City Council Meeting/Strategic Session - Regular Meeting

Ready? Ready here. Okay. Call the city of Connellsville City Council meeting for 01/27/2026 to order. Roll call.

Furman.

Here.

Green? Here. Seton?

Here.

Houseman?

Here.

Stamen?

Here. Would everyone please stand for the invocation given by pastor Ron Howard Milton and our smoke church and remain standing for the pledge of allegiance.

Precious father, we come before you and lord, we thank you that that you have all wisdom, all knowledge, and and lord, we we pray today father for a spirit of wisdom and revelation knowledge. The lord that you open doors to the moan can shut. You shut doors, no make an open. Lord, your word says, if any man lacks wisdom, let him ask of you who gives to all men liberally and upbraideth not. So, father, we thank you for your wisdom today, your counsel, your direction.

Father we thank you for divine protection over our city, over our our workers and and and lord our city leaders and our first responders and those who are taking care of our the streets and and all the all the things that we take for granted. So, father, we just thank you again for you being leading in this meeting and we give you the praise for the direction. In Jesus name, we pray.

Amen. Amen.

The first item tonight, business prior to public input is item one, ordinance rezoning property from r three multifamily residential to p r three plan multifamily residential Haven Hills.

A presentation be given by senior planner Caitlin Rice.

Thank you, mayor Simon and members of the council. The first item before you today is the ordinance for the rezoning request from rezoning from R three multifamily to planned multifamily district for the Haven Hills development. This is the first part of a two part request that you will see on your agenda this evening. This is just an ordinance considered for the rezoning and then later on your agenda you have a new business item for the preliminary plat as a part of the major subdivision process. So this proposed development is three buildings of 60 units of one bedroom units.

It is located in a large property highlighted to your right between Ramada and Rees Drive. The part of the Rees subdivision with the preliminary plat is to go from three lots to two lots and also includes dedication of right of way and the construction of a new public road connection from where Ramada Dead ends into Rees Drive. The plan district request tonight is due to mainly two reasons. One, it is required by our use table for any new construction of multifamily. Although it's already zoned multifamily, it is a planned use that requires rezoning to a planned district as well as two deviation requests are part of this proposed plan district for consideration tonight.

This is one part of the request again and this is the only portion of the development that's up for this discussion. There is no other phases in what you see is what is proposing under consideration. So here's kind of a more zoomed in aerial of the location of the property and the surrounding development. It is completely undeveloped in its woodland. It has been cleared before in the past, but it's predominantly woodland now and it is surrounded by a variety of different multifamily and residential developments.

Here are some photos showing the context of where the roads dead end. So top right is where Armada dead ends into the property now and where that new road connection would start. And then Notting Hill Court below is the other edge of the property that is not proposed to be developed. And this picture here is showing the general location of the new road connection from Rees Drive where we have the beginning of where Rees Drive start to go down steep into Johnson Hill Road and that concrete portion is around the intersection of where the new intersection is proposed. So to give some context of the overall request and how we got here, there was the first public hearing on 07/10/2025 for considering the rezoning site plan and preliminary plat request at the Planning Commission.

The original request at this meeting was for 96 units and five buildings and one and a half parking spaces per unit, 55 foot total height and less than 50% minimum brick. This has since been revised. The planning commission discussed those deviations and made recommendations of 102 spaces per unit, minimum 50% brick and have the height meet our minimum our maximum standards of 35 feet. The public comments were concerned with the density and height of this building's design compatibility, traffic impacts to surrounding area, impacts to wildlife, and concerns about storm water drainage and erosion. The planning commission heard all the public comments and tabled the request of pending submission of a traffic study, drainage report, and soil report.

After that meeting, the developer submitted a revised site plan for 60 units, three buildings, so reducing the density and building height to that 35 foot, increase the two to two parking spaces per unit, and it had an expansion of improvements on the public road per the traffic study recommendation performed by Oates. And swath of publics of studies were submitted including the traffic impact study, wetland delineation report, geotechnical report, cultural resources survey, storm water drainage report, detention report, and threatened and endangered species habitat assessment, which were all part of your packet at least this evening. The second public hearing, we held the new public hearing due to the change in the request and public was re notified of this for 12/11/2025. This discussion of the planning commission found that the submitted studies were sufficient. They were satisfied with the increase of parking to two spaces and the increase of a minimum of 50% masonry for the building materials.

The TIS was recommended that the city update this all the roads and infrastructure in the area to our current standards over time as reconstruction of these roads occur. That triggered concern from the planning commission and the public of the city's future improvements to as that would require right widening from 20 feet to 30 feet. The developer since dedicated a minimum of 15 feet of right away along the southern edge of Restrive which is that developers property to the east and for allow to cities future improvements while mitigating any potential impacts to the neighbors on the other side of the road. The public concerns again were with the character of the neighborhood in general with the proposed development and the impacts of the public improvement to restrive affecting the existing properties. The Planning Commission did approve the three part request with two conditions.

One, the storm water detention basin be located on the same lot of the development and ensure that the height of the buildings is 35 feet max at average grade, which both have been resubmitted in a part of this package this evening. So before I dive into the site plan and rezoning request to give some more context as we go in, going over the traffic impact studies, that was a big talking point at the Planning Commission meeting. But this traffic study found that was taking a look at all of the existing intersections and traffic in the area and projecting outwards with all of the developments proposed in this area including the towns of Westview, Collinsville Landing, and Haven Hills at full development and found that the traffic impacts from this development were minimal under the forecasted peak for through 2047. They also found that that new Vermont at Therese Connector Through the traffic Reduces Traffic through established residential areas such as Sandbridge and Notting Hill Road and minimizes conflicts and maintains roadway efficiency so they did. Find out the proposed road for you this evening was the best Condition.

The traffic impact city again analyze all the existing conditions of the roadway network and identifies those deficiencies in our existing infrastructure And recommended that they are updated during the reconstruction segment So with the dedication of the right away along Rees Drive, the developer is also making those improvements to the new road and to the intersections connecting it on both sides and we'll also be designing the full length of Rees Drive for the city to construct at a further date. And one key part of the TIS is recommended and reflected in the design for the road is that the intersection of Ramada and Rees becomes continuous connection. The new road proposed will be the main drag through the area instead of how it now winds through Sandridge to enter Reese Drive. Reese, the Sandridge going west towards Johnson Hill Road within the stop controlled. So here is the proposed site plan.

It's part of its development. You can see the three buildings proposed with their parking area on Lot 1. And then in gray is the new road construction as well. And as we see highlighted, descending down Reest Drive to improve the intersection for the new road. You also notice how it has kind of this curve that cuts into the existing property lines.

So right away is being dedicated for that as well to ask for the TIS recommended to have a continuous connection through here with a stop control over here in the existing road. The storm water detention basin is located in the center of the property as a whole and is now a part of Lot 1 and everything is draining from the improvements down into this detention area. Their detention report did show that. Is capturing all of the detention from the proposed development and reducing runoff to any of the existing drainage areas in the area. The landscape plan to kind of show the general concept.

The key part about this is we're talking about transition buffers with new subdivisions. Transition buffers not required per our code to the Lafayette subdivision to the west. However, is required for the residential single family subdivision to the south at Carleys Drive. Prevert preserved woodland edge anything in this clouded area. Is not to be cleared and to be preserved.

However a tree preservation plan and study will be required a civil construction shape stage as well to ensure that that is sufficient for the buffer. Open spaces required for any multi family development or subdivision. This is based off your total density per acre of units. So this is 6.25 units per acre And that requires 12% of the lot area to be preserved as open space they are proposing 29% of the lobbying preserve as open space. That's 2.78 acres total and it's divided up by neighborhood common space in green.

Then also conservation area or walking trail active space in blue. Here is the preliminary plat that you'll be seeing up for consideration at on new business later on this agenda. Showing it to help provide the context of the full package as well as highlight that right of way dedication proposed along Reece Drive. So anything in that hatched is the proposed 15 foot right of way dedication from the developer to the city to widen Reece Drive if the city desire to do so. And here's an overlay of how you can see that new intersection, how that alignment is going proposed to work by the Oates Associates traffic impact study.

Okay. So now that we have general context and background about the development, what it looks like, and how we got here, I'm gonna go into the rezoning request in more detail itself. So this subject property is zoned r three multi family residential as well as the surrounding area all in orange as well as a call that as multi family residential land use category in our future land use map to the right which is adopted as a part of our comprehensive plan. So that basically says that the comprehensive plan supports that new existing and new multi family residential is permitted in this area and desired in this area through adoption of that plan. So other than just being a planned use, we have two deviation requests as a part of this proposal.

The first is parking standards. So the city requires two and a half parking spaces per unit for any multifamily development. That would be total of 120 parking spaces. The developer is proposing two parking space or a 150 sorry per this development and then two spaces is requested which should be a 120. That's a 30 space difference.

The developer offered support for this request with the ITE park generation that indicates the average need of point six eight spaces for mid to high rise one bedroom units not close to rail transit and also that other municipalities in the area like Belleville, Illinois only requires one and a half spaces for one bedroom units. Of staffs. You know finds that console does not differentiate parking requirements based off number of bedrooms. Which means that a one bedroom and a four bedroom unit are considered the same and have the same parking standards so. A one bedroom with two and a half spaces may not make as much sense in a four bedroom unit with two and a half spaces may not make sense.

It's kind of based off of the need in the market of the development. Based off this evidence, staff does find that the proposed deviation request is reasonable. That allows for you know a minimum of two cars per unit. The second request is building materials the city requires a 100% masonry materials for multi family developments except for accents and gables. The developers proposing a mix of veneer and siding The buildings average approximately 50%.

Brick and 50% siding and the first floor of each building is brick veneer which is a similar style to what we see with the towns Westview development, which was approved in 2021, as well as some of the existing development in the area. So here is the Building 2. This is the one with the average grade kind of change. The other buildings look a bit different. This one has the 1st Floor same treatment around all sides of the building being brick which would be actually 65% brick for this one.

And brick Buildings 1 And 3 are the same where they are about 52% brick carrying that same treatment of brick along the entire 1st Floor of the building. For comparison of the surrounding area, these are all developed at different times and different subdivisions. We have two from Sand Ridge. The top left Sand Ridge has only 50% masonry on the front of the building, the rest is siding. The other one is a mix of mostly masonry on the front with the sides or siding.

And then Lafayette Court has mostly brick with the second story being the roofing. For more recent development we looked at the towns at West View that which was approved in 2021. They model their design very similar to the West View apartment building with similar color schemes and design. This also has the same treatment of the towns at Westview with the 1st Floor masonry and the 2nd Floor siding. Based off that precedent and the character of the surrounding area, staff does recommend approval of that deviation request as well.

So, after the deviation request, we're looking at the zoning analysis criteria which are the criteria that staff and elected officials review whether it's consistent with our zoning ordinance comp plan and for approval. The first one is does this fit the character of the neighborhood? This is one of our largest multifamily zoning districts in Collinsville. It's also prime location from the Interstate, State Route 157, and our regional commercial and office park districts. So Console Crossing, Eastport, and close to Beltline Road.

The density is proposed at 6.25 units per acre and up to 10 units per acre is permitted by the zoning ordinance. For comparison, the Osborne Condo development is about five units per acre and the Lafayette Court condo development averages 12 units per acre. It is split into two separate lots. So the average comes out to 12. The proposed height is a maximum of 35 feet, is permitted within the R3 District.

And the buildings are primarily brick and siding with about 50 coming out to about 50%, which is supported by the past precedent. Does this development promote health safety, quality of life, comfort and general welfare? Staff finds that the design and layout includes adequate parking needs and also the public improvements proposed for the connection to Vermada to Reese increases public safety and also efficiency of vehicles and you're also reducing traffic through residential areas as of right now. There's also the dedication of right of way along Reese Drive to mitigate any potential impacts to the neighbors along the strive. The traffic impact study supports- this development and the way it is designed- they compared alternative roadway networks and did find that the proposal- Is the best suitable for the development in the area.

Does this is this development consistent with the conference plan or regulations. It is consistent with our comprehensive plan as we saw does specifically call out to this area As being designated for multi plant Family and suitable for such. And it the only way that does not meet the regulations of city of this two deviations we discussed earlier. Which would be Permitted as a part of the adoption of the plan district ordinance. It does have all adequate public utilities and services.

It's restrictions efforts under its existing zoning. It is already zoned R three but we do require construction to be a planned use. So that requires rezoning anyway. This area was there was the moratorium, multifamily moratorium in 2019 to 2020. We're analyzed existing R3 parcels to see if they're suitable and for multi family or if they were more suitable for a single family based of our comp plan.

And future land use map this property was specifically designated to remain as our three multi family. Is it compatible with the district classification with the nearby properties All the adjacent surrounding properties are R3 multifamily except for MR1 single family parcels at the end of Reece Drive along Johnson Hill Road and the separate subdivision to the south that has separate access and is not connected. Will this zoning amendment detrimentally affect nearby property? Staff's opinion, it will not as the surrounding area is a long standing multifamily and has adequate services and the proposed public improvements are supported by the TIS and the other supplemental studies. Is there a disproportionate loss to nearby landowners?

The staff finds that the proposed development and public improvements are anticipated to be a public gain. The public improvements along with that road connection is a net positive for the neighborhood, reducing the traffic conflicts with the existing layout, was intended to be developed at some point in time as well and will help improve the connectivity to this area. So that is the rundown and overview of the rezoning request for this. Staff and the Planning Commission did find that the request has meet all of the zoning analysis criteria and I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Caitlin, would you most recent change I think was the dedication of the right of way. I know you went over it, but you just for the public, can you talk about the significance of that and how it's going to affect the adjoining properties?

Yes. So during the Planning Commission meeting and the public hearing, a lot of the residents in the area, particularly the ones right adjacent, right off Reef Drive, were worried about what the widening would mean or improvements to Reef Drive would mean for their properties. So the right of way along Reef Drive right now would be suitable for roadway expansion. However, the existing conditions of these existing homes, it would it's right of way, but it's still cut into their driveways. It might affect their structures.

It might affect their access, and it could have potentially negative impact on their properties as it is now. So with that in mind, the developer did agree to dedicate 15 feet on the other side. So if the city does decide to reconstruct Rees Drive, right away will already be there on the other side so we will not have to impact the neighbors with any roadway improvements or expansions.

Thank you.

Can I ask Any questions Yeah, or further clarification on that? We were hoping that we would have some sort of a drawing to show where that road this map does not help me one bit. That little inlay does not help me one bit. Where the road would come down off Haven Hills onto Rees so that we could fully see the impact to, because you're saying that's where most of the traffic's gonna flow. It's not gonna go up Rees, the big hill at Reese's much anymore. They're anticipating it going up through Haven Hills. Is that what you said?

Yeah. So this portion of Reese Drive, right now, the main drag is this, right? You're coming off Johnson Hill Road, you're going up Reese, and then you enter the Sandridge neighborhood and wind around into Ramada all the way over here. This road connection right here would be new as proposed. And Ramada Drive Ramada Boulevard will just continue where it dead ends right now, loop around into Rees Drive instead of weaving through the neighborhood.

So this intersection was analyzed by the TIS as well to make sure that its design would be suitable for that continuous connection, be safe with sight distance and grades, and it also recommended improvements for the developer to make, basically, around this portion. You can see kind of highlighted in this gray here. It's not just the new road. It's going down the intersection to help make sure that alignment and the road profile here is suitable.

Okay. So if unless I misunderstood the drawings, the initial drawings that we've seen last week, that road was coming down at a different angle like kind of past some of those that I am I remembering No, this what

we've seen. I think you mean Ramada, you keep saying Haven Hills, do you mean Ramada?

No, I mean the road coming off, the drawings that I remember is it came down a little bit past those first houses closer to the electric. The drawings that we've seen last week.

Don't think it ever showed that. What

did I see?

So this portion of REES is staying the same. Like here's where the substation electric is right here. No changes right now are proposed from the developer or the city at this time to make any changes. It was recommended by the TIS that the city upon reconstruction or maintenance of the road widen it, upgrade it from oil and chip to a permanent surface, put in sidewalks, curb and gutter. Right now the scope of what the developer is proposing for the recommendation of the traffic study is to redesign this intersection here, which I say redesign, it's kind of a new design because this is the new portion of the road coming in.

Originally, it was upon the first to middle back in July. It was just kind of a cut right in, not a huge change here. But if you kinda see this black line right here, that's the property line. I would say the biggest change from July to now is that it's cutting more into the developer's property instead to soften that curve to make sure that this is suitable for a continuous thoroughfare and safe.

I have a comment. I understand that previous councils have granted variances to the masonry requirements before, and I I respect those decisions. I wasn't on the council at those times. However, each each request, it really has to have its own merits. This 100% masonry standard is there for a reason to protect long term durability, the appearance of things, and overall character.

And the primary reason that this is being requested is because of cost, which really is not our job to help make a project affordable or not. And our comprehensive plans, pretty clear that zoning decisions to be guided by long term community goals and the public interest, primarily by an individual project cost pressures. And it really, I just I don't see where this is going to help raise the standard of the multifamily in our city. I think by giving into this variance that we're really going to lower the standard and the expectations for what we want here in Collinsville long term.

Any other comments or questions for Caitlin?

Yeah, you talked about the detention planning commission said that a detention basin should be on that current lot property was it proposed elsewhere?

So it's always been proposed in the same location. The difference is basically the lot lines. The developer had originally proposed kind of a straight shot here which would have taken the detention basin onto Lot 2 which with their contract they would still own. However, rather than being protected through easements or maintenance, this lot could sell off at some point in time. They wanted the detention basin to be a part of the lot that's being developed to ensure that it stays with it since it's detaining that site. Okay.

And then in 2011 I saw that the there was a preliminary site plan at that time that was approved and how long has this been R3 prior to that? Is there any recollection of that?

From what I saw it's been R3 since at least 2006 which was when the adoption of the comprehensive plan and future land map was. I can't recall if it was R3 prior as well.

Okay, thanks.

Any other

I'm sorry, have a comment now. This is part of the vote, correct? This is the last chance before the vote. This community knows that this has been a very very contentious project. It's brought out some emotions from lots of different sources, people that live in this area, people that don't live in this particular area.

And Mr. Munlock, I'm sure you've you've seen all that emotion. This is a community that cares greatly and speaking for myself this pod project if it was a two bedroom or if it offered two bedrooms and three bedrooms I could say you know what this is what the community needs. But unfortunately it's all one bedrooms and that's partly where the emotion comes from is that this project is not what this community needs. That's not your problem that's our problem. But it struck a chord with our community. So that explains that. That we don't need more one bedroom apartments. We need places for families to live in this community. And that was the source of the emotion.

To my residents, I've heard you. We've heard you. This has been a very tough situation to sit through, to listen to all of the different things, to weigh all of the options whether we give the variances or or not. It has been, it's a tough one. And I have if I've learned anything in nine years of sitting in the council is sometimes regardless of what we personally feel we have to do what's right for the community and in doing that we weigh every single option.

So prior to my vote I just want you to know that I personally have weighed every option on this and I have my vote will be based on what I think cost is is the least cost to the city. May not be what we want but it's the least cost to the city. When I mean by cost I mean negative impact in some way. So I just want the residents to know that we heard you and regardless of how I vote or anybody votes this has been a tough a tough one. We've worked through a lot on this one.

So thank you residents for paying attention. I appreciate that. I wish everybody paid attention all the time not just on random topics. So thank you.

So I'll be very honest. I've tried very hard from the beginning because of residents concerns to find a way to say no to this project. I've met with staff several times. I've driven around the property looking at things. Again, like Donna, I think in all honesty there's only two parties that could stop this and that's the seller or the developer and neither one of them have done that.

Based on what we've done in the past previous city councils, I've yet to see anything go through with 100% masonry. Everything we've done we've approved less. So I don't know how we can make that differentiation here with this one. My request to Travis and Kaitlin is to go back and redo the ordinance to reality of what reality is and 100% shouldn't be there from what I'm seeing because we're never seeing 100%.

The apartments on Keebler that Lurch built are 100% masonry and they look fantastic.

I think we talked about reality of the brick. I don't know that any community around us if you go to any community the multifamily is a mixture. I mean, that's just that's what design development is now. I think Collinsville is one of the only ones that do not don't do that. So the reason it was done years ago, those same reasons probably don't apply in today's world.

I agree.

Any other comments? Okay, motion to approve.

So move. Second.

Motion by Houseman, second by Furman. Roll call.

Furman. Yes. Green. Yes. Seton. No. Houseman. Yes. Stamen.

Yes. Thank you. Next item.

Item, council discussion. Fire Station Number 2 update and overview.

Presentation given by fire chief John Bala.

Mayor, members of the council, thanks for allowing us some time tonight. I would like to excuse me, ask Roy Mangen of Arc Arc Images ArcImages, sorry, to have a seat over here and he's going to go through a presentation of the building and then answer any of the questions. When he's done, I'm going to ask Nathan Muni from Holland Construction Services. And Nathan, you can sit up there now with Roy if you'd like. And then he'll go over the bid process and where we're at, what's next steps and things like that. So I'll turn it over to Roy.

Thank you. Appreciate you allowing me to speak tonight. Tonight what I would like to do is give you guys an update on the design of the facility for the fire station and answer any questions that you may have as we go through this. First of I'd like to talk to you guys about the site plan itself. Site plan is the property adjacent to the CVS on Pine Lake Road and Duplex Court.

We are placing the fire station facing out onto Pine Lake Road. The area in the front of the building will have a is the approach for the apparatus apron. The built the apparatus will come out of the the bays and go down to Pine Lake Road and go left or right. Possible return route will be off a duplex court to come in the backside and do the drive through bays. The facility is set up to where this gray area here is concrete paving.

We have some island areas where the generator is located here. We've got some sidewalks and an entrance to the training room in the back and then our front area here for the public to enter the building if need be. On the right hand side we have an area that is the patio area for the firefighters directly off the kitchen area. The balance of the site as you can see in the green area is grass and vegetation and we do have a landscape plan to meet the city requirements. So that basically talks about the site.

We have approximately 41 parking spaces including two handicapped spaces. Like I said, all concrete. The rear area we have set up will also assist the fire station and firefighters of the department to do some training, outdoor training is big enough to where they set up a training prop and do some minor training right there on the parking lot. They wouldn't have to go use somebody else's parking lot to do that. So it's a well used area for the facility itself.

We do have a couple of areas for the dumpster and we are screening the dumpster with an enclosure there and then that generator location there we are also utilizing a screening material to screen that location. Moving on to the floor plan itself, we have in the at the bottom of it, this is the entrance vestibule as you come into the building. We have a restroom, a single hole restroom with a toilet and sink in it for the public in case they need to use the restroom and then also for the firefighters to be able to utilize that facility as need be. As you walk into the building, we've got our day room, our dining room, our kitchen area located in a open plan to allow the camaraderie of the firefighters throughout the day. This room down here in the lower right hand corner is their fitness wellness center for all of the working out and the pieces of equipment.

The left side of the entry is our lieutenant's Office. That is set up for three workstations as you'll see in a minute to be able to utilize that for the lieutenant's Office area. We do have two air locks that work out to the apparatus bay on the left. As I work my way up the plan we've got some storage rooms here in the middle with EMS storage, general storage and mechanical. We have a laundry room located up in here, some storage components.

And then as you go up to the upper right hand corner, this is the training room located in the upper right hand corner. We have access to the back parking lot like I had mentioned before, a couple of restrooms and a little coffee bar kitchenette area to support that room. Upper left hand corner of the housing facility is the bunk rooms. We have bunk rooms with restrooms located here, here and down here. So we've got those, the ability for them to get direct access to the apparatus, bays without any obstruction so it's a quick easy access to the bays.

Within the bays we have the three bays that are drive through bays. We have the decon area with a decon restroom for decontaminating and then we have a stairwell that goes up to a upper level mezzanine. On the left hand side of the bays we have our electric room, our SCBA, our gear lockers, tool area and then the area where we bring in the fire sprinkler riser for the water. Just to kind of go in a little slide the slide. Shows the shows The apparatus bay is approximately the 20 foot tall to allow for us to be able to open up the trucks, the apparatus inside the building and give them the support that they need of the large facility.

We are utilizing that space with a mezzanine area and some passive training for ladder training and rappelling as we look in the apparatus bay. Lieutenant's office, like I mentioned before, we've got a station for three lieutenants to be able to do work in that area along with some areas to be able to have battery chargers and other support spaces, file storage spaces within that facility. The fitness area is kind of a wide open area. We have been working with their staff on the equipment, so we've got that all placed in there. We do have a couple of areas where we've got the mirrors for workout and plenty of space to do their routines as they need to.

The day room, dining room, kitchen area, like I said, was an open plan. On the left hand side you can see the day room with monitor on the left hand side there, the dining room in the middle. The kitchen is designed with an island that separates the dining room area from the kitchen. We've got cabinets, sink. This is our stove area here.

And then we do have four pantries and four refrigerators for the four shifts that they have. Moving up to the upper right hand corner was our training room. That training room is set up for multiple multi use configurations, both in classroom training, lecture training, and then also as a possible EOC if need be. We've got different monitors and different configurations that we've designed within that single room to conduct business in multiple different ways. Again, support areas on the lower part of storage, AV and then the restrooms are directly adjacent to that.

So they don't have to go through the house to get to the restrooms. It supports the room itself. Moving into the bunk room area, again we've got two, four, six bunk rooms with one, two, three restrooms. As you can see with in that quiet corridor section, that door allows that area to be a quiet area to where when the guys are out at night or whatever and they need to come back during the day they're able to sleep and be able to utilize those bunk rooms. It is a single bunk with a desk and then lockers for the four shifts.

We've designed it such that the lockers can be accessible from somebody getting on shift to be able to access the locker from the outside without interrupting somebody that may be sleeping from the night before or the day before to cut down on a lot of the disruptions that could occur in that situation. Looking at the exterior of the facility, we are a masonry facility. This is the front view of building. We do have overhead doors located in the three bays allowing daylight to come into the facility. We have an entrance element over the front door that allows people to understand, hey, this is my front door entry area.

As I worked my way around the side we took the same finishes of stone and masonry block and brick around the three sides. Again, we have some higher windows above those support spaces below to let the daylight get in there to the bays because it's a deep bay area. As we work our way to the back, we're coming off of Duplex Drive. This is the view that you see again creating a nice wraparound masonry facility to allow the visual. Now we did cut down on a lot of the glass on the front doors and the overhead bays but we still allow the glass to come in, in certain areas.

Coming around the back side or the side of the building, the more private side where the kitchen, day room, dining room looks into and then the area in the foreground here in the corner is the training room. We've got a couple of windows that on that wall there. This is the view looking at the the side of the building that looks towards the kitchen, day room, dining room. And then coming around back to the front of the building. Know I ran through that pretty quickly, but I'm here to answer any questions that you may have. I can go back and look at any slide that you prefer me to describe in more detail.

I have bigger questions but I have minor questions now. Why do we have a building with six toilets and six bunk rooms for staff of four that's on shift at one time?

Well, what we've got set up is we've got a facility that's set up with the six bunk rooms for growth and then the restroom there is only three restrooms.

What are we growing? Maybe I'm misunderstanding. I mean a normal ship is four, correct?

Chief, you want take this?

If I can speak to that, Council Member. The six is actually for we're building a building for forty plus years. So we don't know what's going to come in the next forty years. Station 2 if you remember was built for one person back in the early 60s and we now have four. So we're trying not to get into that position again.

The other thing for that is when I bring people in like I did the other night for the snowstorm, I have to have a place for them to rest. So that's another reason for that. The third reason would be if it happens to be an EOC or an alternate EOC activated and we have city staff that is having to stay there in that EOC, we have a place for rest for them too. So there's three big reasons why we have those six rooms versus the four. Yes, we have four people on duty today. I can't tell you four years from now.

Yeah, but if we're adding a third station like we're proposing, I don't see us ever getting to six in each one of the three stations. We just don't have the population that would support that.

I don't even know how to address that sir. I won't be here in forty years.

Neither will I.

Right but you know what we're trying to do is set this fire department and city fire team up for success. Having a building like we have at Station 2 that was built for one person was it was actually a temporary was the way I understand was temporary. Well, that was fifty plus years ago. So if we don't plan now for what might come, the city may be facing that again, know, Station 1 is a good example. We have those examples all over the place and while I can't sit here and tell you, yes, you're going to have six people out there.

We could very well have five out there. Mean the standard for on shift personnel is actually more than what we have right now. So that's why there's a six, really planning for the future.

Well, but we have to weigh current fiscal situation in the city to planning for forty years ahead, so.

Okay. Any other?

Yes, I have a question. So as we try to balance like the durability and functionality and the cost of this, is there any areas that you guys have identified in the design like finishes, exterior elements or system complexity where the councils could be shown like maybe some tiered options that could maybe bring in some cost savings?

Yes. I mean during the whole process of the design from the programming all the way through the final production of the documents, we did look at and value or evaluate the needs of the program. We did look at an additional fourth bay and as we started to push and pull that process we said well we don't really need that. So we eliminated that. We looked at different materials as we looked at the facility and tried to create a more unified look.

We did look at different options of reducing an all brick facility to possibly looking at some alternate materials. But because of the visibility of the facility within the city it was made sense to create and continue to have that. But yes, all the way through the process we did look at a lot of different pros and cons and value engineering and sizing. We reduced the size of the workout area to get the square footage down. We reduced the size of some of the day room areas. So there were a lot of concessions I could say during that whole process to get this project to be the right fit for the program itself.

Okay.

So with all those shrinkages and everything then how are we still over 40% over what was budgeted for the station?

I can't answer to those questions as far as that percentage goes. But I can tell you that as we started to push back on the program itself and to push back on the needs of what we were given as the facility. We have pushed the building down to the square footage that's needed to create the program and what it is. Question. I that the market has told us what that building cost is in today's value.

Chief, I have a question for you too. As this is coming online, could you help council understand how the foreign fire insurance tax or the 2% fund is used? And could it be used to help with the I know it cannot help be helped with, the construction of it, but could it help with any of the interior stuff, like the furnishings and such?

I'll be happy to answer that. If if I could take one minute, I'll

answer the

first question over there with the over the budget cost and we've talked about that quite a bit. If you call back in 2024 when the first cost raw cost estimates came in, it was based off the same exact building that you're seeing here. It's that building has not grown at all, it's only shrunk. So the initial cost albeit the cost estimate was not accurate is mostly attributed to that we're seeing across the country not because we've expanded that building or added fluff to that building, it's truly just because of the cost of all the materials now. So back to you, sir, unless you had something else before that.

But to

you. The Foreign Firefighters Insurance Board is a fund established by state statute that provides that they charge 2% of what I don't exactly know to insurance companies that are not chartered in Illinois. So if there's a Omaha Mutual is a good one, right? They're in Nebraska. Well, they sell insurance here.

They pay a fee to that. And then that fee is collected throughout the year and the Illinois Municipal League is charged with whatever formula it is to distribute those funds to firefighters. It's intended for firefighters use. I do sit on the board as the fire chief and the board is of six people, I was looking for one of my guys here, six people. Of six people and so I'm one vote.

I can get out voted all the time if needed. But the first we call it the 2% Board just because of the 2% tax fee, so it's easier, it kind of rolls off the tongue a little bit easier. That is entirely up to the FFIB Board on what they want to purchase. I'll give you some examples of recent purchases that that Board has done and approved for the fire department for the firefighters. They just approved and I voted yes obviously to pay I think it's like $360 per firefighter for a full body scan for pre cancer screening.

They paid are paying over $50,000 for two devices on our fire trucks that allow them to do their job quicker and more efficiently in that. So they are contributing quite often to the operations because they want it to be successful. Things like furniture, televisions, beds, that's what they're used to paying for. We haven't had those solid discussions but as you noticed when you look through our cost estimates in that, yes, there's a line item for furniture but we don't know exactly yet what furniture we're going to need to purchase and what the 2% Board will approve to do so. So is it there and available to use?

Possibly And we'll have those conversations. The the current FFIB board for the Collinsville Fire Department is very supportive, proactive with things like that. So I would expect that they're be happy to help with stuff. They buy things right now. All the kitchen utensils, all the, again, the chairs, the beds, the TVs, that's what they're used to buying and they've been buying those for this for their daily activity and whatever they buy turns over to the city, the city ends up owning it.

So when we're talking furniture, what do we think we'll be able to transfer from current station to the new station two?

Probably very little. Probably very little. So I believe they may have just purchased some mattresses. I would imagine those can come over. There's some TV, a TV. But there really is not much. Again that building is fairly old as is most of the equipment inside there and furniture. We'll definitely do our due diligence and bring over what is usable. You know, I have I don't go out and buy new furniture for my house every month or so. I don't do that with the taxpayers' funds and money either. We will be frugal with all of that. But there's not going to be much that's going to transfer over.

The percent fund was never intended for infrastructure. I'm sorry? The 2% fund was never intended for infrastructure.

No, no, that's one thing. The 2% fund has a lot of latitude but there are certain things they cannot pay for. I believe structure and salaries are two of the big no no's. It's really the items, the whole premise behind the 2% fund is for the firefighters to live and work better at that station.

I'd like to a little history here of how we got to this point. And I'm probably going to repeat some of stuff we've already talked about but the need for the station and where we're at today is a reflection of years of planning long before you were chief and, you know, the need was identified years ago. We did have a master plan or study done by a consulting firm that reaffirmed our thoughts that what had to be done. That was done can't remember what 2019. 2019.

After that, then the city did their own master plan. So it's critical one reason I want to talk about this is critical to know that the input that's went into that process. We got input from the city council, from the firefighters. On the last effort was put together by Arc Images. They did an excellent job of programming from the very start identifying the needs and how they got that information was from us.

Tony Hausman and I sat on that committee along with four firemen representing each shift. So this wasn't a definitely wasn't a shoot from the hip effort. There was a lot of time and effort went in. I can't tell you how many meetings with Roy and his staff. And all through that process, cost was a huge item.

We always address cost. So I guess I don't like the idea of thinking while we're extravagant on this because, Roy, you can attest to that. My god, we talked about cost constantly. Now, so I think we've done a the city, staff, fire department, chief, assistant chief, I think we've done an excellent job of keeping the bare minimum in what we needed to make a presentable building. I want to be proud I want the city, I want the city council to be proud of a building we put up in the city.

I don't want to put a pole barn up. If you look around at the communities around us, if you can't build a city facility that we can all be proud of, then we shouldn't even be talking about We're working on a facility out there that should have been redone thirty years ago. And getting to that, the comments that you made about building for the future, I will tell you, I've been on the console since 2015. Sadly, we have a history, previous consoles that have undersized, under built buildings. We've got a police department two blocks away from here that the chief just recently talked to city manager about.

We had an opportunity to put a basement in that which they need. They needed it then. But no, we're going to save some money. We didn't put a basement in it. So now we're stuck with that building over there. Fire department number one wasn't adequate, was in the wrong location, should have never been built there, but we had to put it downtown, the council decided at that time. So I want to break away from that history we have of undersizing and just getting by with what we can get by with. We need to be proud of what we can do for this community. And to me, there is no fluff in that building. We've done everything we can to keep it within the limits.

And if we expect our firemen to work in that building, we need to plan for forty years down the road. So I think we've done a good job at this point to get it. I encourage the rest of the council, there'll be other buildings, other things we have to look at to sit on these committees that help us make those decisions. Because then you're there firsthand, you can see what's happened. So I feel we've done a great job of putting it together. And I can't thank Roy enough for guiding us through that process. So I think we've done the best we can do at this point.

Mayor, if I can add just one thing with that. You did mention that about the four shift representatives. From day one, those four shifts, we put out an email saying, hey, who wants to be involved in it? And we had the shifts select one person from each crew. But everybody, every firefighter had an opportunity to go through the building, plans, on the walls, and give everything that they're looking for, didn't want.

And there was a lot of things that were we had to throw out. You know, 65,000 for those bifold doors. There's a lot of fire stations with those bifold doors. We couldn't justify a $65,000 a door cost. So those four really helped put this building together. They're the ones that are on the trucks and running and sleeping there and doing that. So we relied heavily on those needs.

Tony, you sat on the committee also. Is there anything you'd like to add to what I said?

Think you stated it pretty well, Jeff. On the committee, you know, the bulk of my position on committee was to listen to the needs of the representatives of the fire department. It wasn't my input in terms of what bunk rooms we need and what the day room is going look like. It was the team that put that together. I was there as a listening board, sounding board.

I don't know if I'm jumping ahead of myself, but I have a question for the general contractor. Is that okay at this time or is that?

I don't know, but we don't have a general contractor. I thought

he's here with Hollis.

Yes, here.

Okay, but.

Now that the project though is at permit level and the scope is well defined, can you walk us through how the construction risk is currently being carried including like any contingencies, staffing, temporary services and cleanup and whether though there are any opportunities to refine or consolidate those assumptions as we move toward a GMP?

Yes. I can. So I'll start with my portion here. I'm Nathan Moody. I'm the preconstruction director for Holland.

So I've been working with Roy and mayor and the council for we started on this project in February. So we've been working through budgets and and design with Roy since February, sitting in all the same meetings. Roy and I are sort of the yin and the yang, and a lot of my job is to push the cost you know, down and work through value engineering. So like you guys mentioned, we work through a lot of value engineering, different concepts, different ways to cut, and came up with a lot of ideas that were ultimately taken to refine this design. To my left here is Matt Frank, who's the project director on the project, Ethan Foster, who's the the project manager.

So through the same process, and I'll get to your question in a minute here, we toured a lot of different firehouse in the area. So in Illinois, a few in Missouri, we toured with the the fireman, the fire chief, and the ARC images, and this building is very similar to firehouses in this area and and around the area for a town of this size. Today, we we took bids. So we put the package out for bid before the holidays. So it was a a long bid period for it with the holidays in the middle, but we took bids today.

Had great participation. We had 63 bids across 15 bid packages. So we had four roughly in each package, some a few less, some a lot more, but four in average in each bid package, which I can say for a building this size in this area, a lot of contractors are looking to do this project. So we had a lot of very good bids. I don't know that if you bid this at a different time or rebid pieces that you would get as good a business you got today just because we're going into the into '26 and guys are looking to fill their backlog for the year, and it's a perfect size project for a lot of contractors in the area.

The bids we took today were under budget, so we've been working with the the fire chief since February with different budget levels. Today, our budget was below our budget that we gave them in September. Our next step will be to interview the 15 packages, the low bidders in those packages. And so on the risk side, we'll interview all the packages, make sure their scope is covered, and if necessary, interview the second bidders for those packages. And then we will submit a a guaranteed maximum price for the board to review.

So in that guaranteed maximum price from our side, we are the construction manager at risk. So in this case, the council will vote on the 15 packages. The contracts for those packages will then be delegated to Holland to manage. So we will take on the risk to manage those packages. Through our interview process, we will define items that are either risk items or items that need contingency and carry those contingencies on our side.

We'll also have a contingency on the project, but the project is a guaranteed maximum price. So we don't use those contingencies If something that is supposed to occur that we think will happen doesn't come to fruition, it's a guaranteed max. So you get that money back at the end of the project if we don't use it. So the next step on our side will be after interviews. I will interview the contractors in the next three days here.

We'll present our guaranteed max price at the end of next week for the board meeting on the tenth. In that recommendation letter, we'll have our overall budget. We'll have clarifications on our side, so we'll clarify anything that's unclear on the drawings, any risk items that we are holding or carrying in order to mitigate those, you know, soil risk, design risk, you know, any items that we feel that could be a risk to the project schedule or cost, we will carry items to cover that. And then identify those for the board or for the city council along with the schedule and our recommendation for each bid package as you guys would then vote on. So from our side, we are the manager at risk.

We take on those risks. But any risk that doesn't come to fruition has a guaranteed maximum price to get that money back at the end of the project.

Any other questions or comments for anyone involved?

Can I help answer some of There the Council Member Eastman's is contingency funds in there but Nathan can you tell us by chance a percentage of what the contingency is now and what it normally would be?

Yes. So we stepped out of contingency as we go through. So we started at a 30% schematic design with about 7%. And we went into design development that gets knocked down to 5% and now we're at 3%. So typically going into construction, we'll have 3% contingency. And then on certain bid packages, any allowances, so if there's, for example, moisture mitigation for the flooring or soil issues, we'll carry supplemental line item to carry cost for those. But on the overall project, there's a blanket contingency of 3% to be used as necessary to cover risk in the project. And if those risks, again, don't come to fruition, you guys will get that money back. It's not just money that goes away. It's a guaranteed max price?

From my experiences, some of those contingency funds end up going in the ground literally. Usually we find some kind of soil issue that didn't come up. In one of my other projects, they found a cistern that nobody knew was there and we had to deal with. Those are the type of things that usually would come up. There's also a contingency amount on the owner provided side.

Believe you've seen that document as well. That would be all the operational items that the fire department needs to do our job. So that would be the station alerting, that would be the traffic signal controlling, that would be you know all the equipment and things like that. And there is a small contingency on that too because the last thing I want to have to do is come back to you all and ask you for more money. So I think it's prudent to carry a contingency on both sides and if the money isn't spent it goes to the city.

Any other comments you have?

No. Anything

else? Being none, thank you all for your presentation. Next item.

Next is speakers from the floor.

Speakers may address the council under the terms of ordinance number 4,765. Time is limited to four minutes per speaker. Please refer to the last page of the agenda for specific rules governing input. Is there anyone on this side of the room that would like to speak? Please go to the podium and state your name.

Do you have the paper that

Yes. We did.

Said passed around. Around, and I also have some for people signing. This is a visual for anyone viewing this online. I'm just gonna hold this over here. I'm here to update the city on the situation.

Please state your name.

My name is Sierra Summers. I'm here to update the city on the situation at the end of Goath Street. Summarizing it for anyone unfamiliar, around October, a woman living at the end of Goath Street was evicted from her house and let all of her domesticated house cats, which were around 10 loose outside. These are some pictures of them that I'm having passed around. Animal control refused to help the cats at any point in this situation ignoring at least several city ordinances by doing so.

The owner had not been taking care of them and the cats were not neutered, microchipped, or vaccinated when she abandoned them outside. Community members had been keeping the cats alive and safe through both snowstorms while Collinsville Animal Control Fields take action effectively making the cats a charge on the city. The city is taking me to court for helping one of the cats. The first ordinance they're trying to charge me for breaking is making the cat a charge on the city by allegedly not being specific enough with them about where I found the cat. The second ordinance they're trying to charge me with is acting as animal control for bringing the cat to their building after being given express permission to do so on the phone.

I was also threatened with a felony charge by the animal control officer I spoke to on the phone when calling to check up on the cat, which was allegedly for filing false police reports when I had not filed any. I believe this is retaliatory action from an animal control officer who has been shown to consistently not want perform his duties and I believe it's a waste of taxpayer dollars. Everything being said, I've spoken to the local news and an article about the situation will be released soon. I'd appreciate it if anyone concerned about the situation would share it or talk about what I've said with friends or family. This is a glimpse into the entire situation.

Thank you. And here is another photo of one of the cats in the situation during snow. That was taken.

Thank you for your comments. Anyone else on this side of the room?

Hi, Debbie Nelson, Collinsville resident. This is not my usual topic, but I just have to point out a discrepancy. Just heard with this firehouse that's beautiful and I get that overage and you want to do it all in brick and be proud of it. But then we kind of let these contractors come in and we sell we sell out on our all brick standard which I agree. We know in ten years, five years maybe is going to look dilapidated. So why don't we want to be as proud of what they built for us? And again, I'm not in that neighborhood but I take Mr. Seaton's point that we should be holding that up. It's a, you know, ordinance for a reason and I would appreciate it. I see real estate and how it dilapidates around here. Yeah. And the cat thing that we know we'll deal with that later. Thank you. That's all.

Thank you for your comments.

What's your name?

Councilman Fermin Barman.

I think it's very embarrassing as member of Collinsville. How condescending you are comfortable being to your peers. Anyone

else on the side of room? Not anyone on the right side? Being none, next item.

Next item, comments and announcements from the mayor.

Yes, the only thing I'd like to mention tonight is I think we've all experienced this last weekend, terrible time with the cold and the snow. And another excellent job done by our street department. I saw something on Facebook that rated the cities in the area and council got an A on that. So and they always do but they did an excellent job of cleaning the streets and it was a difficult time. So kudos to the job they did.

Oh, okay. In fact, was going to go riding Saturday night with one of them, but I turned out I couldn't do it. Yes, great job and keep up good work. That's all.

Comments and announcements by city staff or council members.

Any anyone? No.

Comments and announcements by city staff.

Yeah. Thank you, mayor, members of the council. Sierra, thank you again for coming this evening and provide us an update on that matter. As you know, Borum is aware of that and we'll continue to look into that issue you're dealing with. Deb, for your comment, hear you loud and clear as far as the Haven Hills development, the brick and then the City Of Collinsville.

Obviously, as the mayor kind of mentioned, we want make sure all our institutional facilities are always looking nice. When it comes to deviations for our zoning code and things like that obviously what takes a big part of that is precedent we've set as well and that's what Caitlin did a really good job explaining during her overview is that we have allowed those deviations in the past. So with that there is a little bit of duty on the cities and on the legal framework whenever we look at those kind of things, see how we've done it before. Here, Councilman Seaton and you loud and clear as far as long term look and all that, but that's part of the consideration the legal framework council looks at when they're considering these kinds of requests. Just want to give you some feedback on that. So with all that being said, real short on the updates today.

Can I

have Kimberly Korn come up and give a quick update on some programming in the Parks

Mayor Steven and members of the council, I wanted to announce that our big summer camp, Camp Cahawk, registration will open this Saturday? We have traditionally opened registration for camp on the January so parents can get their summers lined out and their kids taken care of at our great camp that goes swimming and field trips and all sorts of fun stuff. We do tend to fill up so my recommendation would be to sign up early. Other things that I don't have a slide for is that the CVSL 10% discount will also end this Saturday. So, good idea for parents if you want to save a little money.

Get your kids signed up for baseball and softball before Saturday or before Sunday, I guess, all the way up through Saturday, you can get the discount and today is a dine to donate for the inclusive playground at Colton. So, if you haven't eaten dinner yet, go grab some dinner at Colton's app. You.

Thanks Kimberly.

Mayor that's all we have for staff comments.

Okay. Next item.

Next is the consent agenda. Item one motion to approve payment of bills for period ending 01/16/2026 in the amount of $754,368.23. Item two, motion to approve payroll for the period ending 01/02/2026 in the amount of $878,688.20. Item number three, motion to approve minutes of the 01/13/2026 council meeting. Item four is the ordinance repealing chapter 8.16 regarding open burning. And item number five is a resolution providing final plat approval for the re subdivision of Business Center Court.

Is there any items in the consent agenda that anyone would like to remove and vote on separately? Being none, do have a motion to approve?

So moved.

I'll second it.

Motion by Furman, seconded by Green. Roll call.

Furman?

Yes.

Green. Yes. Seaton.

Yes.

Hausman. Yes. Stayman.

Yes.

Next, new business. Item one, resolution providing preliminary plat approval for the Haven Hills Acres Subdivision.

Presentation by senior planner Caitlin Rice.

Thank you again, Mayor Stamen and members of the council. So tonight for consideration is the preliminary plat for the Haven Hills Subdivision. This is again that three parcel property that is supposed to be re subdivided into two. It also includes the public right of way dedication and the general public new public road location and details. So the way this process works with major subdivisions is when we have public improvements involved that triggers a major subdivision process.

The first step is preliminary plat which is basically the concept of how the the lot is laid out, what the minimum needs are for the any roadway improvements, infrastructure improvements like water mains or sewer extensions and then the next step after preliminary plat is actual construction details and documents. Then, construction of those improvements, inspections, and then acceptance and final plat. So this is the first stage of just kind of doing showing the general of how this would lay out and what the minimum needs are. So here is a proposed preliminary plat that we got a glimpse of earlier this evening. This is proposed two separate lots and we are vacating a right away stub in the property here that was originally intended for a development in this location.

This development does not need it at this location. It's being vacated and a new entrance for a private entrance is being proposed. This is kind of where the detention patient was and this is where the actual development is going. Lot 2 is not proposed to be developed but it does have that 15 foot right of way dedication along Reece Drive for future improvements to Reece if the city so decides. There is also minor dedication here with for the new public road.

The public road is mainly already covered with the current plats as is. And there's also a dedication at the end of Notting Hill Drive for a future cul de sac for the city if they decide to do so. Sewer easement is proposed as well to connect into the sewer line to serve the development. That is kind of a summary of what the preliminary platter showing. Again, documents in the road and all those details of how those public improvements will come under review under the next stage if plat is approved.

These are the criteria that staff looks at when reviewing preliminary plat. So we're just checking to make sure that the way the lots are configured meets our zoning minimums and lot area requirements. There's satisfactory building sites. There is satisfactory access to public roads. All utilities are accessible and easements are dedicated. Any public improvements necessary also show on the plat. So staff does find that the proposed preliminary plat does meet these requirements and is recommending approval.

Any questions or comments for Caitlin? Being none, motion to approve.

So move.

Second.

Motion by Houseman, seconded by Furman. Roll call.

Furman. Yes. Green. Yes. Seaton.

Yes.

Houseman. Yes. Stamen.

Yes.

Thank you.

Item number two, ordinance establishing a mow to own program for the city of Collinsville.

Presentation by community development director Travis Taylor.

Thank you.

See, sat there for a while. Thank you, mayor and members of council. I bring to you tonight three different programs administered by the proposed to be administered by the community development department. The first of which is a proposed mode to own program. Over the years, the city of Consul finds itself in ownership of multitude of different styles and types of lots.

Some of which we find are remnants of maybe right away dedications or pieces of property that have been abandoned and have been deeded over to the city. Some of these are unbuildable that we have around town and staff is still tasked with long term maintenance of those properties. Tonight, we'll bring to you a proposal for a MODA owned program. This program is designed to offload some of those oddly shaped or undevelopable properties to nearby residents, allows us to take these off of our maintenance books, provide them to our residents who are interested in maintaining and owning those lots in the future. In exchange for two years consecutive maintenance, these nearby property owners could potentially own these properties and then at the end of those that two year maintenance cycle, the city would deed that property over to the adjacent property owner.

Right now, as I stand here, we've probably got less than 10 properties on the books that fit this bill. One of those is shown here. You can see this is actually off the corner of East Johnson And Vandalia is a property that was deeded over to the city in 2020. We have since been tasked with maintaining that. Obviously, a cost to the taxpayers and city as we have to get out there, cut the grass, pick up limbs and generally cause for its maintenance.

And what we will do is we will approach adjacent property owners with proposal of long term maintenance through agreement. They will obviously enter into an agreement with the City of Consul and after the two year period has lapsed, we would deed that property order to that over to that property owner. That is pretty simply how how we're gonna propose to run this program. The three programs that we're bringing forward this evening, we're all anticipating to get off the ground this year and with the hopes of narrowing down this list and approaching residents this year and hopefully getting into agreements. With that I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

So you will be approaching identifying those and the city will approach?

Correct. Since the eligible applicants or eligible partners this program are pretty defined they have to be adjacent property owners. What we want is these lots to become just a part of their normal yard since they're really undevelopable. In the future those residents during that two year program residents can utilize that property as if it's their own with the exception of maybe constructing structures on that lot. But in the future if they if it's part of their lot they can then maybe build small sheds or a fence and start to utilize that property as their own.

Any questions or comments for Travis? Being none, motion to approve. So moved.

Seconded.

Motion by Seaton, seconded by Green. Roll call.

Furman. Yes. Green. Yes. Seaton.

Yes.

Houseman. Yes. Stamen. Yes. Item number three is the ordinance establishing a curb appeal assistance program.

Ralph Stapler. Thank you, mayor and members of council. The second program that I'm proposing this evening is a curb appeal assistance program. This program as as the city of the City Council knows since 2018, the City of Council has been very proactive in trying to invest into our residential neighborhoods through our first time homebuyer program. To date, have over 150 grantees and over $700,000 in grants awarded for first time home buyers.

To that same end and to the same with the same goal of investing in our neighborhoods, we would like to set up a curb appeal program utilizing the same pot of funding that was that is dedicated for the first time home buyer program. We can potentially dole out up to what I'm anticipating up to 10 curb appeal grants in amounts up to $3,000. These grants would be for exterior improvements on single family residential homes. Property owners who are eligible would have to fall within the income limits. Right now, we're proposing a 180% of our median area income.

The median area income limits are set by the Housing and Urban Development Department every year. We work with that with our first time homebuyer program. So we can build off that the 180 threshold. We recognize that that number seems a little high at the time. We're willing to revisit that and we believe a quick amendment to this would be easy enough to do.

So we'll take this year if approved to evaluate our income limits and see if we're actually accomplishing what we're looking to do is put give assistance to homeowners who need it the most to enhance the curb appeal of their property. Eligible act applicants must own and occupy their home, submit an exterior home improvement project that's that we deem eligible, and I'll explain that here in just a second, followed in the income limits and agreed to a 0% interest forgivable lien recorded on the property. This is a five year lien that is the same lien that we use for our first time home buyer program and it requires owner occupancy. If at any point during that five years, the homeowner should sell or rent then the city would be able to recoup a portion of that grant that we provided. We're looking at specifically focusing on curb appeal assistance.

So exterior improvements that we believe enhance the curb appeal of that home and continue to enhance our neighborhood and hopefully inspire their neighbors and the neighborhood to move forward in the same vein. So we're looking at siding, exterior cladding, brickwork, porches, new front doors and windows, street facing, improvements as approved by the city, driveways, things of that sort. So looking to make it as simple as possible. This will be a reimbursement program. They will apply.

We will evaluate and then they will have to actually expend that money and prove through receipts that that money has been expended before we will reimburse up to 3,000 We're also requiring with this program as proposed a match of a 100% of what the city puts in. So if the city puts in $3,000, the homeowner would select the match 3,000. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Questions or comments for Travis?

No questions. Love it.

Okay. A motion to approve.

So move.

I'll second it.

Motion by Houseman, second by Green. Roll call.

Fuhrman.

Yes.

Green. Yes. Seton.

Yes.

Houseman.

Yes.

Stamen.

Yes.

Item number four, the ordinance establishing an infill development program.

Again, Travis Taylor.

Thank you, mayor and members of council. The final program we're proposing this evening is an infill development program in in a similar fashion to the way we have obtained many irregular undeveloped sites in in town. We have also obtained developable residential sites in town through demolitions, foreclosures, and just property owners and deeding over property to the city. We have obtained properties that are suitable for new single family homes. Right now, the city is maintaining those properties in the same way that we're maintaining the irregular undeveloped ones and we are looking to find a way to offload those properties for better use.

The infill development program is highly modeled after successful program ran in Belleville, Illinois. This program would allow us to make properties available to qualified developers for the development of new single family residential homes. As proposed, we're looking to develop a request for qualifications that we would release and then we would identify a qualified developer, approach them with the our list of developable properties and start to negotiate agreements on transferring those properties to those developers. Oh my apologies. Get that short and simple.

We are looking to make sure that the developers have to proceed with those construction with that construction and have the home built within eighteen months for that agreement. And then we will also require on the back end owner occupancy for the new property owner. So developer will build the home and then the new owner that comes in will also have to abide by an owner occupancy restriction for five years. That is also something similar to how Billable runs their program. And with that we are currently as with these other programs currently setting up the legal framework for these.

We are in the background working out the details of what properties go on this list and how the program is actually administered, what the agreements look like and so forth. So setting up the legal framework now to allow staff to continue the hard work on the back end to getting everything up and ready for implementation hopefully this year. We do have some properties that have some challenges. We are proposing to deed these properties over to developers at no cost. However, some of these properties do bear back taxes. So we are trying to navigate those challenges because some of those challenges may make them undesirable. So we're trying to navigate those as well. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions.

Questions or comments for Chris?

So, oh, go ahead.

We're all jumping. Two questions. Do you know how many properties we have?

Right now we are look right now I've estimated that we've got maybe 10 or less properties. It's far less actually than what we find at Belleville had a significant number of properties to make available. What we're hoping is that we know we don't have a lot of properties and we know there challenges with some of these properties. We can set up the legal framework, pass an ordinance today and then as we potentially obtain properties because this community development is actually doing a lot of work now and and demolitions and over the last several years there is possibilities some of those properties could come under ownership of the city. We're going to have this framework already set up so we can just add it to the list in the next year and then maybe do a request for qualifications and then approach developers as well.

Okay, second question. In your planning and structure of the program, further structure of the program, can we have

the

language in there regarding the types of homes, the parameters so that we make sure that it fits the integrity of the neighborhood. It's not a

you know what I'm saying.

Yes. Yep. I think we have the latitude and what the program is going to allow is that per agreement and per transfer of home we're going to be coming back to the city with those per property. And with that we can also acknowledge the restrictions of the lot if there are certain challenges that require it to be developed in a certain way, we can hopefully acknowledge that but also have some say in what style of home goes goes on those lots. So that it is it matches the existing character of the area and is and is quite honestly just what we're looking for in this

community. K. So I

was just curious and you may not know since you don't have all the legal framework. You said that they have to be owner occupied for five years. So if like, who's that fall back on? If the person who's out the contractor or the

home buyer? So

the home buyer. The way Belleville currently operates is that as soon as they once we transfer once the city transfers the property to the developer, they do construction. They're required to sell and then put a restriction on the property with that new owner. So it would be with the ultimate home buyer.

Okay. Any other questions? Motion to approve. Well, before that I'd like to this probably goes along with everything we've done since 2019 with the property maintenance program, neighborhood improvement program. This is an effort to upgrade the housing, the single family housing in the community. Community development has done an excellent job. We've made some drastic improvements over the last since 2019. So this plays right into that and big benefits to the city. So job well done. Motion to approve.

So moved.

Second.

Motion by Green, second by Furman. Roll

call. Furman. Yes. Green. Yes. Seaton.

Yes.

Houseman. Yes. Stamen.

Yes. Thank you.

Item number five is the ordinance authorized the mayor to sign a renewal agreement with Med Account Management to provide ambulance billing services.

Chief fire chief Balogue. Good

evening mayor and members of the council again. This in front of you is the one of the ways that the fire department actually brings money into the coffers of the city instead of taking back. We do ambulance transports, been doing those for quite some time. We've been using MedCount as our MedCount Management as our third party billing company for the last six years. Have experienced a very good relationship.

They increased our collection rate. They've been very good for us in the city. So they are proposing a three year extension basically for renewal for a three year period at a 5.3% of the gross amounts, which is just a modest 0.3% increase in today's world that's almost negligible. So that's what we're asking for is the approval to move forward with this agreement and keep MedAccounts as our billing agent for EMS billing.

Do they just do the overdue ones or all the billing?

No, they do all the billing. So what we folks in the back run those calls, they handle all the reporting, then my administrative assistant then bundles that and uploads it to MedCount directly and they only bill the transports. We don't bill for non transports but they handle all the insurance claims, all the Medicare, they take care of all of that.

Questions or comments? Being none, motion to approve. So moved. Second. Motion by Seaton, second by Houseman. Roll call.

Fuhrman? Yes. Green? Yes. Seaton?

Yes.

Houseman. Yes. Stamen.

Yes. Thank you.

Item number six is the ordinance authorized the purchase of a fire engine from Sentinel Emergency Solutions in the amount not to exceed 1,259,870.

Again, Chief Bala.

Again, mayor and council, thank you. In front of you now is a request to authorize the purchase of a new fire truck, a fire engine. We have a ten year rolling stock plan to replace items as we again

going back

to my previous discussion planning for the future making sure that we have the right apparatus in place. Similar to what we did I believe it was two months ago with the ambulance order. We ordered it in advance because of the time it's taking for the delivery. And you can see with the total cost here of $200,000 it is it's crazy what the cost is these days for fire apparatus. You know that used to be the cost of an aerial ladder and now it's just for a fire engine just a much smaller truck.

So we did go out for bid. We got we received one bid and that was from Sentinel Emergency Services for a Rosenbauer fire engine. It is going to be replacing the '2 thousand and five E1. That you may recall the previous Chief bought that used vehicle because that was the best running vehicle at the time. We had no other vehicle in service.

So it's served its purpose and NFPA suggests fifteen years for frontline fire apparatus to go into reserve and then cycle out of that. And so that's part of our program so it would replace that 2005 and we would move the trucks down to second out and then reserve accordingly. Asking for the approval for placing the order.

Any questions or comments? Okay, to approve.

Motion to approve.

I'll second it.

Motion by Furman, second by Green. Roll call.

Furman. Yes. Green. Yes. Seaton. Yes. Houseman. Yes. Stamen.

Yes. Thank you.

Next item, item number seven is the ordinance authorized the mayor to execute an agreement with J and M displays in relation to a fireworks display in the amount of 33,000.

Parks parks director Kimberly Corin.

Mayor statement and members of the council before you tonight is an ordinance to secure the fireworks pyro technicians for the Memorial Day weekend fireworks celebration. This is the organization that we've been working with since we've been doing the event. We haven't been increasing our prices since after the pandemic, but we have been getting more fireworks based on our multi year agreement the way it's structured. We've been getting a percentage more fireworks. So the fireworks show keeps growing while we are not paying anymore. Let's see. The mayor needs to execute this agreement, and this this year's event scheduled for the Sunday of Memorial Day weekend which will be May 24 this year.

Any questions? Seeing none, motion to approve. So moved. Second. Motion by Seaton, second by Houseman. Roll call.

Fuhrman. Yes. Green. Yes. Seaton.

Yes.

Houseman. Yes. Stamen.

Yes.

Thank you.

Next is closed session.

I have a motion to go into closed session to discuss in accordance with five ILCS 100, the setting of price or sale or lease of property and number 11 pending or threatened or imminent litigation. Motion. So moved. Second. Motion by Seaton, second by Houseman. Roll call.

Fuhrman. Yes. Green. Yes. Seaton.

Yes.

Houseman.

Yes.

Stamen.

Yes.

Glasses adjourned.

The motion approved adjourned.

So moved. Second.

Motion by Green, seconded by Furman. Roll call.

Furman. Yes. Green. Yes. Seton.

Yes.

Houseman. Yes. Statement.

City council meeting for 01/27/2026 is adjourned.