City Council - Regular Meeting

Ready? Yeah. You have the trunk.

We will call to order the regular meeting of the Batavia City Council for Monday, August 3rd, 2026. I ask that you all please rise for a brief invocation to be followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. Tonight, as we as a community work hard to make our community a great place and a safe place for each and every one of us and our families to live, we are ever mindful of the troubled world that surrounds us, and we just ask that it blessings be showered upon our world so that we get rid of the wars and all the disagreements and nuclear reactors or missiles and everything else that people are arguing about. And that we want everyone to know that we are deeply in faith and appreciation of all the work that God has done over the years to make our community something that's very, very special. We ask that tonight the city council and its understandings and its discussions REACHES DECISIONS THAT ARE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY, AS ALWAYS THEY SEEM TO DO, AND WE'RE EVER THANKFUL FOR THE OUTSTANDING GROUP OF MEN AND WOMEN WHO REPRESENT THE COMMUNITY OF ITAVIA ON THE CITY COUNCIL. WE ASK FOR ALL THESE BLESSINGS. AMEN. Clerk, please call the roll.

Barraza? Here. Lancy?

Here.

Beck? Here. Malay?

Here.

Malone?

Here. Wolfe?

Absent. Solfa? Here. Barron?

Here.

Lehman? Here. Lohman?

Here.

Pieper? Absent. Fehrenbach? Absent. Anderson? Here. White?

Here.

We have 11 present, 3 absent.

We have a quorum to conduct the city business. Appreciate those of you who may, I know some of you made an extra effort to get here and be here. So we appreciate that because we do have a lot of things that we need to address. Good, item four is to remind each of you who are in the audience, if you're going to address the city council tonight, we ask that you please come up and use the podium with the microphone because this is all recorded and it's all on TV. And if you're out there talking to us from the audience, people watching on TV can't hear anything. So we want everybody to get their motion, their memories and their thoughts shared. And so please come up if you're going to speak. ITEM NUMBER 5 IS MATTERS FROM THE PUBLIC FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA. DOES WE HAVE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO ADDRESS US? I GUESS NOT. OKAY. MOVING TO ITEM 6, ITEMS TO BE REMOVED, ADDED, OR CHANGED ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING? I GUESS WE DON'T. ALL RIGHT. MOVING THEN TO ITEM 7, WHICH IS THE CONSENT AGENDA.

Thanks, Your Honor. The consent agenda reads as follows. Accept and place on file Committee of the Whole Minutes July 14th, 2026. Approvals, City Council Minutes July 20th, 2026, The AP total for August 3rd council meeting in the amount of $3,252,413.73. Payroll fund totals for 7-31-2026 in the amount of $1,215,783.08. Resolution 2026-84-R, approving an agreement with Quad Plus Testing to perform preventative maintenance testing on City of Batavia's Paramount substation for the amount of $63,085, which includes a 10% contingency amount. Ordinance 2026-32, variances for proposed site improvements and existing building conditions. 126th Mallory Avenue, RESOLUTION 2026-87-R, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH THE VITAVIA ARTISTS ASSOCIATION DBA WATER STREET STUDIOS FOR INSTALLATION OF MURAL WORK AT THE SHELKEY GOVERNMENT CENTER, AMERICA 250 PROJECT. ORDINANCE 2026-33, VARIANCES ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SETBACKS AT 1120 ESSEX COURT. YOUR HONOR, I MOVE WE ACCEPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ. SECOND.

MOTION AND SECOND BY ALDEN AND BARZA. BARANA? I KEEP SAYING BAREN. BAREN. SORRY. KEEP PRONOUNCING YOUR NAME. SECOND BY SOFA. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE COUNCIL ON ANY ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? NOT THE CURRICULUM OF THE ROLE, PLEASE.

BAREN?

AYE.

LIEMAN? AYE. LOWMAN?

AYE.

ANDERSON? AYE. LIGHT?

AYE.

BARZA? AYE. Lancy? Aye. Beck? Aye. Millay?

Aye.

Malone?

Aye.

Salfa? Aye. Levin, yes. Nono, three absent.

Motion is approved. Okay, moving to item eight, which is tonight's presentation from the Batavia Chamber of Commerce. And Margaret, their executive director, is here to share that with us.

Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, everyone. Thank you for allowing me to give a chamber update tonight. I want to begin by thanking the newest members of the chamber, Worth a Shot Photography and Film, Alma Cafe inside Cinco de Mayo, Tomorrow Morning, New York Life Insurance Company with Scott Edmiston, Gatsby Glass of DuPage County, Barco Products, rejoin the chamber, The Gaming Spot, and Spring Bluff Nursery. These new members represent the wide variety of businesses and organizations that make our chamber so dynamic. We look forward to helping them build connections, increase their visibility in Batavia, and discover new ways to contribute to our community. July was a very full month for the chamber. I had the opportunity to bring State Rep. Representative Matt Hanson and State Senator Linda Holmes and representatives from State Rep. Maura Herschauer's office on a Batavia business tour. We visited Ignite Medical Resort, Urban Apothecary, Bogey Bikes, Red Hive Market, Sturdy Shelter Brewing, and Windmill Grill. At each stop, our legislators heard directly from the business owners and organizational leaders about their day-to-day experiences. Ignite Medical Resort discussed workforce challenges, including shortages of nurses, difficulties finding qualified employees, and state licensing requirements. Urban Apothecary shared the challenges of navigating sometimes conflicting county, state, and federal hemp regulations, along with changing legislations and increasing fees by multiple amounts. Steve Bogey of Bogey Bikes thanked our legislators for listening to him last year about electric bike rules and regulations. He appreciated the representation in Springfield and the results of those conversations. He also discussed how economic uncertainty is affecting small businesses. Red Hive Market shared the realities of operating a small retail business, and Tom Freeman discussed public safety requirements and other regulations. With our reps, they were happy to listen and represent our concerns in Springfield. Surdy Shelter Brewing also had a productive discussion with the legislators about distribution and about Illinois craft breweries. We concluded the tour at Windmill Grill, where we met with Michael Casa of the King County Economic Development Corp. and Bill Pelico, the director of the IARC at Fermilab. Our conversations help raise awareness of the Fermilab Business Tech Hub initiative and the economic development opportunities it could create for our region. Tours like this give our businesses an opportunity to share what is going well, the challenges they are facing, and what would help them succeed, particularly in the area of workforce, funding, regulations, and economic uncertainty. I appreciate Representative Hansen, Senator Linda Holmes, and Representative Maura Herschauer's office for taking the time to listen to our other businesses, to all of our businesses, and provide a direct communication between our community and Springfield. Speaking of Fermilab, I did connect Bill Pelico with Alderman Jim Fehrenbach to explore additional ways Fermilab can engage with Batavia and serve as a resource for our community. Fermilab is an extraordinary asset, and I'm excited about the possibilities for greater collaboration. Today I had the pleasure of sitting on a panel at the Batavia new teacher orientation. It's really fun to be able to welcome the teachers and say how much of an impact they're going to have on our community and tell them what a great experience they're going to have in Batavia.

The ones as they move towards saying goodbye. We engage in legacy work, which includes things like writing practical plans, taking care of emotional needs, preparing gifts for those who may be left behind, writing letters to those who may be leaving, going through items of financial or emotional value and making sure that that value is understood by your loved ones. I help our clients to find meaning, and we also try to normalize what is a universal experience. In addition to the work that we do within our building, I'm a public speaker, a published author, and have partnered with individuals, schools, police departments, churches, and businesses. I will be at a local veterinary clinic tomorrow and at the Mundelein Police Department on Wednesday. In between these events, I work with individual clients and host groups in my space here in Batavia. This month, we have Grief Club, Date with a Doula, and Book Club for Grievers, to name a few. As a school board member, I do know how hopeful you all are to be able to go home tonight at a decent hour. So I will stop there. But I do love talking about what I do. So if you remain curious about anything, you have any questions, anything, please reach out. I love to talk about what I do. I have a few cards. I'll leave them right here on the corner of the podium. Are there any questions before I walk away?

Any questions?

I just want to comment. First off, thank you for choosing Batavia and coming to our town. It's important work. I also saw a TikTok of yours.

Oh, you did?

I did. And I was like, wow, what an amazing thing to open above Haley's Bakery. And so I want to know that there's a bunch of others. Thank you so much. And some of the younger folks.

I will tell my children that I am social media famous. You are. Yeah, they'll be thrilled. Thank you so much.

I guess one of the questions, I've been asked this, what's the ages you are attempting to service there at?

I have worked with, my youngest client was 29 years old at age of death. My oldest was in her 80s and everything in between. My typical clients are 60 years of age and above. Yeah, so 60 years and above might be clients who don't have a terminal diagnosis, but they just know that end of life will be approaching probably sometime in the next 20 to 30 years. My clients who are younger, like my 29-year-old client, was someone who had a terminal diagnosis.

The person that asked me, I think, is watching this on TV right now because I told her you were coming to speak, and she was very interested in knowing more about if you were serving older people, because in Batavia, as you know, we've got six senior living communities in some form or fashion scattered throughout the town. And so there's a lot of conversation amongst that age group about stuff going on. So I think you're very... QUESTIONABLE, NOT QUESTIONABLE, BUT SOMEBODY THAT THERE'S A LOT OF INTEREST IN WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO HERE. AND THEY JUST SEEM TO WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT IT. SO I WAS HOPING THAT YOU DID WHAT YOU JUST DID AND EXPLAINED IN SOME DETAIL WHAT SERVICES YOU'RE DOING AND WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO. It's very important, I think, to a lot of these people when they get to that age.

Thank you. I really appreciate that. Encourage her to reach out to me, or if you are listening, reach out. I'm happy to meet with anyone and explain more and discuss, and I don't charge the first time I meet with people, so just have them reach out, and I would love to talk and share more. Please.

I think you got your start a little bit before you got here, but hopefully this gives you a nice shot in the arm as far as other people will hear about you and want to know more about what it is you're doing. So thank you for choosing Batavia, as it's already been said by some of the council members. We have a unique complexion of needs and services in town, and you certainly are going to be filling one of them.

Thank you so much. I'm really happy to be here and to get to know all of you tonight. So thank you.

Anybody else have any quick questions? Well, thank you.

Thank you.

RIGHT. GOING THEN TO THE PROCLAMATION ON ITEM NINE, THE REGULAR AGENDA PROCLAMATION HONORING THE LIFE-SAVING ACTIONS TAKEN BY AIDEN RADAL AND NOAH JOHNSON AT THE PAUL COREY BEACH ON JULY 18, 2026. AND THE FIRE CHIEF IS GOING TO GIVE US A STORY ABOUT THIS. Yes, good evening, Mayor, Council, and all the members here.

Thank you, Doctor, for that. Not to debate with you, but we're here to recognize two young men who helped someone avoid dying through a life-saving measure.

So once in a while you get to avoid it. I appreciate that.

Every once in a while. So I'm happy to follow that one up. Put me out of business. Just delay some of your clients once in a while. Happy to be able to do that at this point in time. So it's my honor to give you a little background on these two young men and what they did on July 18th. This is from a recommendation of one of my paramedics. It reads, on July 18th, their prompt recognition and successful use of the abdominal thrust on a choking 70-year-old girl directly contributed to a positive outcome in what could have been a life-threatening situation. Their calm demeanor, teamwork, and confidence made all the difference. Their commitment to maintaining a high standard of care reflects greatly on both their team and the community we all serve. We'd like to thank them for their outstanding work, dedication, and continued readiness. It is greatly noted by both the Batavia Fire and Police Departments. Their actions through to today was written on the 18th exemplify the best of what it means to be a lifeguard and the community of Batavia is safer because of them. And this is warm regards to Sean Russell Watts, paramedic, Batavia Fire Department. And that was followed up. Chief Blower apologizes he couldn't be here today. But from the OIC, Officer John Kale then wrote to follow up on that. SIRS, I WAS THE OIC ON THE DATE BOTH OF THESE, OF THIS INCIDENT. I WISH TO ADD TO DESHAWN'S ASSESSMENT OF THESE SITUATIONS. AND IN PARTICULAR, THE ONE INVOLVING CHOKING THE CHOKING JUVENILE. UPON OUR ARRIVAL, ONE OF THE MANAGERS, THE CALLER ADVISED ME THAT HE HAD WORKED IN TANDEM WITH TWO OTHER MANAGERS TO HANDLE THE SITUATION. This young man informed me that he had initiated the 911 call while two other managers identified as Aiden Rydell and Noah Johnson began life-saving measures through the application of the Heimlich maneuver. I requested to speak to Aiden and Noah to personally thank and commend them. Aiden advised me that while the other manager had called for assistance, he had immediately engaged in performing the Heimlich maneuver. Aidan informed me that while he was doing this, and despite that the young girl appeared not to be breathing or able to breathe, that the girl's family had instructed him to stop and hold on. Aidan stated that he stopped momentarily at their request and that Noah had realized that the girl still was in distress. He continued immediately performing the high maneuver again, and according to Aidan, Noah Noah's immediate application of the technique sent the involved bottle cap flying from the child's airway. At that time when I spoke to Noah, this was confirmed. These three young men recognized the necessity of immediate action and were not deterred from their aim of saving the young girl's life, who, incidentally, was celebrating her birthday at the time. Despite the stress of the situation, I do not know whether or not the Park District has been made properly aware of these events which transpired, nor if there is a possibility of issuing these young men a life-saving award from or on behalf of either both public safety departments or the Park Districts. In appreciation for your consideration of this matter, again, I wish to state these subjects performed admirably under pressure and I believe deserve the appropriate recognition for their actions.

Respectfully, OIC John Cahill, Officer Cahill, Patrol Officer, Day Shift Rotation, Batavia Police Department.

So we're honored here to be able to provide them with the recognition they deserve. Executive Director Allison is here also. We sent... Rapid emails once we got it, and we do appreciate everyone working diligently, Lori Botterman, Laura Newman, to get this on the agenda and get these proclamations done right away. Because we found out that while Noah and Aiden both work for the Batavia Park District as lifeguards at the Hall-Corey Beach, they also are college students presently.

Thank you, Council, for allowing this wonderful opportunity. You may have heard recently about a young lifeguard in California who received national recognition for saving a child's life. And it was a 16-year-old that saved a seven-year-old's life in the waves out in California. It's stories like that that remind us of the extraordinary acts of courage that do not happen only somewhere else. They can also happen here in Batavia. So at the Hull-Corey Beach, we employ a lot of high school and college-age students. They're highly trained, highly skilled, and they're prepared to respond within minutes, within seconds. Actually, within seconds. Sorry, not minutes. Every second matters, and that is exactly what Noah and Aiden did that day. We are incredibly proud of Noah and Aiden, not only for saving this young girl's life, but for demonstrating the leadership and teamwork that is required in this type of situation. We hope to instill that in every single member at the Park District. They've set the bar very high for all of those who follow them. They are role models of all of the kids at the Hall Quarry Beach. So thank you to our first responders.

They're in the back as well, all of you first responders.

Thank you to Noah, Aiden, and especially thank you tonight to City Council for recognizing Noah and Aiden this evening. It means the world to us. It means the world to them, their families, and this is guaranteed to be a core memory for them. And as Chief said, they are both seniors in college and Batavia High School grads as well. So all the more reason to be proud of them. And Noah and Aiden, will you please stand up and be recognized?

All the parents can come on in. Come in the circle. You guys are good. It's an extreme honor to be able to read this today.

City of Batavia Proclamation. Whereas on Saturday, July 18th, 2026, a seven-year-old girl celebrating her birthday at Hall Quarry Beach suffered a life-threatening choking emergency. And whereas while Hall Quarry Beach management immediately called 911. Horry managers Aiden Rydell of Batavia and Noah Johnson of North Aurora recognized the urgency of the situation and acted without hesitation to provide life-saving assistance. And whereas Aiden Rydell immediately initiated the Heimlich maneuver after determining the child was in severe distress and appeared unable to breathe. And whereas, as the emergency continued, Noah Johnson recognized the child remained in distress and immediately resumed the Heimlich maneuver, successfully dislodging a bottle cap from the child's airway and restoring her ability to breathe. And whereas Aiden Rydell has served as a Hall Quarry Beach employee since 2021, and is entering his senior year at the University of Iowa, where he is studying criminology and pre-law. And whereas Noah Johnson has served at Hall Quarry Beach employee since 2021, and will graduate this fall from the Illinois State University with a degree in exercise science. And whereas the courage, sound judgment and composure demonstrated by Aiden Rydell and Noah Johnson under extraordinary pressure helped prevent a tragedy and exemplify the highest ideals of public service, responsibility and compassion. And whereas their willingness to act decisively in a critical moment reflects great credit upon themselves, Hall Quarry Beach and the entire Batavia community serving as an inspiring example of the difference of preparedness, teamwork, and selfless action can make in protecting the lives of others. Now therefore, be proclaimed that I, Jeffrey D. Schalke, Mayor of City of Batavia, together with the Batavia City Council, do hereby recognize and honor Aiden Rydell and Noah Johnson for their heroic life-saving actions and extend the gratitude and appreciation of the residents of Batavia for their courage, professionalism, and unwavering commitment to the safety and well-being of others. I motion we accept the proclamation as read.

Second.

Motion to second. Motion from Barron.

Aye.

Second from Lohman. Barron, aye. Aye. Lehman.

Aye.

Lohman. Aye. Anderson.

Aye.

White.

Aye.

Barraza.

Aye.

Lancy. Aye. Beck. Aye. Malay.

Aye.

Malone.

Aye.

Salfa.

Aye.

Levin, yes. Nuno, three absent.

Bye. Thank you. Thank you.

All right, returning to our meeting, next item on the agenda is item 9.2, ordinance 2026-029, authorizing sale of excess land east of 706 Chabonau Trail.

I do, Your Honor. This is a small piece of property that the city has owned and declared surplus back in 2013. We received some interest in acquiring that land, so we put it out for sale by the solicitation of bids. We opened all the bids last week at our committee meeting. We received one from the neighbors at 706 Chabonneau Trail at the minimum amount of $10. So if we approve this, we will be offloading some of this excess unnecessary land. and the neighbors can take it over. Any questions, or did I miss anything? If not, I move we approve Ordinance 2026-029, authorizing sale of excess land east of 706 Chabonaw Trail. Second.

Motion and second for the approval of Ordinance 2026-029, the sale of the land east of 706 Chabonaw Trail. Any discussion from the council? Clerk, call the roll.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

for the chimney demolition at 2025 through 31 North River Street with ordinance 2025-068. Who's got this one?

I do again, Your Honor. So a few months ago, we discussed and voted to approve the demolition of the chimney over there on River Street. It was determined that the safe height was 11 feet 6 inches. Once the demolition commenced, it was found that while the breach is actually more substantial than thought to be, the safer thing to do is to leave it at 20 feet, which I have a question about. Why is it safer to leave it taller if it turns out it's less stable overall?

And actually what it is, is the breach is a structural part of the chimney, of the wall of the chimney. So if you take it, the breach is, as it sits now, as I understand it, is partially above the roof and partially below the roof. So it's not completely one or the other. So if you take it all the way down to the previously approved height, it is possible there will be a structural issue with the remaining part of the chimney that's lower.

part the breach is not a whole like I was thinking the breach is like a whole it's actually the framing of the breach is actually a structural part of the of the wall of the chimney it's a chimney terminology error in my head.

Okay. I'm not an expert in chimneys either. That's my understanding from the discussion with the demolition contractor.

And then is it just the demolition contractor that has kind of told us this is the best route? Did the structural engineer come back and look at it too?

The structural engineer did not come back. This is the recommendation of the demolition contractor that the property owner is hired after a lot of going around. They are an experienced contractor. They do have experience with this type of demolition and it is their recommendation for the structural integrity of the remaining portion of the lower part of the chimney, as well as the possibility of additional water intrusion into the building and future issues that it'd be actually left seven feet above the existing roof. The 11 foot six elevation, if you remember, was approximately the... level of the lower roof of the 25 to 31 building. This would put it about seven feet above that which is approximately the level of the deck on the apartment up above the retail area. There were some photos in the packet that we included that kind of show you from different vantage points. It's really not noticeable unless you're almost directly behind the building on the cantilevered path. You can see it a little bit, but otherwise it's It's almost unnoticeable from other vantage points.

Any questions? Yeah, Matt?

Is the intent to have a structural engineer come back and review it once it's done just to make sure that it is structurally sound?

That was not the intent. That is something, you know, the engineer's report was pretty, you know, The original engineer's report was pretty clear that the upper portion, as a matter of fact, the upper 25 feet was the worst portion. They did not have any concerns with the lower portion of the chimney. So, and that's one of the reasons that the contractor does not want to take out the breach essentially is because he's fearful that that will have structural impacts on it. But there is no concern that without disturbing that breach that there will be anything to worry about for that.

Did the old structural engineer note that there was a breach at this location?

They knew the breach was there. They did not. It was larger than was anticipated in the report. So when they actually got into the demolition and they've been working for the last month on the demolition, and as they got down to that level, they realized that the breach was not only larger than they thought, it was also partially above and below the roof, which is kind of the problem. It was higher than they thought.

Yeah, I'm trying to... Compose myself a little bit. First off, off the top, I'm just very upset. I think you all know I'm very upset with how the whole thing happened, how it all went down. We were told that this was an imminent disaster. matter that had to be handled all the way down to the ground. I mean, my memory is that the entire chimney had to come down. We had lengthy conversations about, well, can we keep this much? Can we keep that much? Can we do that much? And we were told, no, 11 feet is what we have to do. And now we're being told 20 is fine. Okay. So I, again, attempting to compose myself here. So if I'm understanding this correctly, though, these 20 feet, we're feeling pretty confident based upon the contractor that this is now going to be a safe height for this building to be habitable again, at least from the chimney standpoint.

Okay. Based on the original structural report, yes, there were no issues with the chimney at this level.

Okay. And it did take quite a while for the work to begin. And we skipped a bunch of steps here, right? Like we kind of rushed through historic preservation. We rushed through the other committees to come immediately to us. Are there ways kind of in hindsight now where we could have, did we have to move as quickly as we needed to? in hindsight, right? And second off, are there other ways we can learn the lessons from this instance to make sure we don't find ourselves in this position again?

Well, I would say that I think we were working with the information that we had at the time. The reason it took a while to get through to the point where the demolition was started was the property owner had some difficulties with contractors. I think the contractor they ended up ultimately retaining and getting started on the demolition was the fourth contractor that we started working with. So they had some issues with the previous contractors, and that's why it took so long. It took a lot longer than we intended and we would have liked, obviously. You know, I think we were working with the best information that we had. We did not, we didn't really skip any steps. I mean, we did go through HPC, we did go through committee and council. It's just at that time, it was felt that based on the structural engineer's report, it was an imminent thing that needed to be dealt with immediately. And that's the information we were going with at that time.

Yeah, I was just going to say, I mean, in that same vein, I mean, I was adamant we go with what the structural engineer said at 11 and a half feet, but do I hear you correctly saying that in the original report, we could have kept it at this height originally? Or why did we end at 11 and a half feet? And I don't want to rehash this whole thing, but you know what I mean? Like, it is what it is at this point, but... I'M HALF WITH KEVIN. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE ACTING ON THE SAME INFORMATION, LIKE WE HAVEN'T GAINED ANY MORE NEW INFORMATION FROM ANY EXPERT OR PROFESSIONAL LEVEL, RIGHT?

YES.

OTHER THAN THE DEMOLITION COMPANY. AND THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE LESS MONEY THIS WAY, SO I DON'T THINK ANYTHING'S NEFARIOUS THERE.

THE DEMOLITION CONTRACTOR IS HERE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO. 945. COME UP HERE.

olson american demolition 940 hodge batavia i'm an executive american demolition for 20 years this is the smart thing to do it's the safe thing to do it was in imminent potential for collapse we've taken it down to an elevation where it is safe now we're going to make it worse if we go any farther worse for both the property owner and the public The chimney stack itself is in a great condition with what we have left. And if we take it any farther, we are opening up the structural breach that you can't see until you're standing right up on it. It was buried in the building construction. So once you take it down to that elevation, you open it up, you see it, you can clearly tell in the pictures that we include in the packet that that's as far as you should go with it. You're making it more dangerous.

That was the major new information, obviously, is the breach size compared to what was in the report. So, yeah.

That was something that wasn't able to be seen to that level.

Right.

Got you. Okay.

Okay. Just one more thing. I think now I've had a chance to think through this a little more. It'd probably be worth having a structural engineer just confirm. I definitely think, I know American Demo, I think I would definitely trust them too. But at the end of the day, a structural engineer notified something was not right. And so now we're saying it's larger. It should be larger and a structural issue is not good. So I would at least have them at least sign off on it.

issue with the kidney stent.

The foremost function of the kidney stent is in great condition, solid, and acts as the exterior

Thank you.

We can do that if that's a desire. You know, he is correct. The structural report, the biggest concern was the very, I would say the top 25% was the most, I'm sorry, top 25 feet was the most serious. And then the condition of the chimney got better the lower you got. I think originally the Historic Preservation Commission, I think, recommended that it be left at about 22 feet above grade. And that was comfortable under the report. So we're actually lower. We're actually about four or five feet lower than that now with what we're recommending.

Being devil's advocate here, something were to happen five years from now. What's the engineer? What's we're in a lawsuit because of this. we're going to be asking a structural engineer who looked at this, and their report is based on what they saw originally. This is new evidence now, right? So I think it'd be in our best interest just to double check with a structural engineer who did the report, signing off saying, yes, it's fine. I mean, people have engineer licenses for this, so that protects us.

That can be done. That can be done, yes.

I would recommend we do that, at least. I'm not saying we tell them to, to not do anything with what I think what we're going with is fine, but this is just the belts and suspenders to make sure that's correct.

Sure. Scott, then Kevin.

I think one of the things we'll have to find out is the property owner wishes to do that also, because, I mean, we're compelling them to do something that is additional cost that they're already incurring here. I'm not sure from a legal standpoint if we can compel them to do that, and I would defer to the city attorney about that to see if that's something that we can require.

if so do you want the city to pay for that then well don't they owe us giving us a safe chimney and i mean we have a demolition contractor saying that but we don't have a structural engineer saying that so i would argue the business owner should be making sure that it's safe that's part of an unforeseen condition i would agree i mean that i think if we're going to do that yeah i think the cost would be on the property owner i would agree

Yeah, I confirm with all of that. I mean, and as of right now, from where I'm sitting, we've said you have to take it down to 11. So it's not us imposing anything on them. If anything, it's us giving them a relief. And so I think having the structural engineer come in again, because we, again, we were told that 11 feet, six inches by the property owner was where to go based on the engineer she hired. So I And with great respect, I don't doubt anything that the contractor is saying. I'm sure you're accurate in that. But I think to cover our bases, to make sure that we're being safe and responsible to our citizens, we need to have the property owner make sure their building is safe, which is their responsibility.

I support that as well.

I'd just like to say thank you to the contractor for identifying that. I see what you're concerned about looking at this picture. Thank you.

And overall, super glad that we're saving any bit of the chimney. Wish it could have been 25, 30, 40 feet was the safe. Or having the structural engineer in 40 years ago to get it to where it could be all saved. Any other questions? Do we want to approve this as is or do we want to Is there any reason to wait until we have structural engineer?

I guess I have a procedural question. Can we sort of, can we punt it? Can we sort of pause it for now, say we'll sort of conditionally approve the 20 feet until we get an engineer's report from the property owner indicating one way or the other? I guess would be my question, right?

Mm-hmm. Within reason, she needs to get it weathertight. It has a temporary cap out there, which is just temporary.

I was just going to mention the cap that's on it currently is temporary.

If you're talking 30 days, sure. If you're talking three months, no. It needs to be done before that.

And if I could... abuse your time a little bit here in your experience how long is the turnaround to get somebody to come take a look and get kind of the structural engineer viewpoint of it it's that's a different question so construction is severely undermanned instructional engineers are severely understaffed

I'm waiting for IDOT work four months to get simple engineering views. It truly is my professional opinion that it is a waste of money and time to get a structural review, but God bless you, you can do whatever you like. It would probably realistically be a two-month lead time to have an engineer out there to do a report. I think that's realistic.

Can I just ask a question? Is it possible that we sign off on this and then say she can't rent it out until we get a structural engineer report? Like they can't occupy whatever part is potentially dangerous for that? Is that one way to go?

So, the amendment is asking to leave the chimney higher than the original. So, taking it down further could be done in a second step. So, there's, you know, perhaps no reason to delay approving leaving it at the 19 feet and then adding the requirement so that the contractor doesn't have to remobilize again.

Thank you, but I just don't want to waste the lady's money by putting a permanent cap on there and then 60 days.

The permanent cap is the next step. Once we establish the level, that's the next step is to put the permanent cap on and you don't want to do that until we're comfortable.

That's why I say don't let her put anybody in there until we get a structural thing. That way we can move forward with this and then she can now hire or look at getting a structural engineer if she's looking to rent this out to make sure that that is safe, right? Because that is kind of what's holding up Pal Joey's, right, no? Or is it the apartment above?

She does not, yeah, I don't, I'm not aware that she has any tenants that are imminent to move in at this point, but. Right. I mean, that is possible, but I don't think that she has anybody right now who's,

Well, I know, but just as preparation, say to her, say you can't have somebody move in until we get this report. And we're happy to sign off on that.

part of what we do as a profession is called an engineer's report it sounds like an actual engineer is blessing it and stamping it like a structural report but it's really not it's a final condition survey that a demolition professional can put together a report with pictures to identify how the structure is acting currently and where it's likely to go in xyz years We can also submit that as something that has literally no cost, which perhaps we can put to the council for acceptance in lieu of a structural report, which actually is a cost, but that's up to you. Yes, sir.

Yeah, so the property owner is going to be able to have access to everything that's been said today, and there's no way she's going to say, I think I should go out and pay my own extra money to have a structural engineer do something when the contractor has already explained everything that's been done. And you know i didn't really have a big thing about this chimney but everybody that did seemed to make sure they wanted to keep it taller so if we don't get the permanent cap on it now it gets delayed it's going to cause the problems and then the whole thing might have to just come on down so that's correct so let's just approve this be done and then we can figure everything out later if there is anything to figure out which i don't think there is for um

I think you're onto something, Salfa. I agree to a large extent there. Is it my understanding that right now the property does not have a certificate of occupancy? Correct. That's correct. And is that solely due to the chimney or are there other issues that are? are other issues okay i don't think she has tenants for all okay do and so at the point when a new certificate of occupancy is issued i think speaking to um alderwoman barron's point here i imagine we would take a pretty close look at the entire building is that right it's part sort of issuing that that certificate of occupancy include making sure the roof isn't falling in and the chimney isn't tipping over Okay, so we may already have that type of check baked in.

It would not be done by a structural engineer, typically.

Okay, but our city staff would come in and look at it. You guys would probably know to take a pretty close look at the chimney.

Correct.

Okay. That makes me feel comfortable approving this today, knowing that we'll have a check on the back end of this if the property wants to become activated, if she wants to turn a profit, if the owners, whoever they are in the future, too, want to rent this out, they know they're going to have to have the city come in and take a look, and we'll you know, of course, let them know that we've had this chimney issue, and so they should look at that when they're ready to occupy it. So that would make me feel more comfortable approving this today.

With all due respect to all the intelligent thinkers at this table, but Alderperson Anderson in this room is the one with the most experience with something of this nature. And I just respect his concern and the liability concerns he has. So I'm kind of leaning on him for this particular conversation and the direction that he feels most comfortable with

I mean, I would say looking at the report, it was stamped by a structural engineer, like the inspection report was. So whether we approve this now, I'm fine with approving putting the cap on because I would agree that it's probably fine. But as a matter of close-up procedure to close this out, I think we should expect a revised structural engineer report. I mean, she can go to the same person that did this report, show them new pictures, and they can give their expert opinion on it. But it was a stamped report. We're changing it now. So I'm fine with approving it to put the cap on now. That's fine. But I think whatever mechanism we have, I mean, there's stuff in the memo that they have to do masonry repairs still and some tuck pointing and all that, that this might be part of that as well. But I kind of lean on city staff with them telling us what mechanism to use there.

Yeah. I mean, I think if we're going to me, if we're going to go to that step of requiring the structural engineer to view it, it should be done before the cap is put on. I don't want to have the cap put on and then have them come back, you know, unexpectedly with something else.

We still have a couple months until winter, so.

Yeah. I mean, I fully support the contractor. I think the chimney will be fine the way it is. But, yeah, if we're going to go to having a structural engineer review it, then it needs to be done before the cap goes on.

IT MIGHT BE A VERY QUICK REVIEW BY THAT STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. HE HAD THE BREACH NOTED AT 15 FEET. HE HAD PICTURES OF IT FROM THE INSIDE. THIS WASN'T SOMETHING DISCOVERED. IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY FOUND TO BE BETTER AT THIS HEIGHT. THAT'S FINE. LET'S CHECK THE BOX, MAKE SURE HE'S GOOD WITH IT AND MOVE ON WITH LIFE.

Okay, I'm just, I'm reiterating the concern that it may be quick, but it may not. So will it then prevent getting a cap on there before winter, if it's August? So, okay.

I can't speak to timing, you know, without having a conversation with the engineer, but it should be able to be done before, you know, prior to the weather changing.

Was it possible before our next city council meeting to reach out to the structural engineer and explain the situation and see what they say? You know, they might be able to be like, send us pictures. We can have this reviewed in a week.

We can get with the contractor and the property owner. The property owner is the one who originally hired the structural engineer, so they would have to go back to the structural engineer and go through this. So, yes, that is absolutely.

This feels common, like a common situation with, with a job that was this big. So, I mean, I would assume, you know, there would be the expectation that things would pop up, things would change, you know, and so I don't think it's that unusual to have to go back and ask.

Two things. One, you know, we wouldn't always go back for a structural engineer for everything that happens with demolition. The QT9 project, for example, that building was completely de-skinned and everything else. We did not require a structural engineer as part of that. There was a permit required for the rebuild of that, so that was part of that construction. So that is not always a normal course of business. This was such a large and unusual structure that we felt that it was important to have that done. The other part of the question is, with the city attorney, is what is really the city's liability for this, regardless? This is not our project, per se. This is the property owner's project. They hired the structure engineer. They hired the contractor. The extent that the city's been involved is just approving it from a historic preservation standpoint, as well as just issuing the permit. So I question whether we really have any liability if we allow it at the roof height or a higher height or not. Okay.

Yeah. Yeah, I would generally agree that the liability would fall with the contractor and the property owner. The city's being told that they're getting a representation today that the height of the chimney is sufficient and it's ready to be capped.

He's had his hand up, and then Kevin.

As a bystander attorney who's not the city attorney, but am an attorney, I also fully agree with that assessment, and I think we're not going to force this property in order to do anything different, especially when we've already heard these representations. All we're going to do is get kicked back. It's not like we've had an easy time getting this in the first place, and like I said, I don't really have a big dog in the fight. If the whole thing ends up falling over because we're messing around and there's no cap on it, so be it, but why don't we just put the cap on it and be done? And we're not even doing it. And also, you know, the contractor is not exactly somebody who's just kind of waiting around. I'm sure he's got other gigs to do, other jobs to do. It could potentially be more expenses. I mean, it's not our property. It's a private property.

Yeah. And I think I agree that from like the chimney falling on somebody liability standpoint, we're not on the hook for that. And that's not really what I'm worried about here. I'm worried about I THINK BACK TO A LOT OF TIMES WE FOUND BURIED GAS TANKS AND OTHER DEFICIENCIES AND PROPERTIES THAT MAKE THE PROPERTY UNUSABLE. I DON'T WANT US TO HAVE THE CAPACITY TO GET SOMETHING RIGHT TODAY instead of sort of having that buried gas tank, or in this case, that chimney that needs to be fixed in order for the property to actually be occupied, right? We don't want to kick this down for another generation when it does become city property, or it does become something that we need to deal with. That said, I see the two paths being either we require the structural engineer with the stamped plans, right, I think is what I'm hearing, while the cap is off, which would be the way to do it. Otherwise, you'd have to worry about taking the cap off or finding some other way to look at it. Or capping it now. Both of them involve caps in the end. Capping it now. and making sure that when a certificate occupancy is Issued we've taken a good long look at this and whoever that person is has to figure it out I I will support either but either way it seems like we want to solve it today Find some mechanism today. That's going to make sure that whoever the future Occupants are aren't stuck with a ticking time bomb No

If I understand legal counsel correctly, this vote that we're voting on tonight does not make us liable for what may or may not happen with the structure of the chimney, even though it's very worst case scenario. And I 100% trust the contractor who's here when he says it's safe. But our job is to think of worst case scenarios. So if we vote yes, we'll pass this ordinance tonight, that does not hold us liable.

Just want to be very clear. I said that it would be a bad attorney if I said there was no scenario in which the city could be liable for anything. But we've just heard several representations from the contractor that the height of the roof is appropriate and we are not the owner of the property and we are not the contractor doing the work. The liability would likely fall with the property owner and the contractor.

So what do we want to do? Do we want to vote on this tonight or do we want to table it and give them a couple weeks to at least see how long that would take?

I move that we pass ordinance 2026-034, amending an approved certificate of appropriateness for chimney demolition at 25-31 North River Street with ordinance 2025-068. Second.

Motion and second for the approval of the ordinance. Anybody else want to make a comment? Could call the roll. Solve it. Aye.

Barron? Aye. Lehman? No. Lowman? Aye. Anderson?

No.

White?

Aye.

Peraza? Aye. Lancy?

Aye.

Beck? No. Malay?

Aye.

Malone?

Aye.

Eight yes, three no, three absent.

Motion is approved.

All right. Next one is, it's up, I'll take. It's... It's resolution 2026-81-R approving a contract with Meat Inc. to perform 15 KV underground circuit improvements in Woodland Hills. Woodland Hills neighborhood has overhead electric and this is a contract where we would Get that overhead electric underground like many of the other neighborhoods throughout Batavia. The bonus part about this is as part of it, we have received, we're the recipient of a $1.17 million grant from the second round of the Illinois Finance Authority's Grid Reliance Grants Program. funded by the U.S. Department of Energy. So it's actually going to be funded by about 25, a little more than 25% from free money from the federal government. We talked about this last week. I think it's a real good idea to get this done. It's been partially budgeted, and then we'll have to rethink about the, it's going to be a longer project and have to be budgeted again, I believe, in 2027. But they'll be able to start if we get this approved beginning here in late fall. And I think it is something that will greatly benefit the residents of Woodland Hills and Ward 1. So I know we talked about this. Anybody else have any questions or comments?

Real quick. I watched the video from last week, and I think it was said, but I think it's worth saying again. This is going to make the reliability in that neighborhood of electric service significantly higher. Is that fair to say?

Yeah, when we applied for our grant, and Steve can talk to this more, we estimated a roughly halving in the number of outages and the duration of those outages. So when outages do happen, the time it takes to get people back on is roughly halved. And when the number of outages happen, well, it should be roughly half of that. This moves the three-phase primaries underground, which is the primary thing that helps us get electric to the area, and it's the more bulk transmission or distribution in that area.

Sounds great. That sounds like what the people have wanted. It sounds like someone else is paying for part of it, and so it sounds like a good plan all the way around.

I agree. So I do a motion to approve Resolution 2026-81-R, approving the contract with Meade Inc. to perform 15KV underground circuit improvements in Woodland Hills.

Second. Motion and second for the approval of Resolution 2026-081R, approving the contract with Meade. Is there any further discussion? Clerk, call the roll.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

I just have a few things for tonight. We met with the Park District staff this morning. We have quarterly meetings and we talk about projects of interest to both of us. And there were about 15 items on the agenda. So we really covered a lot of territory in just over an hour. And it was very valuable meeting of cooperation and collaboration. um our consultants jlk architecture have been conducting their inspections of the significant buildings in the historic district this week and they're expected to continue through uh the next week or two and all property owners within the historic district have been provided with notice um lori did a nice uh information piece about it as well on the website and um we're fielding some questions about it but most of the time people walk away with the understanding uh and that uh we're gonna work cooperatively with building owners to identify any issues that we find And then also public works. The brickwork is ongoing at the River Street Plaza. It's really coming together nicely now. And then also engineering has received the stop sign analysis from our consultant who is looking at Branson from Mill Street to Hawks Drive. And so the police are working on preparing their recommendations based on that report. And we hope to have the new signs installed in the very near future. We're continuing to prepare for the National Night Out special events that the police department will be hosting tomorrow night. That's from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the Pegg Bond Center. It's a free, family-friendly event that's going on. We'll have some of our cars out there. There'll be activities for kiddos out there. And who knows, maybe River will make an appearance tomorrow. Is there a good chance? Good chance. All right. That's all I have tonight, unless anybody has some questions for me. All right. Thank you very much.

We have other business. Well, I'm going to end this meeting with some good couple of good stories. Not long, but I want to share them with you. I have, you know, you all know I've been in the mayor a long time and I've never had a year when I've had so many former Batavians show up and say they haven't been here in 30, 40, 50 years, and they can't believe what we've done to this place from a positive perspective, that everybody is very, very pleased. And I had a woman here last week, and she was just told the story that when she was a kid, her family bought one of the early houses in the original version of Woodland Hills off of Wilson Street, and that's kind of where she grew up. And then that area eventually divided. But she always could remember December 16th, 1966, which was the day that Lyndon Johnson at the White House announced that he was going to agree to let this accelerator laboratory be built in Batavia, Illinois. And she said that she could remember her father getting all upset about that, that he was sure this thing was going to smoke, smell, pollute, turn on, make a lot of noise. It was going to be one of the worst things that ever happened. And so she's telling me this story. I'm driving down Pine Street and I get down there by Alderman Barron's house. And she says, geez, you know, I think about this now and look at how good this facility has been. They brought in all these new people and they're all nice people. And the facility doesn't smoke, smell, pollute, turn on loud noise, make no loud noise or anything. But she was extremely complimentary to what we've done downtown, specifically work along the Fox River. And she just couldn't believe that we were able to build the Peg Bond Center and redo the river walk and put bike trails in and She said she was proud to be able to tell people this was her hometown, and she hadn't been here for many, many years. But she said, some of you are really watching over. I said, well, we've got a very good city council, and they kind of keep an eye on things. And as we've heard tonight, you know, you're going to do something. We're going to question about what it is you're going to do. And she says, well, I'm very proud of Batavia. She says, I can't say enough about how good this place looks and how good my, so she was hanging her camera out the window, taking pictures of all the stuff. So I just want to let you know, we've got old time fan clubs coming back here now that are very pleased by what we've all done here to make Batavia a very nice place to live. And the other quick story, I just got this given to me today. We have a new book that's been kind of written about Batavia, and it's entitled The Legend of the Fire Dog. And this is going to be the plan this woman has is she's a distant relative of a longtime Batavia family, the Dickensons. And she wants to come back to Batavia and have a opening or announcement of her book. at the Batavia Fire Department. And I think we're going to do it on October 2nd, later in the afternoon. And she wants to invite people to invite a lot of kids because this book has been written. It's got some very nice pictures in it. It's the story of a mascot at a fire department. But what she's done inside is she puts out ideas of what the dog has done and whatever have you. And then in the book, there's these spaces where the kids then can draw what they've just read about. and make this into some kind of a book that they have a part in. So she says this is kind of a new way for children's books to be done. And so Batavia is going to be one of the leaders of this. So I just wanted you to know we're going to have some publicity about. Batavia, many years ago when I was a kid, we had fire dogs in town. And we had one dog by the name of Streamer. And Streamer was a real character in town. Everybody in downtown knew him. And he used to wander around town and look for people who would hand him out food out the back door. He was kind of Romeo, so he was looking for other dogs that he could have a romance with. And in 1955, I have it upstairs, there was a children's magazine back in those days called Jack and Jill. And Jack and Jill Magazine had a story written about the Batavia fire dog. It was written by a lady that lived out on Deer Path Road, and it got published. And it was a very nice story about the dog. And the dog had arrived at the station and scratched on the door, and they let him in. And nobody knew where he ever came from, but he was there for all these years. And he used to climb up on the fire truck. And when the truck was going down the street to a call, he'd be barking along with the siren. Met the siren and he'd start barking. So she's kind of got some of that idea in this book. But I just think it's very interesting. I told her the story that when you were on the fire department and this story came out in Jack and Jill magazine about the Batavia dog, the Batavia fire department had a little bit of a problem for a few months then because all these people from all over the place were showing up at the Batavia fire station on Saturday and Sunday, WITH THEIR LITTLE KIDS, AND THEY WANTED THEM TO BRING OUT THE FIRE DOG AND LET THEIR KIDS HAVE A PICTURE TAKEN WITH THE DOG THAT WAS WRITTEN UP IN JACK AND JILL MAGAZINE. AND THEN THEY WANTED TO HAVE THE GUYS OPEN THE DOORS WITH THE FIRE TRUCKS IN THE BACKGROUND, AND THERE WERE SOME DAYS, I KNOW, WHEN THE BETAVIA FIRE DEPARTMENT, WHICH USED TO HAVE ONE GUY ON DUTY, When he was there, there would be some days there'd be 10 families showing up wanting to have their picture with the dog. So we've had these kind of unique situations. And I was telling this gal, Elizabeth Miller, who's done this, I said, well, I can probably give you another whole story if you want to write another story about the dog. So I don't know if we're going there or not, but I talked earlier in the day with the chief and he was aware that she had done this and had talked to them and he was supportive of having the the thing at the fire station where they'd have a little announcement and invite people to bring their kids over and whatever have you. She mentioned she wanted to do it on a Friday in October, and I don't know. I told her, I said, let me check the high school calendar because if there's a Batavia football game going on, that night. That's not going to be an easy place for anybody to find a place to park because the big fan club is now out there watching the players on the football team. So it's all kind of come together. But those are two kind of fun stories I wanted to share with you of how Good things are happening in our town, and we're getting a lot of admired comments about things that have been done. And so not everything we're doing down here is crazy. We really made the town look a lot better for somebody who hadn't been here in 40 years and comes back and looks at it and says, her words to me, my goodness gracious, what have you done to this place? And she says, some of this kind of looked like a dump down here, as I remember. And she says, now it's all parks and you've got all the stuff along the river. And I said, yeah, and it's year round because we still can ice skate on the Depot Pond and all the other good stuff. So we've got a lot of neat things happening. And I think I may have told you, I just was sorry yesterday, the mayor of Highland Park, Illinois, which is the place that had that Terrible shooting at their Memorial Day parade where some kid got on the roof and shot like five or six people in the parade and whatever have you. She came out here one day for a meeting in this room and was so taken. She told me this yesterday and she's coming back and bringing some people from Highland Park so that they can see what we've done in Batavia. as far as taking an old town and kind of changing it around, maybe not tearing a lot down, but repainting, remodeling and doing stuff. So we're being emulated by Highland Park is someplace that maybe we've done some stuff that they can do. So I feel good about all that. Last thing I want to mention is I've gotten a couple of texts tonight while the meeting's been going on that the sound for this meeting is not good on TV and people aren't able to hear it. So I don't know how much they heard or didn't hear, but I've been sent that text a couple times tonight. So when you're the mayor, you never know what you're going to get. And that was my news for the night. So that's the end of my report. I guess we don't have any executive session, do we? Yes, we do. All right, we need a motion then to go into executive session.

So moved. Second.

Thank you.

Clerk, call the roll.

Nancy?

Aye. Here.

Did I mishear? I'm sorry.

Here.

You made the motion to enter executive session, right? Or did you mishear?

Yes.

Okay, fantastic. We're taking a vote on that now.

Dear Lord.

Malay.

Aye.

Malone. Aye. Wolf is absent. Solfa. Aye. Barron.