and see the people that's on the wall, the need of the people. You guys live in your neighborhoods. You guys don't see what I see. So with that being said, thank you for listening, and thank you for having me.

Thank you, Ms. McGee. I'll ask the clerk please read the name of the next person, which is not for public comment.

Rick Lawrence.

Good evening.

Welcome, Mr. Lawrence. You have three minutes beginning now.

For the past several months here, the mayor and his lawyer has had you guys chasing your tails on this ordinance of ethics, supposed ethics. He hasn't shown one example of where there's a problem, hasn't demonstrated any alderman that has taken money and changed their vote for that. For the past 20 years, yes, there have been mayors that have supported aldermen that they like, same as you and Mr. Larson and your attempt to get rid of other people on the council, to put your people in, doing the same thing the other two mayors have done, no different. But you come up, you've spent hundreds of hours, tens of thousands of dollars in labor on an ordinance that that nobody cares about. Here's an easy thing. You don't want money from people that do work with the city, say no money. Why is 1500 okay, why is 16 bad? Just say don't take money from people who have contracts with the city. Maybe don't hire unqualified people that just because they worked on your campaign and donated all that time, they get jobs paying them 150,000 plus, 200,000 plus, and maybe that's a little bit of corruption. But you know what you're not talking about all these months that you've been doing this? Last week, hours sitting up here? You're not talking about that we have no economic development going on. He has nothing. There's nothing in the works. His staff has nothing. Nobody can make a decision on his staff. You're not talking about that. You're not talking about overcrowding and property standards not being addressed. and why John Curley's office is not doing their job. You're not talking about why the medians and the basic maintenance is not being addressed. He has you running around, he's in the newspaper, saying that you're taking money from PACS and somehow you're corrupt. Then say it. Give an example. Call it out. Here tonight, you're gonna put this ordinance in there? Say why you need it. You ran an entire campaign on pay to play, pay to play. done nothing about it. You said there was one company that was given all these alderman money and the mayor money and everything else, the previous mayor. You gave that same company a $2 million contract. So it's a bunch of campaigns. It's real easy to campaign. It's another thing to actually lead and govern. And when you look at what people are really concerned about, It's the overcrowding, it's our neighborhoods, it's our schools, it's the media, it's the basic maintenance of the city. Economic development. That's what you should really be talking, that's what you should spend hours questioning why we don't have any economic development on the table. And there's nothing coming with his group. They don't want it. They're not taking the meetings. can't get answers that's what you should spend hours up here not some campaign thing that he runs around and says you're all corrupt he was just in the newspaper saying that so i would suggest focus on what really the people want john mike times thank you mr lawrence i'll ask the clerk to please read the name of the next person we'll show for public comment brenda lee

welcome miss lee you have three minutes beginning now good evening mayor um members of the city council my name is brenda lee i'm standing here tonight in solidarity with my family i have a disabled son and three minor grandchildren who i have full legal guardianship of we are here because we have been systematically exploited displaced and trapped in a vicious cycle. We were placed into a recent rental house by Hesed House. We did not know at the time that our landlord, Ratna Kapoor, sat directly on the board of the trustees for the very same non-profit. This is a massive conflict of interest. When our home didn't have adequate heat, I did my duty as a guardian and a grandmother and a mother. I called the city code enforcement. As soon as I did that, we faced immediate retaliation and was forced out of our home. To cover this up, Hesed House has pushed us out of Kane County. They dumped us in a hotel in Warrenville when I went out there and complained that we cannot commute back and forth. for the kids to do their activities and the services out here. gave us a hotel on Route 59 and Deal Road, cutting off my disabled son and my grandchildren from the very services that they need. Tonight I am here to tell you that this is a systematic pattern. This is the fourth home that Hesod House has placed my family in that has had severe code violation. The City of Aurora already has the foyer records and the citation histories for these properties on your computers. the first home was 716 view street the um landlord was michael bomb the second was two south farnsworth that landlord was patrick franciski the third was um 7042 742 east downer that landlord was melissa broadway the fourth home was 900 spruce street with ronica poor being the landlord Two homes had unvented plumbing. One wasn't even a legal licensed rental when they moved us in. Unvented plumbing trapped sewer gas inside the home. I have severe COPD. Putting a grandmother with life-threatening lung conditions into a home with toxic plumbing violations is a danger to my life i've asked ryan dowd and karen whitney for an emergency transfer they say that they can't do it or they don't know what i'm talking about we are human beings paying the price for the board members code violations and the shelter's total breakdown of accountability and housing networks laziness i demand the city of aurora TO DO A FORMAL AUDIT OF THE HESSET HOUSE AND THEIR HOUSING PRACTICES. I DEMAND THE MAYOR'S OFFICE TO STEP IN AND BREAK THE CYCLE AND SECURE EMERGENCY TRANSFER SO MY FAMILY CAN COME HOME SAFELY. AND ALSO I AM VERY NERVOUS AND AFRAID FROM ME SPEAKING OUT TODAY THAT I WOULD BE RETALIATED AGAINST FURTHER BY THEM NOT PAYING FOR OUR HOTEL.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Lee. Your time is up. I'll ask the deputy mayor to please get in touch with Ms. Lee and get her contact information. Thank you. Alice Clark, please read the name of the next person who wants to offer public comment.

Patricia Shipp.

Welcome, Ms. Shipp. You have three minutes beginning now.

I grew up in Aurora, Illinois. I am speaking out for the senior citizen. For the last two years, when the heat and everybody probably don't watch the news, how hot it's supposed to be this week, I would like to know how come the senior citizen does not have no one bringing them water, fans. It is extra hot. I'm quite sure you all have air-conditioned fans at home, but what about our senior citizen who can't get out and go to the store and get water and fan? How are they supposed to make it through this heat? This heat is dangerous for them. And I want to know why is no water delivered to their homes, no fans delivered, no one's checking on them. City of Aurora do it every year. For the last two years I've been back and forth in Aurora, they have done that. But it seems like this year no one's moving out for them or even thinking about them. I have talked to a lot of senior citizens and the communities And they have not heard from no one. And they are saying the same thing. They are used to someone coming knocking on their door, dropping water off or dropping a fan off. Some of them sitting in the heat right now with no fan because they can't afford it. So what is the city doing for them? How are they supposed to make it through the heat for this week? Everything's dry. But you go home day by day under air condition, under the fan, you're cooling off, but they're not cooling off. They got to open windows and all the heat is blowing in. Where is they coolness? It's a lot of them are sick. And we need to deliver water to their homes and fans. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Shipp. I'll ask Deputy Mayor to please contact Ms. Shipp and get her contact information. I'll ask the clerk to please read the name of the next person which will offer public comment.

Priest-Pryor.

Welcome, Mr. Pryor. You have three minutes beginning now.

Hi to the city council. Basically, I'm speaking about the elderly like she was, but I'm trying to get it where we can do what God intended us to do, help those who can't help themselves. Our elderly, we need to start taking more care of them. and making sure that they okay. Because one day we all going to be in a spot and we going to want somebody to do the same for us. So I'm not up here to bash nobody. I'm saying that we need to do better because all of y'all, including all of us, know better. So we should do better. And we should, as Ms. Shipp said, we should make sure our elderly is taken good care of in this city because we used to doing that. For some reason, I don't know what happened. We fell off, but I'm a part of an organization, Challenge to Change, if anybody know who that is. We can get them involved. Well, we can get boots on the ground, and we can make it happen. I'm one of the runners. So y'all get the water. Y'all can even just drop it off. It's right up the street. Give it to them. I will come and get it. I'll get the addresses, and I will take it to the people that need it. I just want y'all to know we all need to do better in this city and take care of our people.

Thank you, Mr. Pryor. Let's clerk to please read the name of the final person wish not for public comment.

Mercy Galicia.

Welcome Mercy. You have three minutes beginning now.

Thank you. Um, I just wanted to thank everyone for attending our festival. We had a very nice turnout, beautiful weather, and due to the attendance, we're going to be giving our scholarships, uh, July 25th at the third ward. And I just came to invite everyone, see if you'd like to attend. It'll be at eight o'clock in the evening. I sent out some invitations to the elements that participated. I'll be dropping one off for the mayor. All right. Thank you and have a wonderful evening.

Thank you.

Okay.

You would have to have signed up by 6 PM. There's a list that's available, and you can sign up online prior to the 6 PM time. Thank you. Next, that concludes the public comment portion. And we will ask the clerk to read both the consent agenda and direct to council consent agenda in full.

250764, a resolution authorizing the execution of a joint funding agreement with the state of Illinois, the execution of a phase three construction engineering services agreement with V3 Companies, and the not to exceed amount of $144,100, and the appropriation of $530,000 of MFT funds for the Safe Routes to School project in school districts 129, 131, and 204. 260262, a resolution to establish a preferred contractors list for the 2026 Aurora Rental HVAC Replacement Grant Program. 260301, a resolution establishing the maximum number of class B on-site consumption liquor licenses unofficially related to the application from HH59 LLC located at 4448 East New York Street in Ward 10. 260315 a resolution authorizing the execution of real estate contracts to purchase properties and appropriating mft funds required for the 2022 safe routes to school project and the amount of 8150 dollars 260359, a resolution authorizing the execution of an agreement to provide parking for residents of the Hobbs building. 260368, a resolution to award San Susi Drive and Cobblestone Drive water main replacement project located in Ward 5 to Whittinger excavating in the bid amount of $1,599,570. 260370 a resolution to award a contract for well maintenance services for well 119 to municipal well and pump and the not to exceed amount of one hundred three thousand four hundred seventy four dollars and seventy cents twenty six zero three seven two a resolution to award the phillips park irrigation pump system replacement project located in ward three to midwest well services doing business as pump station professionals and the contract amount of 244 thousand dollars 260373, a resolution authorizing the execution of a phase two design engineering supplement with HR Green in the not to exceed amount of $17,622 and the appropriation of $17,622 of MFT funds for safe routes to school project in school districts 129, 131, and 204. 260380, a resolution approving the purchase of bulk rock salt in the amount of $74.33 per ton from Compass Minerals America in Overland Park, Kansas for the Division of Street Maintenance under the DuPage County Department of Transportation of Illinois joint purchasing agreement bid for the 2026-2027 season. 260391, an ordinance vacating a city easement on the property located at 55 South Constitution Drive in King County, Aurora. 260392, an ordinance annexing property located at 1160 Jackson Street to the city of Aurora pursuant to a water service agreement. 260415, approval of the minutes of the Tuesday, June 23rd, 2026 city council meeting.

Is there a motion to approve the items on both the direct to council consent and consent agenda as read? Motion was made by Alderwoman Garza, second by Alderwoman Smith. Are there any members who wish to remove an item or have any questions on any of the items on the consent agendas? There being no further questions, will the clerk please call the roll on both consent agendas?

Garza? Yes. Nunez? Yes. Franco? Yes. Seville? Yes. Benuelos? Yes.

Yes.

Smith? Yes. Bugg? Yes. Bade? Yes. Larson? Yes. White? Yes. 10 yes, 0 no.

Motion carries. The consent agenda and direct to council consent agenda are both approved. Next, we will move to unfinished business. And to try and keep everything together, I'm going to go to agenda item 260361 first. So I'll ask the clerk to please read that agenda item.

260361 a resolution requesting the approval of a three-year support renewal contract to sign tell solutions for network infrastructure managed services of citywide network infrastructure in the amount of two million one hundred sixty eight thousand one hundred twenty seven dollars somewhat motion to approve a motion made by Alderman Garza second by Alderman Franco any questions or discussion Alderwoman Smith yes could we please get a presentation on this

Do we have a PowerPoint ready to go?

Good evening, Mayor and Council. Jeff Anderson, Deputy CIO. So what this contract is, is a renewal of the existing managed service we have with for all of the networking equipment, the internal networking, switches, routers, those kinds of things that transfer all of the equipment through all of our, all the network traffic through all of our all of our buildings. What we're looking to do here is through this three-year process is end up buying out so we actually own the equipment. The current contract is structured that we, it is fully managed. The equipment is owned by Scientel and this now, the negotiation we have here will get us to a point where we have purchased all of the equipment and it'll be ours at the end of the three years and then we can make another choice on how we want to go forward. So to go through, and that covers the start of it here, we can go through a quick agenda here, cover the five-year financial review, go through what it would look like if we just renewed at one year, which is the existing agreement. We could extend it for one year. The three-year extension I'm talking about tonight, and then we had another option if we just stopped everything and went and purchased all the equipment from another reseller. This is an example of what's being done for us. I won't go through this eye chart here for you, but there's a lot of things that are being done by our partner Scientech on behalf of city staff. The goal as part of this is as we ramp this down, we'll ramp up city staff's abilities as well throughout this, throughout the next three years, so that we'll get to the end and again, we'll be able to make a decision, informed decision at the end of the three years. So under the five-year plan or contract that we're currently under, we started out, went out to an RFP, And we went out believing we had 250 devices. And after we went through the RFP, we realized we had 355 devices. And you can see that the number of devices has grown throughout the project. And that was really because we made conscious decisions as a city to take the network where it had never been before. We built a brand new public works building. We extended River Edge Park not once but twice. We built three new fire stations. We had other small extensions with 101 Lake Street. We went to the golf course. We went to other places at Phillips Park. Stope Island Garage, Grand Boulevard, and some other locations. So that's what you'll see here on the next graph is what I'm trying to show here is annually when we would true up our maintenance fees with Scientel, you would see the increase. And what I'm trying to show on the graph here is the corresponding locations we went to consciously to take the network to. We brought those to council, right? And we agreed to take the network to River Ridge Park. to golf course, to all the other places I've already discussed. So you'll see the increase in fees according to this. And this was trued up annually in 50 device blocks, if I can put it that way. So as we added, we would increase once we reached 50 new devices, if you will. So 350, 450, 550, those kinds of things, right? So that's the five-year financial review. This three-year extension, what you'll see is that we currently have just under 650 devices. The extension is negotiated. Scientel will cover up to 650 devices. Anything above that, beyond that, would be ours. So what they're doing here is showing the bottom line on the discount here. You're seeing that the contracted price, if we were to continue, would climb well up over $1 million. We're negotiating this down now to $800,000. down to the last year of $639,000. So 2.168 is what we're asking for at this point. So at the end of it, you know, Royal will get all the equipment for a dollar. They're in the line in green at the end of the three years. This is just another graph showing the increase over the time of the five years of this, and then the decrease on the right-hand side of it coming down as we're buying out the equipment. And then other alternatives we explore is if we would stay and say, all right, let's just extend this for one year. And what would that look like? They would give us a discount. It would still be more expensive than what we negotiated for three. And at the end of that first year, we would not own the equipment. We'd still have another decision point to make. So that's if we continued with the option that's currently out there in the existing contract. And so if we went out and just said, OK, we're just going to go buy all of this equipment new from a reseller. And in this case, we're a Fortinet network, so we'd go out and buy all the equipment new. You can see that that exceeds the cost of the three years and would not come with any of the managed services that were on that eye chart page at the beginning of this. So what we're trying to do is ramp up the capabilities of our own staff while we're buying out the equipment on the back side and then own the equipment on the back side and, again, make a decision there within year eight of the contract. So then this gets into some of the details I covered previously that anything above 650, we will buy those and own those outright. Scientel will actually provide us coverage for up to 700 devices. So unless we're out looking to expand the network greatly again, we believe this will cover us for the next three years. And that's, I'll pause there and take questions.

I'll just say you guys did a great job negotiating this. I know it was a lot of back and forth as we looked at a lot of options, but you can see that we've moved from 600 devices to 650 devices, and we're paying less to get it. So in the ramp down, and I know it wasn't an easy negotiation, but I appreciate the hard work on an IT leadership team.

Thank you. Yeah, this was when we started, I think, with everybody back in January, Mayor. I think this was when.

Any other questions from the council? Thank you, Jeff. Thank you.

You're welcome.

OK. Questions or discussion on this agenda item? Hearing none, I'll ask the clerk to please call the roll. On that, 260361. Yes.

Nunez?

Yes.

Franco? Yes. Seville? Yes. Benuelos? Benuelos?

Yes.

Smith? Yes. Fogg?

Yes.

Fade? Yes. Larson? Yes. White? Yes. 10 yes, 0 no.

Motion carries.

Motion carries. This resolution is adopted. Thank you.

Thank you.

OK. Next we'll move to the item everybody's been waiting for, another round of the ethics ordinance. I'll ask clerk to please read the first agenda item under unfinished business 260779. What?

250779, an ordinance amending and adding sections 2-185 and 2-186 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Aurora pertaining to the disclosure of economic interests and campaign-related employment and volunteerism.

Before we move to a motion, I'll ask your Dana to take the lead. I know she's been working with several other people on some of the motions.

I just want to explain what's in front of you. It worked well last week to work off of papers, so I printed three. These are all in Legistar. So what is before you, the very first document and the second document have to do with Legislature 25-0779. This is the Chapter 2. This is the disclosures. And then Chapter 15. is the ethics portion is the last document before you. The way I organize this is the very first document. This is what was discussed last week at Cal. and was um i'm these we pretty much um came to a consensus on chapter two that was um you know pretty comprehensive um afterwards um when reading the the completed document although when bade had a proposal which is the highlighted section in the second document it's labeled bade proposal number two and that highlighted section is on page three so she can present that when she's ready and then chapter fifteen just to get it all in one document so that it was easier to go through the only things that are highlighted in here were the areas that were still under dispute when we left committee of the whole so there is a disputed item on page two okay there's a disputed item on page five and then on page seven is also under dispute

Okay, so just for procedure, would it be appropriate to entertain a motion in a second and then entertain amendments as we move forward?

Yes, you need the main motion first.

Okay. So on agenda item 260779 before, sorry.

It's 25. We started this agenda item in October 2018.

0725. OK. Is 250779. Yep. Agenda item 250779. And just to start the discussion, is there a motion and a second? So moved. Second. Motion made by Alderman Smith. I'm sorry, Alderman Seville, seconded by Alderman Larson. OK. Discussion. Alderman Bade, I think you want to kick it off.

Thank You mayor so so if everybody can go to the Bade proposal to correct yes okay page three line seven and eight it's highlighted in yellow this is going to be consistent with what was proposed for Section 3, and it's the same. The general nature of such outside is a little vague.

Because thinking about it, I don't know that my thought was, does this language clarify that question? And I don't think it does. So we'd have to.

I'll just say that I tend to think that the 24 months is more definitive for those people who are trying to live.

The fact that we had to explain it and it's still not quite clear probably says that if the last donation was March of 24, you know in April of 26 you're good.

I think that for the people that have to abide by the rules, to me it makes more sense. Any other questions or discussion, or is there a motion? Alderman Woman-Bate.

Just wanted to say something. I think it will be consistent with what our Madam Clerk had mentioned about how it will be easy if it is months. Similarly, if it's 24 months, like what she had proposed last week to change to 12 preceding months instead of preceding year for explanation and for handling. For her also, it will be easier if it is 24 months.

Thank you. Any other questions or discussion? Is there a motion?

We need a motion.

It needs to be in one direction or the other.

Yeah, yeah. Which one do you want?

The motion would be to amend agenda item 260406, page 5, line 13, to adopt the words 24 months or two calendar years.

Which one do you want? 24 months. 24 months.

Can somebody formulate that in a motion?

Move to adopt the, so it would be a motion to adopt 24 months. Okay, all right.

Page 5, line 13.

to adopt 24 months and remove two years.

Is there a second?

Second. Second.

Motion was made by Alderwoman Smith, seconded by Alderman Franco, to amend Legislature Item 260406, page 5, line 13, to use the words 24 months and remove the words two calendar years. Any further questions or discussion? Is everybody clear on what we're voting on? I'll ask the clerk to please call the roll on just the amendment.

Garza? Yes. Nunez?

Yes.

Franco? Yes. Seville? Yes. Benuelos?

Yes.

Smith?

Yes.

Bogg?

Yes.

Bade? Yes. Larson? Yes. White?

No.

Nine yes, one no.

This amendment is adopted and will be changed in the agenda item 260406. And then the third and last disputed area, unless we address the golf courses, is page 7, section C. And I put together a short presentation because somebody had asked, I can't remember, someone on my left asked to see an example of this. John, can you pop up first the State Board of Elections website and then? So this is just to show everybody you can go find any D2 information. Each one of us who has a political action committee has to raise money and report that money to Springfield. This is the way that you can research it. a PAC called Build Our Future PAC that I referenced as a shadow PAC in the last discussion on this. And you're looking at the D2 quarter reports for January of 2021. And then I'll ask if you'll just pop the PowerPoint up, I can go through sort of what I'm referencing and why we put the rationale for this section together. Build Our Future PAC. These are all, again, just cut and pasted donations over the years that that PAC was active. It was concluded in 2024. And you can see that this is a company that does do business with the city of Aurora, donating 93,000. And again, this is not going to any candidate's political action committee. This is going to a separate political action committee. Second, next slide. Again, looking at another person who has received TIF incentives and other financial incentives and done business with the City of Aurora through a number of entities owned by those two partners, JH Real Estate, totaling $60,000 to the Build Our Future PAC. Next slide. looks at a lesser amount from the Werman and Poulakidis group that's been involved in a number of development deals. Next slide. So I broke this out. This Build Our Future PAC had donations that largely came from businesses doing business with the city of Aurora. During the 2022 gubernatorial race, donations started to come in from a lot of Chicago companies that I looked into and had a history of. doing city contracts, and sometimes those contracts were not the lesser bidder. In fact, some of them were two million more than the lower bidder. And this totals about, over the course of several years, 313,000 came into this PAC. The next slide illustrates that not all expenditures, just like not all donations came from companies doing business with the city of Aurora, not all expenditures went to Aurora Races. So I highlighted the two instances where donations were made to Pedersen for Judge and voters for Sean Morrison. Again, both of these came in the 2022 window when money was being raised for the gubernatorial race, not for Aurora races. Next slide. And this looks at 2021, and I did not put the 2019 activity up here because a lot of that might have had to do with automatic races as well as 2023. I'm just looking at 2021. And you can see that of the money spent in 2021, 32,000 of the 35,000 was spent in the municipal cycle. I did not count the dollar amount spent In at the end of 2022 Simply because or sorry at the end of 2021 simply because it didn't fit in the electoral cycle and probably had to do with the 22 races But it's it's an overwhelming percent spent on municipal races next slide And then again just to point out who probably controls both the donations coming in and the patent and money going out When this pack was terminated the majority of it was transferred. In fact, everything left was transferred to urban for Aurora next slide Or you can back up. You can go back off that one. That's fine. So this is, you know, the intent of this section was to say we're writing all of these rules to regulate our 13 political action committees. Somebody can skirt all of the rules we just put in place by having what I would call is a shadow pack, which also takes money from the city of Aurora and then donates to various organizations Aurora centric races and so the intent of this percent was to say if 33% of that pack was supporting one candidate then it should be considered a Pack that supports that one candidate personally, I think it should say city of Aurora races, but you know, it's fine how it is But somebody wanted to know the rationale behind it. This is the this is the rationale and

questions or discussion sure other woman Smith 1500 the 1500 that we have now that you can get per donation per a business doesn't that cover that if that same business was to put money in a pack and you got money from that pack, wouldn't you be unable to take money from that pack because that business is in there, regardless of this 33% paragraph or not? Because you've already taken the 15%. you're that you are entitled to take and if that company company a gives you the 15 that company a shows up in the pack and the pack gives you money you wouldn't be entitled to be able to keep that money because some of it would be coming from company a who already gave you the maximum amount so is this is is this not redundant in some fashion

So I don't think it's redundant. What this is saying is that you can't circumvent the rule that you can't donate more than $1,500 is on page five. We just did that 24-month thing. So subparagraph A is the rule. Subparagraph B explains that this applies to people who are directors or control the bids or whatever is being submitted in response to RFPs or whatever, partners in the organization. So that's on the side of the company. Paragraph C is saying that you can't circumvent this rule by using a pack or using a um a the mayor called this shadow pack but but a pack in which there is um where they're making giving financial support in excess of 33 percent of their total receipts so so it's not i don't think it's redundant because this is just laying out that it's closing

a way to circumvent paragraph a and can I just finish with mine and I'll be done so as we discussed a lot of what we have done here corporate council you said you found a lot of Cook County as I look at the graph that was put together when we started this what ten months ago but however long ago was eight months ago that has 17 municipalities all around us including Chicago and the PAC contribution limits for the state of Illinois believe it or not is seventy two thousand and eight hundred dollars that's the PAC contribution for the state each and every one of these municipalities um follows the state of illinois limits so all 17 of these people that are all around us are following the state um and and not treating their city council like they're crooks and that they're going to try to do something wrong as this is what this part does to me this makes me feel like i'm being treated like a crook and if i don't vote to put this back in, I'm going to be told I'm not following an ethic ordinance. So this is the part of all of this that makes me feel really bad, and I won't go into it a lot because I did it the other day. And I also find it very interesting that we just had a 15-minute conversation about 24 months or two years, and we thought that one made it a little more complicated than the other. You want to talk about complication? wait until you start going through this at the end of your campaign when you're going to have to do look backs and look throughs and go back through PACs if they gave you money and to make sure they did it right and to make sure you got the right amount of money and make sure you didn't get more than 33%. And if you did, you're going to be paying them back. Furthermore, this was wonderful. It was great for everybody to see, to understand what a PAC is. This PAC, this situation, completely legal like it or not agree with it or not we don't get that much money we are not involved in dollars like this we're alderman you know we're making twenty thousand perhaps at the most we're bringing in something like that this is this is big time this is a mayoral race this is a governor race the problems don't fall within Even if we take money from a PAC, it's small amounts. It's small amounts. So this is just my gut and heart feeling for this. It's unfortunate that this one thing is just that we can't make some kind of compromise here with just this one item. But with this 133% item in there, I will not be able to be in favor of this Chapter 15.

I would just say the intent is not to further regulate the PAC for your campaign or anybody up here's campaign. The intent is to prevent somebody from utilizing a shadow PAC that a majority of the proceeds are then spent to benefit that race. And additionally, this PAC in particular has supported multiple alderman over the years in both the 2021-2019 and 2023 cycle. So it is a bit of a way to circumvent the rules that we're trying to put in place. If we leave this language in there, people will not be able to circumvent that system. I want to address the potential burden of having to go back at the end of the year and look at where they get their campaign funds from, because Alderman Barrero raised the same question as we all do, is how do you regulate this? It is if a member of the public or another candidate or elected official says, you know, I notice that there's this pact that's been a significant amount of money influencing outside races, I'm sorry, Aurora races, and they are not abiding by the rules that the rest of the council had to abide by, then that creates an unfair playing field because one might be influenced by the shadow pack and everybody else is trying to play by the same rules. So it's to create a level of fairness as well in the system so we're all playing on the same field.

Can I comment?

Alderman Franco.

So I'm glad you mentioned the level playing field. And this was talked about by our chief of staff before, because I remember these words perfectly. We have to level the playing field. The playing field is unleveled. Political parties can give unlimited amounts of money. Religious institutions apparently can give unlimited amounts of money. State of Illinois caps what businesses can give up to $14,600. You have an unlevel playing field starting out. We're making it more unlevel. I mean, I can't wrap my head around when we say unlimited and we're going to push it down here. So when you talk about level playing field, it's a farce. We're making the playing field more unlevel because, as we know, the business community does not want to support people who disparage capitalism. And that's a given. So instead of dealing with it, we're changing the rules to make the unlevel playing field more unlevel. So I don't really, it doesn't resonate. I think it's a farce that we talk about stuff like that because we're going the opposite direction. It's the math that will tell you we're going the opposite direction. So I wasn't going to comment until you said that, but we are not making this a level playing field. We're making it worse. And I think that's wrong. And I think the business community should be able to abide by the laws, but we don't refer to people as being influenced. We are not being influenced. Nobody up here is being influenced. We're supported by certain people, certain businesses, because we agree that businesses work, or religious communities can do this or that. That's why they give us money, not because we're going to vote for them. And I think it's shameful that we're basically basing this on something that's never happened up here before. Nobody's been indicted up here for that before, and yet we're making it all about we're the bad guys, and I don't think we are. And I think all the women Smith said are good. We're not doing anything wrong. But when we talk about fairness, we're going the opposite direction. So I just wanted to say that because I don't think this playing field is level.

I would say $313,000 is not a level playing field for the rest.

Well, $200,000 by the governor of Illinois is not a level either, so, you know, where do you want to go with that? We could do this all day long.

Well, I would also suggest that at least I followed the rules, and I would say there was probably way more money, dark money on the other side, influencing the race that wasn't recorded, wasn't documented, wasn't made an issue of.

So you're saying the rest of us didn't follow the rules? I'm not suggesting. I would love somebody to tell me that I didn't follow the rules and show me where that didn't happen or anybody up here. So if you want to go there, let's go there. I don't think that a person who doesn't take money, doesn't do anything wrong, should be thrown under the bus because we're going to assume they did because nobody else can get that money because we don't believe in capitalism.

I'm not saying, Alderman Franco, I'm not saying that you're not following the rules. I'm saying that this PAC didn't follow the rules. They didn't even follow the rules to put the legal disclaimer required by the state of Illinois on there, on both for races, for aldermanic races and races for the governor's race and races in the mayor's. They didn't follow the rules. They didn't play by the rules. But we are. Well, again, but this would not create a level playing field. Again, if we are all following the rules by the ordinance that we adopt tonight, and then somebody else is allowed to let a shadow pack spend a significant amount of money that's influenced by the amount of money coming in from city contractors, I think that says something. If, by the way, a political party act also accepts a majority of their funds from people doing business with the city of Aurora, I would assume that it would fall under the same category as this as a shadow PAC.

Well, I can't argue the numbers here, but I'm going to argue that the playing field is not becoming more level. It's becoming less level overall. This whole thing was based on that. So I think that when we go there, that's the wrong thing to say. We're not leveling the playing field at all. We're making it wider than that. So that's just my opinion on that portion of what you said.

Any other members who haven't weighed in on this? Other woman, babe.

Thank you, Mayor. I'm all for ethics and campaign contribution, so I just want to say something that in order to make it easy for anyone who wants to run for this privileged city of Aurora position, we just want to make it easy for them to be able to run the election and not get into complicated things where anybody can come and say gotcha for not understanding what mistake they made. So I strongly would want to follow all the state rules. They have all the campaign rules and ethics in place and all the other, most of the cities are following those rules. And exposing families through political violence when they're not running for office was one reason why I did not support the first chapter two, I mean the chapter two. When the governor doesn't want your family to be included, why is City of Aurora forcing to include their whereabouts for making more than $2,500 an year? So that was one reason why I did not support that, and I definitely want this to be in some easier language if we definitely want to put it here. But if it's so complicated, it makes it difficult for the new person to run for our beautiful city of Aurora.

I think we're doing our best to make it easy by creating candidate packs for people that want to run. We've even talked about doing a public meeting perhaps next year because our timeline is running out. But I would say easy is not the only thing. We also want ethical and everybody playing by the same rules. Alderman White.

Yes, I want to address some comments that Alderman Bay made about the specific act, the Public Act 104. about the Safety and Security Illinois Public Officials Act. So based on reading the document... Just a quick question, point of order.

You had mentioned Chapter 2. We're now talking about Chapter 15. Okay. So we're no longer debating Chapter 2. You just brought that up as... Okay. Your rationale for voting against Chapter 2 on the last agenda item, right? Yeah. Okay.

Okay. So I would just say that that's a false interpretation of the document. That's all. Okay. It clearly states otherwise, something different.

Okay. Questions or discussion on 260406 from anybody who hasn't spoken on it?

Yes.

Alderman Buck.

Just briefly. There's been a lot of talk about... Things are complicated. The elected officials need to track donations from different parties. As the 13 people up here know right now, we already do that. We're not creating some new system. From the Illinois State Board of Elections, schedule of receipts. A receipt must be itemized if the contribution exceeds a mere $150, an aggregate from one source during the reporting period. You must receive name, address, all that identifying information. If the contribution is more than $500, you must receive employment information, the date it was given a course, a whole list of things. If you do not do those things and turn them into the Illinois State Board of Elections, you will be in trouble, I'll just say it that way. You can ask the person who tried to run against me last time. because they got put off the ballot because they didn't follow the rules. So we already do these things. You already capture the information from the people giving you contributions. You already write all this down. We're not going to tell you how to write it down. We're not going to tell you what to put at your campaign table on how you capture that information. You're already capturing it, though. So now you're just capturing a little bit more. One, you're capturing do you or have you done business. We just decided in the last 24 months, not calendar year, 24 months. Have you done business with the city of Aurora? You need to add one more line onto your sheet where you're already capturing your information. That's really about it. One more line. Did you do business with the city in the last 24 months? And you're moving forward. There is not a whole list of information. You have to go back at the end of the year and I mean these things you got to turn in the State Board of Elections some of them within a week so you're not you're doing it now according to the State Board of Elections you're not gathering this over months and months and quarters and a year you've already captured it and you have to turn it into the State Board and then you also have it for your records for the city so I think in some of our explanations we're making it harder than it actually is. I think all 13 of us hopefully are doing this already so we're not getting caught by the state or caught up in the rules of the State Board of Elections. This is just adding on again to limit our involvement as far as contributions with those who are doing business with the city.

Anybody who has not weighed in on this agenda item yet, 260406, Chapter 15, Alderman Larson.

Thank you. Yeah, I just want to make a few points. First of all, regarding this being a level playing field, I agree that it would make sense if we could do more. But there's only a limited amount of power that we do have. And that power is not in limiting how many dollars can be given to a candidate. It's in if you exceed this threshold, you can no longer get a contract for this period of time, four years. So that's what we're dealing with. That's really all we can do as far as I'm aware. The second bit is about whether this makes us look like criminals or bad people. I mean, if I personally were to receive a large donation from a business in the city, whether they have a contract or not, it wouldn't change the way that I vote up here. It wouldn't change my mind. I'm sure everyone else agrees with that. The important thing is not how we feel. It's not how we trust ourselves. It's how our voters, our constituents, the people in Aurora, how they trust us. And from polling data, we see that there's very, very bad trust for the government generally. I think I've referenced it before, but there's a Pew Research poll from just a few years ago. 72% of U.S. adults think that there should be limits placed on campaign contributions, only 11%. disagree with that. That's the reality. It's not necessarily about how this makes us feel. It's about how it makes the people that we represent feel. And the final point that I want to make regarding this specific language we're talking about here with the 33%, I don't think it's that complicated. There are a lot of complications with running for office, and part of that is filing things with the State Board of Elections. And if you go on the State Board of Elections website, you can look at any PAC and look at their quarterly reports. And the language that we have here is referencing contributions in excess of 33% of the committee's total receipts for the reporting year. So our elections are in April. If I were to have a fundraiser in March, that's pretty early on in the year. Let's say a PAC gives me $3,000 and they've raised $9,000 throughout the year. That's above that 33% threshold. It's 33 and a third. If they raise another $1,000 by the end of the year, then that threshold is no longer surpassed. So maybe if I were to take a donation prior to the election, I would look at the number at that point and not want to risk it. But there's also a pretty good chance that that PAC could raise more money later on and this would no longer apply. So I don't think it's really that burdensome to the people donating or the people taking donations.

Anybody else who hasn't spoken on this? Are there any members that want to address the park issue? Hearing none, I'll ask the clerk to please call the roll on agenda item 260406. Alderman Spill.

When you asked a question about the park issue,

I thought that was addressed last time.

So we accepted the language to allow fundraising on city parks. What corporate counsel said is she's not sure if that is compliant with state law. So she wants to check with the attorney general just on that section. There was a concern that some of the other stuff that we're passing is also not legal per state or federal law. And this was the only issue.

yes I think I think the the concern was was that everything the only the only sentence that I have pause on is the the issue at the parks and everything else in this I'm confident would be upheld in court

So the amendment that we thought sustained consensus on is in here?

About the parks.

With the parks.

It's currently in there, yeah.

All right. I just want to make sure.

Understood.

And we won't address it unless the Attorney General comes back and says there's a problem with it. And then we'll bring it up.

And probably not spend nine months on it.

I'll ask the clerk to please call the roll on agenda item 260406.

Mayor, I have a question.

Yeah.

We're voting on the whole, no, the 50,000 has been approved. This is in as is. 33%? Nobody's made an amendment on it.

I make a motion that we strike lines 3 through 11.

Can you phrase it as move to amend legislature item 260406 and state the page and line number?

I move to, what was it, amend legislature chapter 15, page 7, lines 3 through 11, addressing 33% of the committee's total receipts reporting for a particular candidate for the city office elected official and authorizing fundraising committee for the candidate elected official. Is that, will that suffice?

The highlighted section. OK. Yeah. That's fine. Is there a second? Is there a second? Second.

There's a motion and a second for an amendment to amend legislature item 260406 to remove the language on page 7, lines 3 through 11, the highlighted language, which reads, or to any political fundraising committee which during the reporting year in which the contribution is to be made has itself made contributions are given financial support in excess of 33% of the committee's total receipts for the reporting year to a particular candidate for city office elected official or the authorized fundraising committee of the candidate or elected official I feel like we've already had a discussion. There's a motion for an amendment and a second. So to be clear, there's been an amendment on the floor. I'll ask the clerk to please, does anybody have questions on what we're voting on first of all? This is just a motion, a vote on the amendment to remove that language, the highlighted language.

Mr. Mayor, I have a question. Sure. Just reading it through with that, so just wondering,

would yes so would the would section C make sense without that portion yes it will it'll be a complete sentence the only other thing I would do is remove the little eye that is part of the highlighted portion so it's part of the highlighted portion yeah it's but otherwise yes the sentence would make sense I made sure it did

Any other questions or discussion? Last clerk please call the roll on the amendment. It's an amendment to allow shadow packs. Alderwoman Garza. Last clerk please call the roll.

Yes. Garza?

She said yes.

Nunez?

Yes.

Franco?

Yes.

Seville?

Yes.

Benuelos?

No.

Smith?

Yes.

Bugg?

No.

Bade? Yes. Larson?

No.

White? No. 6 yes, 4 no.

Amendment passes. We've amended legislature item 260406. I will ask if there's no further questions or comments. efforts to amend.

I have a quick question. So when we started the discussion about these two ordinances, which was one ordinance at RAP, we had a form with all the questions that will come in front of us to submit annually. Currently there is no form, so when will we see the form and will it come for council approval?

The form itself, I don't believe needs to come to council for approval. That is something that we're working with IT and the clerk's office to. But part of it is we paused it because every time it was amended, we needed to amend the form. So the sample form that was previously circulated seemed to cause a lot of confusion. And so we paused that just because it every tweak was requiring changes. So we'll go back to it. And we're working with IT on how to manage this, especially for candidates, since that's going to become an issue in two weeks.

And I agree with you. There were a lot of confusion between the form and the ordinance, because we were looking at both and they were not consistent. So how do we make sure that the questions that are going to be asked are based off of the final ordinance? Because if you remember, nature was removed in the form, but it was in the ordinance.

So it was hard because there was a lot of changes to the ordinance. So once we have a final draft of the ordinance, so if it's approved tonight or not approved or whatever, we'll have a final draft. know we approved section two so that's that's where the form comes into play so we'll have a final final draft of that and um you know once we have it um done we can you know we can inform you guys and okay you can look at it because the first time we will see it it will be in june 2027 right Well, I think you can, because we have to get it.

So first of all, we're talking about Chapter 2. We're voting on Chapter 15. So what I'm going to ask you to do is hold this off until after we're done voting on Chapter 15, because we've already discussed Chapter 2. Fair enough. But it was effective immediately. So the task is that the clerk has to get those questions up and online with GIS before the ballot packs are put together on July 28th.

Thank you.

So question before you vote.

Alderman White on 260406.

Yes. OK. So we've made changes to this $50,000, and we've made some other changes. So just wondering before you vote, if we don't pass this the way it is, what happens? It goes back to what?

What do you mean? So chapter 15. So the current ordinance that we have is the non-red line part. So if you do not pass this, it's just the black part. I understand. The red line part is the proposed additions, deletions. Okay. So it just returns back to what we currently have.

Got it. Okay. Understood. Sorry.

And as clerk, please call the vote on legislature item 260406.

Garza? Yes. Nunez?

Yes.

Franco?

Yes.

Seville?

Yes.

Benuelos?

Yes.

Smith?

Yes.

Fogg?

No.

Bade? Yes. Larson?

Yes.

White?

No.

Eight yes, two no.

Agenda item 260406 passes. This motion is adopted. Before moving to reports, I just want to thank the members of the council that worked hard on this over the last nine months, the RAP committee, and certainly corporate council and the chief of staff who put in endless hours on this initiative. Next, there is no new business. We'll move to reports. I'll ask Stacy Peterson, the first agenda item, 260423, Corporate Fund Investment Report, second quarter of 2026. Acknowledge receipt of the Corporate Funds Investment Report for the second quarter of 2026. Are there any questions or discussion for the Corporate Funds Investment Report? No questions? Alderman Nunez?

Could you just give us a high level breakdown, please?

Sure. Stacey Peterson, Chief Financial Officer. What you have in front of you is the corporate investment fund report for second quarter, which is April through June 30th of 2026. It reflects all the securities that the city has held as of June 30th. The total investment portfolio is $298,758,414.09. This report shows all the sales and purchases during that second quarter, and you will note that there were no purchases made in the second quarter.

Any other questions on the investment report? OK, next. Alderman Spill.

Can I just have a question? Do you think we're similar to where we were a year ago? Or are we ahead of the situation financially for our city?

That might be more for the treasurer's report, but then the investor. Are you looking at investments and return on investments? I guess I'll let you answer the question.

Looking at the investments, we We have started to invest more than what's been invested in the past and started to ladder it out so that we constantly have investments maturing periodically throughout the year.

So that would be a yes then, we're better off this year at this time than we were a year ago at this time?

I will have a report for you more towards the end of the month at the finance committee meeting on the 30th.

Okay, all right, thank you.

And moving to the Treasurer's Report 260424, the Treasurer's Report from January through June 2026. I acknowledge receipt of the January through June 2026 Treasurer's Report. Are there any questions or discussion for the treasurer on this report? And I guess maybe if you want to hit any highlights or trends that you feel warrant the city council's attention.

OK. I'll just reference the June 30 financial report. Noting the general fund currently right now has, for June 30th, is showing a deficit of $986,898.93. The general fund balance as of June 30th is $29,083,000. $87,574.46 with a cash balance of $27,267,762.94. As of June 30th, the general fund revenues based off of the budget, we're at 45% and expenditures are also at 45%. And noting that deficit, typically within the first couple quarters of the year, revenues or expenditures typically exceed revenues and that's because we do not receive our property taxes more towards June and July. for the first installment.

Any other questions on the treasurer's report? Hearing none, next is the list of bills. Agenda item 260421, the bill summary large bill list. Is there a motion to approve and pay the bills as presented? Motion was made by Alderman Franco, second by Alderwoman Garza. Are there any questions or discussions on the bills before Stacy leaves? Hearing none, I'll ask the clerk to please call the roll.

Garza? Yes. Nunez?

Yes.

Franco? Yes. Seville? Yes. Banuelos?

Yes.

Smith? Yes. Bugg? Yes. Bade? Yes. Larson? Yes. White?

Yes.

10 yes, 0 no.

Motion carries. The bills are paid. There's no need for a closed session. Is there a motion to adjourn? Motion made by Alderman Franco, second by Alderman Garza. All those in favor? Aye. This meeting is adjourned at 8.19 PM.