City Council - Regular Meeting

Clerk, roll call to establish a quorum, please. Mayor Ricky Williams, Jr., present. Vice Mayor Eve Lewig, present. Alderman Ed Butler, here. Carolyn Doy, present. James Pashard, present. Tom High Totower, here. Harry Johnson, present. Mike Okaine, here. Mike Poor, present. Rick Strie, here. Sherry Pickering here. Trisha Teague present. Jalle Jones here. Doug Arn here. John Cooper here. 14 present.

14 present. We do have a quorum. Uh at this time um we will have the invocation. Unfortunately um Elder Parks called and and um was unable to be here due to a family matter. So I will be giving the invocation this evening uh followed by the pledge of allegiance uh led by alderman Pickering. Please rise. Gracious God, we just thank you for this evening. We thank you for I thank you for each of these men and women who have decided to serve our people, Lord. And I just pray that you'll help us have wisdom to make the best decisions for our community. God, I pray for all those who are in sick health. I pray for all those like myself who have lost loved ones, Lord, that you would just bring them comfort and strength during their time of need. Lord, I just thank you for our team members, for our staff. Um God, I just thank you for all the excellence that they give to our people every day, Lord. Uh and for their commitment to making life better for all who live, work, and play in Danville. I thank you for the people of this city who came to learn more about what's going on here and to share their concerns, Lord. And I just pray that you'll bless them as well. I pray that you'll give us a productive meeting, Lord. And I pray, Lord, for for peace in this earth, Lord. Um Lord, everything that's going on in this world and with our country right now, God, I just pray you would help people to be levelheaded, to be coolheaded, Lord, that you would

let people not act in self-interest or out of um retribution, Lord, but out of a way to do what is good and best for everyone involved. And I just ask that for all of us here and for every level of government throughout this country and throughout the world. Lord, please give people patience. M please give them pause before they make any con any decisions that will have lasting consequences for all of us God because um we we we all want peace Lord and we just we just ask all of these things in your son Jesus holy name. Amen. Amen. Amen.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Alderman Pickering. You have before you the minutes of the March 18th meeting. Is there a motion to approve those? So moved. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion or debate? Seeing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any oppose? Same signed. Thank you very much. Um, you also have an agenda before you this evening. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? So move. Second.

It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion or debate? Yes. Alderman T. Um, I'd like to move that we remove items 15 and 16 from the agenda as one. It is a violation of um the open meetings act to dis to discuss elected officials uh compensation in close session and also because the public has not had the opportunity for public we have not provided the public with opportunity for public inspection of the documentation um associated with either of these ordinance changes because they were not included in the packet. Are you making such a motion? Yes, I am making such a motion.

Is there a second? A second. It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion on the agenda? I would simply say that I don't believe that that's the case. It's never that's we're doing it the way we always have in the past. Um, and I do believe that that's probably correct. I could be wrong though. I could be wrong. Uh secondly, however, how we decide salary issues has always been that they're discussed in close session first and then and then discussed openly. Do I have a floor?

Well, according to opinion 18-015 that was um issued in 2018, which is a binding opinion from the public access counselor. Um it states that 2C1 exception of the Illinois Open Meetings Act authorizing close session to discuss quote the appointment employment compensation discipline performance or dismissal of specific employees of the public body does not apply to elected officials. First, the public access counselor determined that the holders of the elected public offices are not employees under the definitions of quote public offices and quote employee in section 2D of the Open Meetings Act. To reach this determination, the public access counselor noted that an individual cannot simultaneously be both a public officer and an employee of a public body. The OMA defines quote employee as quote a person employed by a public body whose relationship with the public body constitutes an employer employee relationship under the usual common law rules and who is not an independent contractor. Um when this um counselor decision was made and this opinion was uh provided in 2018, the body for which it was uh decided against were then ordered to immediately release all minutes from the closed session and the verbatim transcript of the closed session because public officials compensation must be disclosed and discussed publicly so that the public can hear about those discussions and so that the public has an opportunity for what the phrase that's used in the open meetings act public inspection of the documents. We've not provided any public inspection of the documents and according to the according to the uh binding opinion from

the public access counselor in 2018 that would be a violation of the open meetings act. So out of a prepoundonderance of caution, I think we should table it, especially considering that is a binding opinion. The I um I don't know if we have any any thoughts on that corporation council because we haven't had an opportunity to review it. It would have been interesting to have this so that we could review it if you were aware of such knowledge. Yeah, I this has just been brought to my attention. So um I I don't have all those decisions memorized. But I I can look into it. Uh

I just Googled it out of curiosity. Everybody had an opportunity to do that. I mean, we didn't get the information until Friday night and uh city hall wasn't even open on Friday. I just happened to stumble across it in my email cuz I happened to be in my email on Saturday for a whole different reason. So, it was kind of to be quite honest by accident that I looked it up. I went ahead and prepared for and here's the other thing. I know the motion might fail, so I'm prepared to have the discussion one way or another. But I do know based on the fact that I've already said it is a violation of the Open Meetings Act, that if we do have the discussion, then most likely somebody is going to file um with the attorney general's office, that there's a a public access uh uh inquiry with them.

I would be completely fine with having that discussion right here because the truth is before we vote on it, you'll be able to have that discussion anyways.

I'm fine with I'm fine with that, too. However, I would be fine with that except the public has not had the opportunity to see what we're discussing. The p if it had been included in the packet, then it would just be we discuss it openly in public. But because it's not included in the packet, the public has no opportunity to see what we're discussing. They have no idea what the numbers are that are being proposed. The last time we had this discussion in 2022, it was actually publicly available if I recall correctly and therefore the public had an opportunity to express their opinion. But since the public does not have the opportunity to express their opinion, then I think it should be tabled. I also think it should be tabled because it didn't go to committee. Now 2022 when we had this conversation there was extensive conversations that went to committee and the information that I provided um when we talked about this in 2022 because there was so much conversation at that time the the body chose for uh the late Alderman Iverson and myself because we had done research to get together compile our research together and then pre then present to the entire body for us to be able to have all the information so that everybody could be able to make an informed decision. We basically were given two business days to go through this and there's no pending deadline for this to be done so quickly. Everything else that we do goes through committee first so that everybody has an opportunity to scrutinize the information and make a decision for themselves before they vote. We got this on Friday at 4:20. No, no, we did not get this on We got this on Friday at 4:20 p.m.

And if you happen to be checking your email on a holiday weekend, then you might have seen it, but most people probably weren't. It was happen stance that I that I did.

And so what is customary in this body is for things to go through a committee for everybody to have at least a week's worth of time to look through the information before we asked to vote on anything. We're given actually two days or le less pretty much to vote to be able to make a decision on this and there's a whole lot of other thing other changes that I think should be made. So what we did last time four years ago was we took our time. We have time to take our time. Law requires that it is be done 6 months prior to the election. That's not until the fall. We have plenty of time to discuss this and come up with a solution that is actually what we all want and not be rushed into a decision. So, I don't I don't understand why we're trying to rush this now or or push this through all of a sudden. We should be able to take our time and go through it and I'm happy to discuss it tonight. However, we also would violate the Open Meetings Act because we did not provide the information to the public. Now,

you can discuss any item at any time as long as you don't vote on it. So, that's inaccurate. So there's no expectation to vote on the ordinance. We have we have always um we've always taken there are many there are a couple of things that don't come straight to that don't go to committee. That's number one any kind of um contractual agreements. So any any of our union agreements don't come to committee first and salaries don't usually come to commit. They normally don't come to committee first either.

That's not what happened four years ago. I can't I I don't know what usually and usually does or does not happen, but that's not what happened four years ago. And again, what doesn't come to committee first is because it protects the employees. This is not an employee situation. This is an elected official situation. It does not apply and the open meetings act clearly states that and so did the Illinois attorney general. Alderman and then uh corporation counsel.

Thank you, mayor. Uh I have uh some similar uh comments, but primarily that was going to be my request is that if the intent of the administration was for this to be voted on this evening, which it appears the way it was presented on the agenda, I would be asking for that to be reconsidered and allow for discussion this evening and then followed up through the committees. I think it's probably going to take a couple of months. I think everybody knows I've got some thoughts on uh the alderman pay and other things and I don't understand why we weren't consulted for other elected officials pay before this was presented. Uh I also believe that the discussion and the vote for the treasurer and the mayor should be separate uh for two reasons. One because they are separate positions. They are separate elected positions. But two, there's been discussion previously and there was some comment to that effect and I would hope we haven't abandoned that is this needs to be an appointed position, not an elected position. So let's not kick this can down the road another term. Let's fix the problem. This problem this been a issue for two decades and the mayor knows that. He's been on the council. The chairman streaming has has lived through this and got handed off a mess when he took let's fix the problem. Uh, so that's to be said on those. As it relates to item number 16 pertaining to the employees, I I do anticipate that's being handled the way it typically has. I didn't agree with that as an administrator, but I think historically that data has not been provided to the alderman until the close session of that night's meeting. Now, whether a vote has to take place after that, I I think everybody should be given time, but uh I also don't want to penalize employees for lack of timing. We do have another meeting coming up this month and I certainly don't want to put the payroll situation where all city employees are getting retroactive pay. I mean

retroactive pay from an administration standpoint is a pain. So if we can keep the municipal employees on the timeline, their increases are supposed to be going into effect May one. Uh I agree the discussion on the elected officials should be in open session. I think we do should have that. But I do think we should retire to close session. I think and find out what the proposal is for the employees uh under item 16. Those are my two thoughts. So I would not support removing them both. I will support changing the ordinance to vote on elected officials to discussion item only.

I assume that 16 was treating treasurer and mayor as if they were employees. So, if it's if it's for other employees beyond treasurer and mayor, then yes, I'm all for it. But because we didn't have any information that provided any insight on what item 16 was, that's my my assumption. So, I didn't know I was wrong. So, I can amend my motion to rem and only remove item 15 from the agenda as a voting item. Would you So, Alderman Teague, would you entertain Alderman Arin's friendly amendment to make it a discussion item? item. Yes, we can have it as a discussion item that we're not voting on. Absolutely. And who was the second on that, Madame Clerk? I was.

Yeah, it was all I have as Alderman Butler. Alderman Butler, would you agree to that friendly amendment? Yes. Okay. Corporation council. Yeah. No, I I think it should be uh in an open. Okay. Thank you. All right. Um, any further discussion on the agenda as amended? I don't know if we want to add this as an amendment or as a afterthought, but I'd like to have the attorney general give us a a real opinion. Nothing against you, but I want to I want something real. I can I downloaded it from the attorney general's website. I can email it to everybody. It's a 14page document. That's why I didn't print it.

Okay. Thank you. We can um thank you alderman Teague for willingness to provide that. Um any further discussion or debate on the amendment on the agenda as on the amendment? Uh roll call on the amendment only. Alderman Betler. Yes. Detoy. Yes. Pashard. Yes. High Totower. Yes. Johnson. Yes. Okaane. Yes. Core. Yes. Streing. Yes. Pickering. Yes. T. Yes. Ledwig, yes. Jones, yes. Arns, yes. Cooper, yes. 14, yes.

14. Yes. The uh amendment carries. Now we are back to the agenda as amended. Is there a motion to uh to approve the agenda as amended? So move. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion or debate? Seeing none. Um all those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any oppose? Same sign.

Thank you very much. I do not have any proclamations, board committee or personnel appointments or are there any reports of boards, agencies or commissions? Seeing none, um items of information, I just want to say thank you to everyone who expressed condolences about the passing of my uncle Tom. Um honestly, it's been one of the hardest things in my life. Uh he was a gentle giant that was a big dude with a hu with even bigger heart and uh he loved people and was well respected. He gave back a lot to the community both here and then when they moved to Missouri. So, uh we will certainly miss him. And I also want to give my condolences to all of you. I know some of you have lost people that are very close to you in recent times. Um and uh I just uh your our heart is with you and our prayers as well.

Um also wanted to say thank you, a huge thank you to the director of the YMCA. Um she came in for us last minute. we were having some weather for for last Friday and she uh made sure that we were able to have space at the Y to continue our first Friday program. So, just really want to thank uh thank the director for her, Miss uh Laura for her her for help with that. Um this time neighborhood group meeting. Yes. Thank you, Chairman. Um the other thing, thank you chairman Poor for the reminder is that we do have our neighborhood association meeting this Saturday. Rihanna, do you want to?

Yes. Our neighborhood association brunch is this Saturday. It starts at 9:30. We do have seating available. So, if you haven't let me know that you want to attend still, you are more than welcome. Just come find me or shoot me a message and um we will go from there. But we would welcome all of you or if you're just interested in the meetings or you're interested in these, they're kind of similar. there are more um like casual talk and help you connect with other neighborhood association groups because what we find is a lot of them struggle with a lot of the same issues. Um and it's it's helpful to hear that we're all working towards progress in the neighborhood associations. So yeah, thank you. And Rihanna, that's located at the slotten spoon, correct? This year it's at Harrison Park clubhouse. Harrison, that's right.

Yep. The clubhouse is back open, so we're shifting back. That's awesome. Okay, very good. Thank you. Thank you, chairman, for that reminder. Madam clerk, at this time, do we have any petitions, communications, or audience comments? We do. When I call your name, please come to the podium. You'll have three minutes to speak. I've got Deianne Ryan regarding sleep and heavenly peace.

Hi, I'm Deian Ryan. I also want to thank Alderman Teague for doing that um agenda item check. I I did look at the agenda and I did look for any documentation that might explain what it was and I thought why is that not here? But um I don't know if the public was supposed to get it or not. Um but I just I'm here actually to talk about Sleeping Heavenly Peace and to give you an update. Since August, we have delivered 168 beds in Danville. We currently have 62 children on our waiting list. We also deliver all mattresses and bedding. We have hosted two bedding builds locally and the last one over a 100 volunteers participated where we built 120 beds from 2x4 wood. Our team traveled to Champagne, Farmer City, and Muhammed to for builds and brought beds back to Danville. We are scheduling our next builds now. hopefully have one in the summer, but for sure August. Work Source and Lowe's have been great partners, allowing us to build in their building and parking lot. Next week, Sleeping Heavenly Peace is having a 24-hour build sponsored by Lowe's in Charlotte, North Carolina. Alderman Ed Butler and Keith Groves, a member of our team, are attending that build to supervise volunteers. We will get a 100 beds delivered to Danville from that build.

That's awesome. Um, I also want to recognize the three kings of peace for making this initiative possible. They didn't hesitate when I brought the idea to them and I never could have done this by myself. Ed Butler, Frank McCulla, and Herman Young have participated in all of the builds and even the out of town ones and have and all of the deliveries using their own time and gas. Um, these guys and myself are not young. Um, but they've carried heavy wood and supplies into 50 homes in Danville and treated all of the recipients with dignity and respect. They are tireless workers and true ambassadors in Danville. And we've also had other delivery volunteers as well. Um, and anybody can add to our list for volunteering. We're currently very low on bedding and we'll need a lot of bedding for our hundred beds that are coming to Danville next week. We have a wish list on Amazon and Walmart on Facebook. Sleep in heavenly peace-dam. Um, and we also are taking still taking signups for beds. Either you can sign up for beds on the website shpbeds.org or get in touch with me.

Thank you. Thank you, Mrs. Ryan. We appreciate you all the work you and everyone have done around this. And thank you, Alderman Butler. Deontay Brooks about sundown towns.

Unfortunately, the Alabama guy got to come talk about sundown towns. Um, good evening, um, mayor, city council members, staff, and I want to start this off off by saying that the police and our communities and throughout the county do an amazing job. This is not an indictment on them. Um, this is more an indictment of institutional racism and how it affects our communities and the people that live in them. Because racism is not just a chapter in history. In many ways, it is a set shadow that still remains across Vermillion, Edgar County, and Central Illinois. We cannot talk honestly about the truth without acknowledging the legacy of sundown towns. There are certain places that people that look like me know that I can't be when it get dark at night. I know it. We can't go fishing. We can't go hunting. I can't drive from Indianapolis back home to Danville. I have to make sure I get a hotel and stop overnight and wait till the sun comes back so I can get home safe so nothing happens to me because Coington is one of those towns. So we live in fear, exclusion, and mistrust that history still leaves behind. Too many families continue to live with violence, silence, and unanswered questions. We have too many unanswered murders. Galani Day, Annayiah Davis. There's a reason that people of color are fear are fearful to speak to the

police because we have been prosecuted and persecuted so much beyond outside the constraints of the law that we don't know who to trust anymore. And that is the problem with these towns and feeling safe. Chief Yates ain't one of them people. I trust Chief Chief Yates. He a good man. So what I'm saying today is not about division. It is about truth, dignity, and justice. Every life deserve deserves equal value, equal protection, and equal pursuit of answers. Our communities deserve better. I grew up in a small town just like this one. My grandmother went to segregated schools in the South. When I was born, the South had only been desegregated by four years. That was 1980. And we are still fighting the same battles. The motto of our town is you decide. But I think we need to decide. We need to be the community. We need to be the people. versus the people, individuals who are out there persecuting other people just because of color of their skin. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr. Brooks. Sabrina Kelly regarding audio system.

Good evening. I guess um I wanted to say first that I'm representing just myself and not anybody else. I guess there was uh some confusion last time I spoke, so just want to clear that up. I also wanted to say that um I'm thankful for each and everyone who got here safely tonight. I'm going leave it at that. Um the audio system when I listen on uh YouTube, a lot of it's been cut short. I don't know if you guys are aware of that. Um and also like there was one that was like 40 minutes or 4 minutes and 30 seconds. So not everything uh was, you know, available. And I know that's not anybody's fault. technology is what it is. And then uh last week it was cut short as well and I just wanted to bring awareness to that. I also wanted to say thank you for those who speak into the microphone for those of us who are hearing impaired. Um thank you very much for that and uh that's all I've got. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Kelly. That's all I have. Is there anyone else who wishes to address the council this evening? All right. Thank you. We do not have any voting positions u tonight. Uh however, you do have before you the payrolls of March 20th, March 27th, and April 2nd for approval. Is there a motion to approve? So move. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion or debate? Roll call vote. Madam clerk. Alderman Pashard? Yes. High Totower. Yes. Johnson, yes. Okain, yes. Core, yes. Streing, yes. Pickering, yes. Teague, yes. Lewig, yes. Jones, yes. Barnes, yes. Cooper, yes. Butler, yes. Doy,

yes. 14, yes. 14, yes. The motion carries. You also have before you the vouchers payable of March 24th and April 7th, as well as a special run from March 25th. Is there a motion to approve those? So move. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion or debate? Roll call vote, please. Alderman High Totower, yes. Johnson, yes. Okaane, yes. Poor. Yes. Streing. Yes. Pickering. Yes. Teague, yes. Lewig, yes. Jones, yes. Arns, yes. Cooper, yes. Butler, yes. Doy, yes. Pashard, yes. 14, yes.

14, yes. The motion carries. At this time, we'll receive our public services committee report. Chairman Streaming. Thank you, mayor. Uh, puts us to item number 11 A and then we got 11B, 11 C. Uh, Miss Huan, if you would, uh, I I know you told us a little bit on our committee. First, I'll u, I'll make the motion to approve and dispense with the reading and ask for approval. I'll need a second, please. Second. Okay. Now, Miss Han, would you please kind of tell us this is kind of a cleanup, isn't it?

This is just cleaning up ordinances removing the language requiring a bond for these types of businesses, which is a practice that we no longer do. and it's just old wording. So, we're just cleaning those up. Yes. Any questions? Are those being done together? No, I'm going to take I'm going to take it separate. Uh 11 A, we've got an ordinance amending. Thank you, Miss Horn. Welcome. Uh 11 A's ordinance amending chapter 93, garbage, solid waste, weeds, and nuisance and littering. Like I said, I made the motion to dispense with the reading and asked for approval. And uh is there any questions on 11A?

Second. If you don't have go for a second. Any questions? If not, roll call, please. Alderman Johnson, yes. Okaane, yes. Poor, yes. Streing, yes. Pickering, yes. Teague, yes. Lewig, yes. Jones, yes. Arns, yes. Cooper, yes. Butler, yes. Detoy, yes. Pashard, yes. High Tower, yes. 14, yes. 14, yes. Thank you. carries. 11B have an ordinance amending chapter 118 on licensing. I'll make the motion to dispense with the reading and ask for approval. I'll need a second, please. Second. Is there any questions on 11B's ordinance? If not, roll call, please. Alderman Okaane, yes. Core, yes. Streing, yes.

Pickering, yes. Teague, yes. Lewig, yes. Jones, yes. Arn, yes. Cooper, yes. Butler, yes. Doy, yes. Pashard, yes. High Tower. Yes. Johnson, yes. 14. Yes. 14. Yes. Thank you. The motion carries. Push us to 11 C, which is an ordinance amending chapter 124, Pond Brokers and Secondhand Dealers. I'll make the motion to approve and dispense with the reading and ask for approval. I'll need a second, please. Second. Is there any questions on 11C ordinance? Not. Roll call, please. Alderman Poor. Yes. Streing. Yes. Pickering. Yes. Teague. Yes. Ledwick. Yes. Jones. Yes. Orange. Yes. Cooper. Yes. Butler. Yes.

Doy. Yes. Pashard. Yes. High Totower. Yes. Johnson. Yes. Yes. 14. Yes. 14. Yes. Thank you. The motion carries. Puts us to 11D. We have a resolution approving the submission of a grant application for the 2025 Edward Burn Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, JAG. I'll make the motion to approve and dispense with the read and ask for approval. I'll need a second, please. Second. Uh Chief, would you like to elaborate on this just a little bit?

This is the grant that we get every year. Uh we uh apply for it and then we split it. Uh I believe it's a 55 45 uh split between the city and the county. Uh usually this grant comes available um September of the of the year of the grant. This is actually the 25 grant and uh it was delayed in the application process or in the solicitation process. Uh as soon as we got it, we applied for it and um they they have increased the projected amounts. We're not certain how much it is. Uh but normally we get uh I believe our part is about 26,000 and the county gets somewhere around 20,000. Uh however, I believe this year it it should be uh considerably more, but I'm not certain on that amount. And this is a full grant, no matching funds. This is what we use often for uh supplemental patrols, um additional programs like if we have a program such as uh an event in the park, park patrols, um and details as such.

Is there any questions uh for the chief or any questions on 11D's resolution? If not, roll call, please. Alderman Pickering, yes. Teague, yes. Lewig, yes. Jones, yes. Arns, yes. Cooper, yes. Butler, yes. The Toyo Toy, yes. Pashard, yes. High Tower, yes. Johnson, yes. Okain, yes. Core, yes. Streing, yes. 14, yes. 14, yes. Thank you. The motion carries. Item 11 E, accept and place on file the Treasury report for January 2026. I'll need a motion and a second. So moved. Second.

Second. Is there any questions on the treasures report for January for 2026? If not, all those in favor uh signify by saying I. I opposed. The eyes have it. Uh thank you, mayor. That is uh all. Yes. Oh, I'm sorry. Uh this is the Rachel to mayor one too. You know, due to the storm, we've got an awful lot of people walking door todoor. Um if pered Did we give them some type of ID that show when they go to the door? Yes. They need to apply at our office. They'll get a permit, but they also get a badge.

So, we just had an announcement uh Rihanna had received from public works to the meet public stating if they're coming to your door without a badge, ask for it. Without a permit, ask for it so they can be licensed. And then if they're not, you can call the non-emergency police number. just have an officer will come out and just ask them to stop by our office and get licensed. I just wanted to have clarification. I've had calls on it. So, absolutely. Yeah. I think here a week or two ago, we got notification through our emails about one group that was maybe a month ago, I don't know, but they're usually pretty good about it. So,

and we posted on the website also on the city clerk page those that are licensed to go doortodoor and the month the period that they're licensed for. But we do try to email you out also each time somebody comes in and gets licensed through our office. So, we'll try to be more consistent on that if we're not so you guys at least see it. Anybody else have anything on the same line? Yes. Do you have to have any kind of permit or anything to solicit by phone? No.

Okay. They're calling about hail on the phones, too. One of the reasons that's so important with a permit with doortodoor is we're able to look at look at them look at the people that are going doortodoor and for for trying to ensure the the the best expectation for uh for the public is we can look at who's coming and then we've got that on record in case there is a problem whether it's fraud uh uh home repair fraud and anything like that. We're just trying to get give us the highest probability to protect our citizens with that. Thank you, Chief.

Yes. Go ahead. Okay. In relation to all that, there's a lot of roof damage, especially in my neighborhood, say the homeowner has a company going to let them do the roof and they're not permitted or anything by whose responsibility is that? Excuse me. Oh, sorry. Cont. Can you repeat the question, please? Roof damage in my neighborhood.

Say somebody hires a contractor, you know, the way they're coming everybody's house. This contractor isn't licensed or registered with the city. Whose responsibility is that?

Yeah. Um, so that is a great question and this is a public a public notice while we're on to this is a question that homeowners in the city of Danville number one should ask is is the contractor registered with the city of Danville not only for soliciting but um for doing work on their roof that ensures that they're a credible contractor um they're licensed they're insured and the work gets done properly because we have seen unfortunately in recent uh hail events in the past five um we call them fly by nighters. They'll show up, take money, go back to where they came from, and do a really bad job on the roof. So, the city of Danville will ensure or do the best that we can to make sure that does not occur. Um second, this is going to be uh we we only have two two inspectors on staff and code enforcement officials that assist us. If if if we do see a lot of roofs occurring, we have two inspectors to catch them. call if if they don't have uh markings on their vehicles, if you don't see signage in the yard, if you suspect a roof is being illegally installed, call call public works. We'll double check. It takes 5 seconds that

Okay. A lot of homeowners probably don't know that. Correct. And then if they begin the roof and everything, whose responsibility is it? Yeah. At the end of the day, if they do not get a permit um for inspection of the roof, it is truly a civil a civil matter at that point in time. and the city of Danville has no repercussions that we can take. Okay. Yes, Doug. So, to clarify, the homeowner is responsible for ensuring a permit is obtained whether they do it or the contractor does it or if you tell the contractor, they're responsible for the permit. Does that excuse the homeowner?

It it ultimately is the responsibility of the homeowner to ensure that a permit is pulled. But if the contractor is caught illegally performing work, the strike is is litigated for back letter terms on the contractor, not the homeowner. Anybody have anything else?

Chairman, I have one more thing. We just made an update for our Arbor Day celebration. We're still holding it on the 24th at 400 p.m. Um, but we're changing the location to Liberty Park. So, I just sent that out in your guys's emails, so you should receive that with the updated information, but we would love to see you guys there. This is an amazing grant. Um, I believe it's one of the only ones in the state of Illinois who received this amount of money. And it doesn't just go for planting trees, but also removal of some of the dead trees that we have. So, it's a really great program. We'd love to see you guys there on the 24th.

Thank you. Well, mayor, I believe that pretty well takes care of the uh my my team's report. So, we're done. Thank you, Chairman Chie. At this time, we will receive our public works committee report. Chairman Poor. Thank you, Mayor. 12 is a resolution authorizing application of the Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunities on the Regional Site Readiness program. Uh, move to Spence Re and ask for approval. And I will need a second. Second questions. Load.

Yeah. Um, apologies. I wasn't able to get this on the last uh committee meeting. Um there's been a slight change. If you recall, um we came for um approval to submit application for flood remediation of the former Heatcraft and Quaker site off of Vorhees. Um that was for what was considered the federal EDA grant. Um the same amounts were listed in that resolution. It was a grant for $5 million with a $1 million match or 20% match. Um we have received recommendation um from outside parties to switch our application from EDA to site readiness. So from federal to state um the reason for the rush is the site readiness grant is a rolling grant application um since we weren't intending to apply for it for this. The original deadline was at the end of last month and it is a rolling um grant acceptance by the state of Illinois. So the quicker the better. um they have added $30 million into the the pot of money and extended the deadline to the end of this month, but we want to have it done yesterday. Um so that's why we're here here tonight to apply for this switch our action plan. It's truly just switching from a federal agency to a state agency which is selected by the governor's office DCEO. Any questions on that? Okay, see no questions. Roll call, please.

Alderman Teague, yes. Lewig, yes. Jones, yes. Arns, yes. Cooper, yes. Butler, yes. Doy, yes. Pashard, yes. High Tower, yes. Johnson, yes. Okaane, yes. yes. Streing, yes. Pickering, yes. 14, yes. 14, yes. Thank you. Uh 12B items information and we will meet next Tuesday 6 o'clock in these chambers. Everyone's welcome. That concludes my report. Mayor,

thank you. Chairman Thor, are there any items of information for the good of the cause? Seeing none at this time, I would entertain a motion to section to go into close session under section 2C1 of the specific employ of the of the open meetings act to discuss specific employees and section and salary schedules. Is there a motion to do so? So moved. Section 2C2, I'm sorry, to discuss salary schedules. So moved. Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion or debate? Roll call vote, please. Alderman Lewig, yes. Jones, yes. Barnes, yes. Cooper, no.

Butler, no. Excuse me, no. Thank you. Doy, yes. Pashard, yes. High Totower, yes. Johnson, yes. Okain, yes. Core, yes. Streying, yes. Pickering, yes. Teague, yes. 12. Yes. 12. Yes. The motion carries. We are adjourned to close session. There may be action taken afterwards.

B is with going on as well. That is mine. Yes. This time I would entertain a motion to return to open session. So move and I'll make the motion. Is there a second? All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any oppose? Same sign. Thank you very much. What minute? I ain't got time. Um, if there be no objection, I would like to uh request a motion to um take item 16 before item 15. Um, that way we can get that that vote conducted before we have our discussion. Move to amend the agenda and uh insert item 16 in front of item 15. Thank you, Alderman. Is there a second?

Second. It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion or debate? Madam clerk, roll call, please. Alderman Butler. Yeah. Can I have clarification? Yeah. So, so basically, we're going to review and discuss uh we're going to vote on number 16. Number 15 and 16. Alderman's friendly amendment to exchange number items 15 and 16. Is that correct? Yes, sir. So, we're voting on the So, we would be voting on the on the compensation section 3907. So, we'd be voting on item number 16. Thank you. If if the amendment If the amendment passes, that's correct. Right. Yeah. Is there It's been motioned and seconded. Um roll call vote, please.

Alderman Butler. Uh no. The toy pashard. Uh yes. High Tower. Well, I'll be totally honest. I'm only voting toward any raises or increases only till the fire department. If it's not geared toward the fire department, it's a no from Tom High Tower. Alderman. So, this is just for us to to go ahead and vote on number six. I'm sorry. That gets me kind of going to get my goat. Johnson. Yes. Okay.

I'm trying to find us in Dropbox. What number is it? Item number 16. There is no 16. No, we're just voting on the amendment. On the amendment? Yeah. No. Poor. Yes. Streing. Yes. Pickering. Yes. Teague. Yes. Lewig. Yes. Jones. Yes. Orange. Yes. Cooper. Yes. 11. Yes.

11. Yes. The amendment carries. Now you would be voting on um the original ordinance um item as as amended. I do believe that we need another amendment to uh strike the changes to elected official salary. Is there a motion to do so that they would not be changed at this as part of this? So moved. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion or debate on that amendment? I'm I'm sorry. I'm trying to re find the all theordance in the section on uh there's a section in there about elected officials and it does change the salaries for them as well. Ordinance won't be in the packet. It's a separate document in

No, I'm in the Dropbox. Okay. So, I want to be clear. I'm in the Dropbox. What is I don't see reference to employee wage. Oh, wait. Okay. So the wage chart is what we are adopting. So we're basically charts adopting is the ordinance amending section 3907 of the wage chart. Right. I'm reading the ordinance um section 39

to see where so basically we're we're approving the wage chart and uh or we're voting on approving the wage chart and we're moving which is uh section 1A and removing 1 A1 and 1 A1 sub A correct And also section two, correct? Removing all items change removing changes in to any item related to elected officials. Go to the right box. That doesn't seem to leave anything. A1 you're reading it as well. Yeah. Uh

I don't see whether there's any language approving the compensation of it's support it support document B. it when it refers to the other additional document, it has that in there. In the ordinance, the language of the ordinance only says the city of Danville, Illinois wage administration program and its accompanying charts adopted by ordinance 7966 is hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. Everything else in the in the ordinance refers to elected officials, does not refer to um employees. I'm just reading the language of the ordinance.

So section one or section A1 refers to all the different programs that are included in the wage chart and they're separated by section. So a section a for elected officials which part on but it's still included in the wage chart. So that actually would still need to be there. The part that we're talking about changing their pay would be in section B section two section 2 where we don't want to support. No, that's not it. 15. If you tap on them

then I don't know what is in the shared is this ordinance 3907 and it says 4.7

this says one week ago. This is not this is not the this is not on the agenda. This is not on the agenda. Yeah. I'd like to like to table this until the next full meeting and and get the paperwork right so that we can so the alderman can see what they're going to be voting on. Made a motion to table until the next meeting. Is there a second? Any discussion or debate? I I'm sorry. Roll call vote, please. Alderman Butler? Yes. Pashard? Yes. High Totower? Yes. Johnson? Yes. Okain? Yes. Poor. Yes. Streing. Yes. Pickering. Yes. Teague. Yes. Lewig. Yes. Jones. Yes. Orange.

Yes. Cooper. Yes. 13. Yes. 13. Yes. It is tabled until the next meeting. Um item new item 16 is discussing compensation for elected officials. So I just wanted to to review uh you guys. So uh Treasurer Heron and I provided some documents. We had some conversations uh with chairman and u some of the aldermen about this and um you know the suggestion was to bring it all in a timely manner uh to you all at one time. Um and so that's why we brought it this way. Um yeah that's so I appreciate their guidance on this. Um

however at this time I would like to turn it over to treasurer heron to to discuss um his propo his recommendation to you. Before we can do that, could I have a follow-up question on that? Why were only some alderman asked or participated in that discussion? It wasn't some of us have voiced opinions on on these matters previously and I would have hoped out of professional consideration if others are getting calls about what's going to happen with the wage chart that maybe all the alderman should be included. There may be others that have alderman pay. The discussions are primarily with the chairman, sir. Okay. And that's standard operating procedure. I don't think the chairman should be involved in what's going on. It was just

treasure her. Hi. Okay. So, um I just put in my analysis that I think you got in an email. I'd be happy to answer any questions or go over anything with anybody that

has any questions about that analysis. I just uh simply went into the IML and uh did some research there. I called treasures. You know, I've never done this before. I never I didn't even know this was a thing until we had talked about it. And um so I just did the best I could by going into the IML just did some logical things. I called treasur's offices um did some research federally of what happens and you know I found a lot of findings and that's what I have in my analysis. Um, and so I'd be happy to answer any questions or I can and I have some copies if people didn't get that in their email if anybody wants a hard copy and I can read through the whole thing if you like.

I I would love a hard copy. I'm trying to find it in my email. Um, but I would love a hard copy. There's a lot. Yes. Alderman. Well, I guess starting for me, the questions dependent upon what everybody's thoughts are as far as fixing the problem of having what we have experienced as an ongoing problem of having this as an elected position. And so, it's the pleasure of the council to go away from that. I'm not going to get belabored on the salary nuts and bolts of a position that we hope doesn't happen. So, uh I certainly think we need to be cognizant of the timeline. I don't know what research has developed to this point

to tell us what has to be done in order to make that change. If that's a voter referendum, if the council has authority, my impression is the council probably has the authority to put it on an on a referendum if that's what it requires. Um, and so I guess what what research at this point has the administration or anyone done on that? What's it take? uh corporation council is investigating that and uh we will we hope to have a recommendation or not a recommendation but a some information provided to you all soon on on the ways that that can be happen because as as I think you know I've agreed for a long time that this should probably be an appointed position it's too important and if you get the wrong person elected you can see we literally had all of our finances frozen and if this council and if our team had not been good stewards um if they had not been good stewards, then we would not have been able to do a lot of things the last year and a half without it.

No, I agree 100%. The uh you know the the numbers in my opinion when you include in the the 24,000 for the pension funds, if I understand that correctly, the the treasur receives a thousand each from the two pension funds per month. So we're at 114 in total. Uh, so I think that's an appropriate number for a financial expert. Hopefully that's sufficient to get it get it done. But as a council, I think we also need to recognize that if at some point those pension funds decide not to utilize those services, we better be prepared to pick up the ball because that is the level that it takes for someone with this skill set. Absolutely.

So those are my thoughts. I will not approve an increase in the treasurer salary unless it's part of a specific transition plan to an appointed position. That's where I'm at on the number for the appointed position. I'm fine with for the you mean for if it be Yeah. If it were to become an appointed position, I would be fine with the numbers have been proposed for that position.

Alderman T. First off, I can um imagine how frustrating it was for you trying to find information because I did the same back in 2022 um when we had this conversation then and it is significantly inconsistent in terms of treasurer. Um some municipalities don't have an elective treasurer, some do, some um it's a staff position. Um, so in the data that I have and I basically went through cuz I kept my old spreadsheets from when I did this in 2022 and then I try to gather updated information from public sources as much as possible unfortunately um with with very little time it was hard for me to find any updated information especially on um treasurer. So, but there's so much inconsistency as it relates to treasure that it's really hard to ascertain what is the um standard practice. Um, so I think I would um concur with Alderman Arms in that it does need to be an appointed position because when you have someone in the position who for whatever reason might be remiss in their duties, the implications that it has for the city and our ability to operate rate are significant and there is no cause that can be taken um short of elections, you know, to change

the tide on that. And so the position is far too important for us to um roll the dice, so to speak, as relates to who might be in a position. Obviously, you've done a wonderful, outstanding job in getting things back on track, but we also know you can't be in a position forever, right? So, um you know, we don't know what we would end up with. So, I would agree uh with Alderman Arms that it needs to be appointed and but I also believe that um it would need to go to the electorate to be able to determine how we should proceed. So, um I think that putting it on a referendum or recommending a referendum for a future election would be um a good a good move for us. And I would then um support that because at that point in time, one of the things that happens with elected positions is that anybody who's popular, whether or not they're qualified, can actually be in the position. And the treasurer's position requires a certain amount of uh qualification, financial knowledge, accounting knowledge, finance knowledge, um you know, understanding of of of GAP practices and whatnot. And so, um I would I would say that when it's appointed, then you can make sure you have the right person in the job. So because of that, I would uh concur with Alderman Arms um on this.

Thank you. Any other items regarding the treasurer specifically? Well, I'm just not

I'm just going to say that uh the lady was in there before was in there for almost eight years and until she come up and she found out that there was this mistake she made and it was late when she got it. uh I found 10 $10,000 and two weeks later she said, "Well, I I found something else." And it be me to worry then. I don't want to go back to do what we had this last time and the amount amount of money and the headaches we had to go through. Um so that's you know, we've been talking about trying to get this back to where it's a pointed position because you you you've only got so much hands-on you can do an elected position. I mean, your hands are really tight. So, I would like to see this go back to a handpicked individual versus an election because we could get something worse. I I don't know how, but we could. Believe me,

it is possible. It is possible. Uh so, that's that's the only thing. And I've been listening to this. I I've sat through u when we talked to the mayor about it. Uh if if we're keeping him, I I like I like the numbers as well, but at the same time, I I want more consistency. I'm not going to be here forever. So, um I want to know that when I leave that at least I done something right. So, it's all I got to say. I agree. Like, Alderman Lewig, is this about the treasur's position as well?

Yes. Um, I'm not sure it would be inconsistent to um amend the salary schedule for the treasurer and also have something on the uh, you know, have a referendum that would allow for um, the treasurer to be an elected position. I think we could do both.

Thank you. Anything further about the treasur's position? Yes, sir. And not knowing I we be talking about this, my recollection of going back in history is that when this form of government was set up, we made a choice, you know, the mayor was elected, we made a choice of either the clerk or the treasurer would be elected position. We need to figure out whether we if we set up a referendum because it sounds good to me, but we need to figure out what we are restricted to with the state government with the consent agree uh the degree and with the state government's articles of uh say about this kind of government.

Yeah. And I think our our legal was looking into that. So, you know, believe me, it it takes a while to get anything moving in Springfield. So, good luck trying to find if you can find them. if you can find something. Yeah. But, uh, corporation council and and assistant corporation council are working on on providing us with that information. So, hopefully within the next couple of weeks, we'll have that for you. Um, regarding regarding the mayor salary, can can I have can I respond a little bit to that? Yes. A couple things real quick just to give some clarity and information.

Um, in my analysis, you'll see that Uh, I I thought the same thing that sooner than later this needs to be an or an appointed position. Whether that be now or soon in the future, however the law works, I'm not for sure. But I also when I did this analysis, it was for um the treasur. It's not for it wasn't for an appointed position. So the information that I received um was a treasurer salary and I think I mentioned in my analysis because of people that I had talked to different municipalities I think it's probably going to be a higher rate

um possibly and and you know I'm I that's just what I got from feedback because this position is going into the finance in a lot of these places been going into the finance uh department where the comproller or the CFO or somebody is doing a lot of these responsibilities that we currently have. But there's also has to be that segregation in there which a lot of these municipalities do not have. And um a second thing I'd like to just touch base on is and I don't know what this is called. This 3113 Rachel is this this is an ordinance is that right?

Yes.

So the part where it talks about the compensation received from the trustees of such pension funds shall be in addition to the salary specified for the treasurer. I think it's worth noting the difference, the separation of why I get this $1,000 extra from each of the pension funds because that's going to need to be discussed going further when we get into an appointed position. The P because like Alderman Arn said, they they can stop at any time there. Um there are specific things they've asked me to do that can be and I talk about a little bit in that analysis that um they can they can source out to Lauderbach and Almond and they asked me to do that. It's just that the price is so high and now they have someone capable of doing it that they wanted me to do it. But, you know, it's a slippery slope right there because they don't want to go back and have somebody in this position that can't do it and then all of a sudden they have these huge tax um liabilities again. They both got hit with about $100,000 in fines and in penalties and interest. So, they're kind of looking at this whole thing too, but it's all it's all the big picture of that office. And so, I just wanted to kind of make everybody aware of it. I kind of talked about a little bit in that analysis, but I'd be happy to answer any other questions, you know, over time and we can talk more about it. But that's all I had. Thank you for the consideration.

Thank you, treasure. Um, as far as the mayor salary goes, you know, I just provided you a little bit of information and essentially these these are always a contentious issue, right? uh especially because you're often voting because of our requirements of 6 months before an election, you're you're talking about it right before an election. Um in here, I think one of the things we have to be really careful about is if you limit the compensation, you limit those who the options that you have available in terms of who would be willing to apply for the job. I'm going to use myself for a moment, then I'm going to take myself out of out of the equation. So, I am a single person. I have no family. I have no debt except for my home. Um, so it's easier for me to accept a lower compensation salary, but does that mean that it's fair or just? Right. Um, and and does that mean you're going to get good people to apply for the job if you don't or to run for the office if you don't offer a reasonable salary? Right. Um, so I'll give you an example. Before I came here, I was making $115,200 a year at Project Success. Okay. Um, had about 120 staff members, about which 20 of which were full-time. Um, and uh, I was able to do great work that helped this entire county and Danville specifically, but um, it was it was a hard job, but it was a tenth if or less of the stress of of this role, right? And you oversaw far fewer things. You were looking at youth and family development programs versus overseeing all the different things that the mayor and the city of Danville oversees. Um, and you know, my concern is that if you don't offer a reasonable salary, then you're only going to get a one of a couple of options. Somebody who's independently wealthy, someone who is retired, or someone who has their own business, right? And then you have to wonder if you have those competing interests, what is their availability going to be? What is their focus going to be if that someone is running their own business or

whatnot? Um, so that's something that we have to consider. Um, if a person has a family, if they have um, you know, other other debt besides their their home, it would be hard to justify for someone taking that kind of position, you know, that kind of salary increase. For me, I've lost by the time my second term is up, it will have been almost a quarter of a million dollars. And again, yes, I absolutely signed up for this. This is not about hardship. This is about not about need. If the salary was $110,000, I would be okay with that. or but I think if we're go looking at not Ricky Williams, but if we are looking at the future and trying to recruit somebody good to run for this office as we move forward, we got to make sure that that's something that that we consider is who who could be available. But also, if we want to look at equity and parody, uh there are 22 city employees who earn more than the mayor currently. Um, and I don't know of any place where the person who's in charge and has the ultimate responsibility for everything makes substantially, not many I should say, where that she she or he makes far less than all than many of their team members. Um, I also looked externally. Um, you know, one of the things that I think is last time we did this analysis, I think that there were a few things that I missed. I think that there were a few things that Alderman Teague missed and others who did research that we missed. in our analysis. Right? So, what I did was I went on the Illinois Municipal League and I looked at a salary range of all those who were 5,000 5,000 persons smaller than us and 5,000 persons more than us. And uh got a got a all I included all of those on this data uh that I provided to you. Um I also added Urbana and Quincy because they are frequently cited in our arbitration with fire and police as comparable communities. We can argue whether they're not. I think at least one of them is not right, but they're in there. So, I want to include those. And

then I also included a couple of regional comparisons because that has been done previously by various u sources as well. Ranul, Seavoy, and Tilton um because they are referenced regionally. Um only three municipalities in this cohort spend less per capita on executive leadership. And all of them, and I think this is really important to note, all of them rely heavily on separate taxing districts to deliver their services that we handle directly into the in into the city of Danville. What do I mean by that? They have separate they often have either a separate fire district, a separate library district, a separate parks district, or a sep andor a separate transit district, right? whereas all of those things ultimately are a lie at the foot of the at the foot of the mayor's office, whoever that is, right? Um,

so they are not doing the same. I I'll get into that a little bit more. Smaller municipalities frequently spend more per capita and sometimes more overall on executive leadership despite managing fewer responsibilities. And most comparable um, municipalities employ a city manager and administrator. So just to give you a little bit of um

of the 30 some municipalities there only three Belvadier, Granite City, and Quincy spend less per capita on executive management than we do. However, they all have other taxing districts which were um taking on some of the responsibilities that we conduct as a city. Two out of three of them have multiple separate taxing districts and thus additional revenue and personnel to oversee them. And there are only four municipalities, Alton, Belvadier, Granite City, and Tilton, that spend less total than we do on the executive role. And all of them have external districts that provide relief from performing one or more of these major functions. Three out of four of them have multiple entities which do so. They have multiple other taxing districts uh that provide those. Um the three that are substantially smaller than us, Ranul, Seavoy, and Tilton all spend more per capita than we do on the executive function um with far less responsibility. Uh two out of three spend um more overall on the executive function than we do and none of them provide their own transit system. Tilton has no library and the Seavoy library is under a separate system. And the last thing that I maybe one of the last things that I would say is third um I know that Alderman Teague made this point last time. Well, this analysis includes city managers, administrators. What about those with only a mayor? There are only five other municipalities in that in that population range. Alton, Belvadier, Burbank, Granite City, and Quincy that u in our population range that have no city manager administrator. However, two out of the five have separate fire districts. Two out of five have separate library districts.

Four out of five have separate park districts. All all of them but Alton. And four out of five ex uh all but Quincy have separate transit districts. Um three out of five have three separate districts and one of them has two separate districts. Um, as you know, here in Danville, fire, parks, uh, and transit all fall directly under the city administration's, uh, responsibilities. And although it's indirect, there's a lot of involvement with the library as well. Um, basically what I'm trying to say to you is that the mayors and treasurers in these other five cities that have only a mayor, their scope and oversight and their responsibility is much less than what it is for me and treasurer Heron here in the city of Danville. Uh, and you may say, well, why do you include city managers, administrators when we don't have one? And here's why. When our wage study was conducted, they did comparisons not by job title because everyone changes a little bit, right? They did it by um and people had various names for different positions, but they did it by job description. The descriptions had to match ours by at least 70% to be included. When the study was done, our mayor's job description matched that of other mayors of both mayors and city administrators. Why would we assess this role any differently than we assess all the other roles in the city of Danville when we cond when we conducted under them the same analysis? I think in my opinion to do so would intentionally and unfairly inject bias into the process. Um furthermore, as you can see from the analysis below, most other PIS uh municipalities our size have a city administrator of some port uh some sort. So here the mayor performs the function of a city administrator. Um, so in in some based on the wage study, the mayor's salary falls in pay grade 16 with a minimum salary of $130,300 and a maximum salary of $195,495,000.

And although I believe that $150,000 would be a more fair or a reasonable amount for everything that this person does, again, take Ricky Williams Jr. out of this. I am requesting that we would start the 2027 mayor's salary at the minimum like we did for the other city position with a a small rounding down to $130,000 a year and then give him or her, it might be someone else, it may be one of you that's elected to this position, a 3% raise each year. And the bottom line is if we want to recruit talented people to do this job, we cannot pay them an unreasonable salary. Um, if you do, I think you'll continue to get unre you you'll continue to get people that aren't as qualified. And you may say, "Well, Ricky, you can also get an elected person that's unqualified." We've seen that happen, and that's absolutely true. But my my my supposition to you is that you're far more likely to get somebody who's unqualified, if qualified people are taken out of the equation because the salary isn't reasonable, right? Um I didn't know if anyone chairman if you all had any thoughts or other alderman if you have any thoughts. Alderman Cooper

couple in 2023 this job paid 75,000. So in 2030 you're want to make this up to 142,000 which is damn near 100%. never seems like, you know, this year on next year's election, I from what I've heard gathered, I think we've got probably six or seven people running for mayor. There may be more than that, but I know it's six or seven. I don't think the people running for this position, whether they're qualified or not, they know exactly what they're making and they're earning. I I think we ought to throw that out. I think if you raise this up to 142, 150,000, you're going to get a lot more people running and it could be a lot worse than what I think it could be. But I I could never support this run from a, you know, seven years running up to that type of price increase when giving the other city employees three and 4%. I just can't support that. Alderman, I I I would remind you that we have raised near at least 70% of the employees salary substantially. For example, our records clerks make about 45% more than they did when I started as mayor. Um our our um our HR risk manager makes her salary has more than doubled since I've become the mayor because our salaries were inappropriately suppressed for a long time. And that's why you have to such a long way to come because we were not paying people anything. Basically, we were paying our records clerk minimum wage when I became the mayor. No wonder we we struggled to keep them, right? You can't pay people a popper salary and expect them to do good work on a continuous basis over a long period of time. So, while I understand what you're saying that that's a big jump, and I agree with you, it's a big jump. We have

made a similar big jump for a lot of the other positions. I believe that I hired Logan in at $50,000 and we've more than doubled his salary and Logan is worth double triple what we pay him now, right? Um, so it's we what I'm not asking you to consider something for the mayor's role, whoever it is, that we have not already done for all of our employees and change and and improving their salaries because many of them received far more than three or 4% across the years and in fact some of their salaries have more than doubled a number of them. If I represent people out there and if I go up to some of these people and they go, "Why' you vote for to support 142,000 for the mayor?" I don't think I could. And I I I don't want to be in that position where I can do that because I don't think it's deserving of that to be honest with you. Um I I just can't do it. I mean, if I talk to people and they say, "I voted for this. I wonder why I I not support this and

that is just the way I am. I understand and and I would just add that we also have had pandemic since this which greatly inflated all everyone's wages across not just the city of Vanville but in the world as a whole. So I'm I'm I'm not tending to argue with you just providing providing some light on it. And our our population is not going up. We've seen a decrease last 3, four years. How many jobs have we lost? I mean, it's those are concerns and I I can't support it. Alderman,

couple of couple of items as it relates to this as as you might anticipate as well as others. the uh I I think some of the things that we need to keep in mind when we start discussing these positions with other city city positions and certainly with other administrations and other governments. Uh you know, one of the first questions the council might ask you is why are we only one of five communities that is still doing this? That might be one question. The second question is is if the other 25 others figured out there's something different then maybe that should be looked at and evaluated as well as to as it relates to the the specific issues here. You can't I will not disagree that the responsibilities of the position would warrant a much higher salary than the $130,000. But the reason I'm not willing to go to 130 is the same reason I won't go above the 110 or anything else is I don't believe there should be a public position that exists in a six-f figureure salary range that doesn't have accountability and every individual you mention whether it's a city manager one of your staff members some other staff man manager they can all be terminated they can all be removed for poor performance they can all be disciplined for things personally Personally, I think there were times and I, as some of you well know, there were issues here at the council where action should have been taken, it was not. And what what was explained to me is you can't really deal with that when they're an elected official. Going back to what Alderman Strebin just said. And so what I will say is is what I would like the administration to do is is is do a little research and find out in a home rule form of government is there any level of uh action that the city council can take if a mayor is refusing to perform their duties.

That's the question I have. Because if a mayor can take the job and win a popularity contest, as some have suggested, and collect $130,000 salary and not show up for work, which we've had alderman do, you may have one someday. So, I'm for accountability. I'm for compensating people at good rules. So, mayor, I'm not going to argue with you over the 130. You know, I felt the 125 a few years back was appropriate if there was an ability for accountability and discipline in the position. To my knowledge, there's not or hasn't been demonstrated to me at least. So, if a home rule authority, the municipal league should be able to answer this question or somebody can implement its own policies or ordinances that allow the city council in a supermajority to post for a recall vote or put a referendum on the ballot for a recall vote. I'll talk about that more then as far as increasing a salary, but as long as there is no accountability other than waiting four years until the next election, that's not accountability. Alderman, to answer part of your question, there was a bill brought before uh brought in the state house uh several years ago to um try to have a referendum for a recall and it failed. It did not pass. So, the state had not authorized had not provided that specific authority, but I will have um corporation council uh check and see if there are any other kind of disciplinary actions that can be taken.

Okay. Thank you. Yes, Alderman Teague.

So, I provided information um to everyone. So, everyone should have this at their seat. I'm more than happy to email it as well if you would like it. Um um so I did extensive research on this back in 2022 as uh the mayor um referred to as did uh late Alderman Iverson. And back in 2022 when we were having discussions on this um the full body tasked Alderman Iverson and I to get together to compare our notes to compare our research and to come up with um what we thought a recommendation and so the first page that I've provided you um at the top shows where we were at 2022. In fiscal 20 20 uh3 the mayor's position made 75,000 the treasurer 45,000 and alderman 2700. What was being proposed is on the left for um for both of those and then where you have the compromise is what al alderman Iris and I suggested. So what was originally proposed to us when we discussed this four years ago was 95 then 105 then 115 then 125. So $10,000 increase every year. What the compromise that alderman um Iverson and I came up with that is in this email. This is what was sent to so those of you who are on the council if you haven't deleted any email this text is actually in your email. Um, so what Alderman Iverson and I came up with was 95, then 100, 105, and 110, which is where why we are at 110 right now.

Alderman Tig, you, if I recall, you actually voted against that. I did vote against it. I'm just telling you what is in this email. I did vote against it. You're absolutely right. That was our compromise. But I don't I'm still talking, sir. Okay, very good.

Um, because I don't want to lose my train of thought. So the treasurer's piece we didn't have any issue with the alderman. We thought should actually be more because alderman pay hadn't been changed in well over 20 years. Um so what was proposed back then was 3,600. What Alderman Iverson and I proposed was 4,800. What was settled on was 4,200. That was what the the body decided after the proposal. So I'm just giving you a lay of the land. I highlighted in yellow some very specific points um al so one of the things he says is we gave substantial increases to other city employees to bring them up to a fair wage so it's not unprecedented to approve such increases um he also said it seems fair that elected officials have some type of salary increase during the four years I didn't disagree with any of that and and this document shows he talks about where he and I disagree agreed, which is why I voted against it because we did disagree. That was our compromise. I still disagreed with it and I and I'll tell you why in a minute. Um goes on to say that I had done extensive research. I'm going to get into that in a second. He said, and and in hindsight, I agree with this part. Elected officials are not a bargaining unit and doing a percent increase will become a political football. knowing that we do have, you know, the normal 2 and a half or 3% or whatnot, I can see why he felt that way. Um because the the chart just above that on the back page is what I had put for if it was a 3% increase each year. So the sec on the back side of the first page where it says uh 20 24 92 250 2025 94 556 that's a straight 3% calculation based off off the 90 and that was what I was suggesting. Um and he says I

disagree. This is what he wrote but he wrote it on behalf of both of us. Um what he also says is that the research shows that alderman in other cities get a much higher rate than that in Danville. and the Danville rate has not been changed for some 20 years. Alderwoman TIG feels Danville ottoman should be uh Ottoman should be based on meeting attendance. I felt that way then. I still feel that way um because we have had significant issues in the past, maybe not so much with this council or even the last council with people who um didn't always attend and it wasn't always health concerns. I know we had some people who didn't attend um who are not seated now who had significant health issues and therefore couldn't attend but there were times in the past where people just not showing up and they were always getting paid and you know I I come from a school where if you don't if you don't work

you don't eat you don't get paid and that's the way it should be so um but every but but I was in the minority on that opinion 4 years ago. Okay. So, the next page shows 2022 elected official compensation. The reason why I included this because I updated it on the next page. So, originally when I presented this, this is pretty much the same as it was except um there are four cities listed on here. They were not on this originally when I uh submitted this four years ago. So what I did when I when I did my research, I did research on every city in the state of Illinois. I actually have a spreadsheet that has 500 cities in it. I did extensive research. 500 cities. And what I did was then I categorized those cities so that we can have an applesto apples comparison. So I only compared us to other cities that have the exact same form of government that we have in that they are mayor and aldermatic form of government and they have the mayor acting as the chief administrator. They have no other administrative role in their governments. So there are some cities who have um mayor automatic form of government uh government but they still have a city administrator. Urbana is one of those cities. So they have a mayor but he also has a city administrator. Now some of them use different titles and at that time I went back and I was looking like at multiple websites to see what do they have what do they have. So when I filtered it down these are in the top 100 these are the eight cities that are just like Danville. Now, four years ago, I compared median income and median home

value of all those other cities larger than us to us so that you can kind of gather what the cost of living was in those other cities compared to Danville. Cuz when you're looking at salary, you know, the same I used to work at a a global corporation. So the same position that lived in San Francisco did not get paid as that position in Chicago. Chicago uh San Francisco got much more pay because the cost of living in California was so much more significant. And that needs to be taken into consideration when we're starting to compare things. So those four cities at the bottom, they don't have that information because this was at that time. I can't go back and get cost of living for what it was in 2022. But this is a comparison of where we are, where we were then. And what you will see is that there's only there on in 2022 there was only one mayor making six figures and that was the mayor of Walkegan where median home values were twice as much as in Danville. The alderman pay was also significantly more although they have less alderman. They only have I think seven or eight. Um the treasurer's pay was significantly less. I don't know the reasoning behind that. like it would take a whole lot more phone calls and I was really getting frustrated with just trying to find data in general on treasurer back then. Um so this is this was my starting point and I wanted to give that to you. Now if you go to the elected official updated for 2026 I added some information that I thought would be relevant. So the first thing I looked at was rank and where those ranks are now. So walkgan is still the 10th largest city in the state. Belleville is fell a place from 42 to 43. Danville fell 10 places from 66 to 76. And when you look at population change versus 2022, Danville lost 1838 residents.

Everybody else gained or they lost less than a thousand except for us. But the other number that I included when you want to look at comparisons is total budget for that city. So I looked at Walkegan's total budget. I looked at all these cities total budgets at least for what I could find in the little little bit of time that I had and I looked at total budget and then general fund budget. So Wke Keaggan's total budget is 292 million and their general fund budget is 106 million. Belleville's uh total budget is 162 million and their general fund budget is 43 million. Calumet city 111 million total budget 50 million general fund budget. Now when you start to look at the the salaries walking mayor salary increased by about $18,000 and then Belleville so there's little notations I can tell you what they mean. So if you look at the 90,000 90,06 Belleville's mayor did not increase their salary in the last four years. So it's exactly the same. Calumett city I could not find the information. That's why it has a question mark. I can't find updated information on there. Ours increased. So the plus next to ours is we increased since 2022. Everybody else has either increased somewhat or stayed the same. But all of these other cities, with the exception of Belvadier, have significantly more money available to them than we do in the city of Danville because their budgets are significantly more than ours. As it relates to all demanded pay, we are still the lowest paid and in most instances, everybody is making one and a half or in some instances two, three, four times than we are for automatic pay. Again, we already talked about

treasur. It's all over the place. So, when we look at this, here's my belief system. I still believe alderman pay should go up. And for the same reasons that the mayor said for why mayor pay should go up, I believe the same thing for alderman pay because people don't want to run for alderman because they don't think it's worth the hassle and it's a lot of time that you put into it and and for what, right? It's um now if you're dedicated to the job and you're showing up then you should get compensated because when you work you eat but if you're not you're just basically getting paid to potentially show up at a meeting or not. And like Alderman Arn said if there's no accountability and no option to remove someone who's dare electing their duties, then you just have somebody potentially earning a paycheck. Whether that paycheck is $350, $450, $500, $1,000, it doesn't matter. If they don't show up for 6 months, they're still getting paid. So, I think that the argument for why uh we should increase pay for mayor actually applies to alderman and it applies appropriately to alderman. Um, as it relates to the mayor's salary, if you were to look at the average and average this out, it to me the data when you compare apples to apples does not support increasing the mayor's salary by $20,000. Should the mayor get an increase? Yes. We are on a trajectory right now where the mayor gets an increase of $5,000 every year. I don't personally have a problem with that or any other variable similar to that. Um, I do think a $20,000 increase, especially when it was just $75,000 not that long ago, is significant. I also know that the the statistics for our city show that 25% of our city, let me speak, let me be clear, it's not exactly

25, 24.5% of our city lives at or below the rate of poverty. So, we are not a city that can that, you know, we're saying, "Yes, um, we want to give all this money to the mayor and everybody else, you know, we we know that your living situation is not necessarily getting that much better because our poverty rate was not that high several years ago. Um, when you look at I' I've written a lot of grants recently, so I got a lot of data in my head. When you look at um what's called Alice, which is asset limited income contingent but employed, for the county, that rate is 53%. But for the county, the poverty rate is only 17%. So I imagine that the bulk of that 53% is probably here in the city of Danville. And I would if I were a betting woman and you know, you you start to look cuz I'm a I am I have been a data analyst in a past life. Um, and so if you start to extrapolate what that probably is for the city of Danville, I would imagine that the Alice rate for the city of Danville, if it's 53% for the county, it's probably about 65ish% for the city of Danville. So, we have 65% of our people who are one disaster away of losing everything, but we're going to give the mayor an additional $20,000. It just it it it it just doesn't make sense. The mayor's position is a public servant position. And as I said to the mayor previously and even in conversations that we've had since 2022, even if I was the mayor, I would say it was too much money cuz it's not about a person. It's not about you, nor is it about me. To me, the data doesn't support it. Now, if the data said every other city's mayor was making over $115,000, then I would say we would be on par with what's happening in all those other

cities that are just like ours. But we're not. And what's being suggested is even worse than where we are right now. And so, I'm presenting all of this data for you all to make your own decision. I've made mine based on data because I like to make databased decisions. So I and I'm happy to share the spreadsheet. I'd have to do a lot of explaining cuz there's a lot of color coding and there's a whole lot of other data that I added cuz I also added data based on I did a calculation um based on cost of living to kind of extrapolate like okay if the mayor of Walkegan lived in Danville what would his pay be if the mayor of or if Danville was in Walkegan what would the pay be? So I basically kind of like equalized those. to try to equalize everything to show what these numbers would be. I didn't put that in this because that's a whole lot of data talk. But I have that information if anybody is interested in it.

Yeah, I would just add, you know, you've said that you're comparing apples to apples, but the truth but you're actually not. Uh, Walkaggan is almost three times our population. Number one. Number two, they also have I just looked quickly. They have their own separate regional transportation system. So, the mayor is not overseeing that. They have their own separate library district. So the mayor is not overseeing that. And they have their own separate parks district. So the mayor is not overseeing any of those things.

And yet the mayor and yet their general fund is $106 million. So the mayor is overseeing a whole lot of something even if it's not those particular agencies. While Keegan is a much bigger city, which means there's much more people, right? Um, so for $106 million general fund budget, the mayor is overseeing a lot more than we're overseeing with our 39 million general fund budget. I would also add that um, one of the other arguments that was made as it relates to whether or not the mayor's position should be making more money because people who report to the mayor make more money than the mayor. You could look at the university system and see that there are significant people make there are people making significantly more money than the president and the chancellor of the university. For example, cuz I also look up the university system. Brett Bimma makes $8.4 million. Uh Josh Whitman makes $1.5 million. He reports to I'm sorry, Brett Biba reports to Josh Whitman. Josh Whitman reports to the chancellor and the chancellor reports to the president and the president uh Tim Khen makes $916,000. So you actually have from the president down four people making more than him. I didn't look up um the basketball coach's uh salary, but I imagine it's also in the millions as well. So there's precedent that can be made for any argument that somebody makes. Regardless of that, to me, none of those things matter as it relates to what the mayor of Danville should be making as it pertains to other mayors of comparable cities. Now, if you want to so, and if you want to look at it, I would say you're right. Wkegan is much bigger. Belleville is very similarly sized, very similarly situated because Walkegan is in one of the richest counties in the country um because it's in Lake County.

Belleville is downstate just like us. Belleville's mayor makes $90,000. Belleville's mayor has not taken a raise in the last four years. It's still $90,000 and it was $90,000 in 2022. And yet Belleville is bigger than Danville and yet Belleville's general fund budget is bigger than ours. So I would agree yes, Walkegan is much bigger. And I was only comparing it as it relates to form of government because the argument was made about whether or not there is an executive level person on staff while Keegan does not have an executive level person on staff. So their mayor is acting in the same capacity as our mayor is as is the mayor of Belleville as is the mayor of Calmed City. And so yes, you're right. And if we want to look at those that are closer to us, then we should look at Belleville and Calumett City. And if we look at those, both of those mayors make less than $100,000. Our mayor makes $110,000. And what's being proposed is that our mayor gets a $20,000 increase.

Your analysis though does not include several other things such as Quincy. Quincy is the exact same form of government as us. 39,000 people and the mayor makes $95,732. Um, and and do they have a city administrator in Quincy? I believe that they do. That's they do not. Are are you sure? I am sure. Alton is just like us. There these are places that are used in our fire comps and our police comps. Alton, the mayor makes 900 $99,993 uh for a population of 25,000. What was the number you said? Alton 99,993. That was 25.

That was as of 25. And they have separate librarian and and county and uh county transit districts. Um so, you know, your analysis does not include a number of other places that are like ours because I provided those. Well, I did not have the amount of time that you had to prepare it. I only had two days. So, I I might be my some of my data might be wrong. The data that I found for Alton said 8893 as of 2024. I did not find uh more current information. It's still less It's still less than $110,000. Yes. And they have separate library and transit districts. So when you're talking about comparisons of apples to apples, let's make sure that we are

and they all and they also have a $79 million general fund budget. So you're talking about comparison to apples to apples. This analysis does provide that. Your analysis does not. I I I was comparing apples to apples as it relates to size. It's still data and all the data can be put together and people can make their own decision. That's right. But let's just make sure that what we provide is apples to apples if we're going to say that. I what I called app my definition of apples to apples is different. Yours is also different as well because you also include places that have city administrators. So that's also not apples to apples and

and it and it doesn't matter at the end of the day. It's data that people can use to make their own decisions. I'm not trying to sway anybody one way or another. I'm just providing data and providing insight for how I got to the decision I made. Thank you. If we're going to talk apple to apples, then it's only mayors. No city administrators, no none of their numbers belong in there or on the sheet or anywhere else. No, I'm saying if if No, what I'm saying is is if your position is apples to apples, it doesn't matter what city managers and administrators do. Are the mayors that do not have lead administrators or city managers.

So, and so I just want to be clear, Alderman Teague said she was comparing apples to apples. So what I'm saying to her is if she's saying that she wants to compare apples to apples, let's not. My suggestion is comparing apples to apples in terms of job performance. What is required of the position? That is apples to apples. Job job responsibilities. Yes, that's correct. Alderman Lewig, did you

Well, I mean, I just was going to say exactly what you said. I mean, we have to compare the the scope and responsibility. And when you look at what Mayor Williams does as mayor, the scope and responsibility is the same as a um you know a mayor and uh you know he does the job of all of these uh administrators, the administrator manager and the deputy manager for these positions. So that's why it's all put together as a total executive compensation in that uh fifth column. So we have to look at it that way. That's the only way to do apples to apples. So, so you ignore the lack of accountability measures on those individuals.

I am just looking at the total executive compensation and the total uh well I'm saying is part of the compensation is the fact that you can lose your job. You're paid because you're you're placing yourself at some level of risk.

Well, I think our city is putting ourselves at a level of risk if we do not compensate our mayor properly. If you want someone according to what has been paid in this community in recent years, we have an individual making $200,000. We have several individuals making more than $150,000. And I'm sure with the total compensation package, that number grows even more. So, so, you know, I haven't looked at the list that I asked about earlier, but I'm sure there's quite a few names. The mayor has indicated there's 22 people that make more than he does. So, there's a lot of people here making good money. And as I stated earlier, if the mayor if the council was able to hold the mayor to account the same way he's able to hold all of those other individuals to account, then 130 is not the number. The number is 175 to 200. But that's not what we have here. What we have here is someone who needs no qualifications to become a mayor. other than a high school diploma. I would suggest that a community that allows a $90 million budget to be turned over to someone without a basic skill set in finance, we've seen the wrecket created as a treasury. What if what if we have that expanded even further in the top role where nobody feels they can do anything about it? And so I you know, it is what it is. And I don't put this off on this mayor any more than any other mayors. the other mayors in those other communities, they may not take raises for the same reason some of ours didn't is they didn't want competition. They kept it intentionally low. Uh so I don't disagree that there's a risk for that. But you can use the same argument for why those other 25 communities decided to go to a professional they could terminate for poor performance. And perhaps that's why the numbers are what they are. And so I will just say there is no apples for apples if the

accountability level is not the same for those people. And believe me, I've been in these appointed positions. It's there's a difference. There's a distinct difference.

There's there's also no apples to apples. If you're kind of going going to compare a city administrator, which requires a certain level of education and credentiing to a popularity contest, um, which is an argument that I made in 2022, which is basically the same thing that Alderman Arns, I think, um, referenced because a city administrator certification typically requires a certified public manager designation. It's a it's an accredited field. It requires a certain level of education, usually a master's degree in public administration. A mayor's position does not require that. You could be bozo the clown or you could be Captain Kangaroo. And because those two people are very widely known and highly popular, hell, you could be Elmo, right? Be and and be uneducated, but because you're popular, end up in the mayor seat. And to your point, now you're in charge of a couple hundred million dollars. I'm not saying that our current mayor or any other mayor isn't um is not going to be a good steward or at least take the job seriously, but that does not mean that the next person who might get elected won't because they are it's based on popular opinion. And you know that most people that are voting are not here in this room to see the professionalism of a person who might already be in this room. So all they're basing their vote on is popularity. And if you're going to compare apples to apples and you're talking about, well, let's look at the executive level positions and what those positions are being paid. Let's also bear in mind that those positions require a certain education that a mayor's position does not require it. Now, it's good to have in a mayor, and I would hope most people

would want to vote for someone who's highly qualified with multiple degrees, but a mayor's position does not require any degree. Neither did the city administrator in the city administrator's position in Ranul when they hired Scott Eisenhower nor the city of Seavo or the village of Seavoy. But I believe that but I believe that when they hired Scott Eisenhower in Ranul they also required that he receive a certain certification by a specific time or otherwise he wasn't going to be in that position anymore. And I believe that he acquired that certification because he's still there. You're right. His compensation was $100,000 until he got that degree.

So it wasn't a it wasn't a contingent upon it was contingent upon a salary increase. I would just like to on one say say one thing I'm sorry. Can you bring move your microphone closer? I take offense to say that the population would vote on a po on a bozo. I have more I have more I use those names because people who knew who they were and that they were popular. Not because not because I'm saying a person is a clown. I'm what I'm saying is I have more respect for our population to vote on somebody that would hold it position and do a good job.

Any uh yes, Alderman. Switching gears a little bit. What's everybody think about alderman pay for no show? Alderman, I I apologize if we can. Is there anyone else that has anything to say on the mayoral before we go on and if so then then we'll come to that one particularly. Yes, ma'am.

I just want to draw this back specifically to Danville. I just want to draw this back to the fact that we have a a mayor alderman form of government. That's what we have right now. So, we need to focus on that and whether or not we should increase our mayor's salary. We just need to focus on that and not look at anything else. Um and and not worry about the administrative manager roles or the deputy manager role. We need to focus on what's at hand and in my opinion the increased mural salary is in the best interest of Danville. It's best interest of our citizens um because raising the salary um to a comparable rate of other public administrators within our city is fair and equitable. It's in my opinion that the current mayoral salary compensation is set below the scope and responsibility of the position and I think we can all agree to that um when we see what Mayor Williams has to do on a regular basis. So, one thing that I looked at here specifically in Danville is a review of the public information regarding Danville district 118 administrator salaries. I found that district 118 superintendent salary is 208,000 per year. Assistant superintendent salary is at or above 179,000 per year. DHS principal salary is at or above 143,000 for assistant associated uh or associated principal salaries is 188,000. Northridge Middle School principal salary is at or above 121,000 per year. DAC president's salary is at at or above 240,000 s uh per year. Um district 118 has four different general administrative or general supervisor positions that range between $140,000 and $120,000 a year. And I, you know, when when we look just specifically at Danville at those salaries, nobody objects to that to those roles. Increasing the mayoral salary will serve to encourage qualified candidates to put their hat in the ring because they will be compensated properly for their immense

responsibility as mayor overseeing core municipal services, infrastructure, budgeting, intergovernmental coordination, um management of personnel, and labor relations. How does it make sense that um the mayor, who is the head executive leader of the city of Danville, has 22 city employees that he oversees that are paid more than him? I it's my opinion that raising the mayor's salary to 130,000 in 2027 is more than appropriate and it's fair and equitable and it's in the city's best interest. Let's see.

I would say nobody objects to those salaries because those jobs require a certain level of education. Having a sister who is actually on the administrative track, she's now working I think on her third degree, her I'm sorry, her third advanced degree in order to qualify to even be in one of those roles. Um, so you talk about the amount of work required, uh, the amount of education required, and then the testing because even after you've gotten a degree, then you still got to go through and test and then qualify for those roles. And although those roles are they are very highly compensated and if you and yes, you're comparing executive function, but the education requirements again are not the same. And so the reason why nobody contests those is because the the the requirements, the certifications required, the education required because you have to have multiple degrees and multiple endorsements to be a principal. You have to most of the time be not all the time but many times be a PhD level to be a superintendent. Um and I not all the time because every superintendent is not PhD, but many of them are. Again, mayor does not require any of those things. Any other discussion on the mayoral component before we move to Alderman Mannic? All right, Alderman Arms.

There were two uh items that uh that I feel from an alder manic standpoint. And I'm not going to touch on the compensation of the alderman simply because what I requested when that discussion was taking place some years ago and I still believe it relevant today is that if state law allows that alderman should be able to wave their pay and assign it to benefits to their ward.

I did not want to pay taxes. I didn't want to be paid on this board. I've served on multiple boards 35 years. Never been paid a penny. I didn't want to be paid to be here. This was a privilege for me. That doesn't that doesn't judge anyone else. I'm in a position was able to do that. I would not do that for one of the two full-time positions. I can tell you that. The the reality is though is there should be a way for an alderman to wave their pay so that they don't have to pay taxes. Yes, I donate a lot of money back and I will be using it for other city government purposes. But the reality is is it would be nice to be able to just say no, I'm going to have that for uh award seven uh awards or ceremonies or a special project, something like that. That's one thing. The second thing is regarding the alderman's pay, there should be no pay if there is not regular attendance at meetings. And we can all discuss on what those ideas are. Initially, my ideas are three meetings a week. We hold four, so you got to get to three to get full pay month

a month. I'm sorry. Uh to get uh you know, so maybe there's a situation where it's half pay, full pay kind of thing, but there has to be accountability on the council. And if we expect our workers to come to work, we should expect ourselves to do the same. And so I just ask everybody to to give input to the administration to help them put this together. Uh those are my things is there should be a way and there should be some minimal illness exceptions. Uh and there are already some exceptions where you can participate remotely. Uh so that should certainly count if you're able to participate remotely. Uh but uh for for everyone else, it sounds like there's a pretty good consensus that everybody agrees with that now. So perhaps that won't be a problem. Those are the only things. I don't have a particular venue other than three meetings a month. Hit two committee meetings if you can if you have to miss a council meeting. But to me, you have to hit at least one council meeting a month to get any pay for that month in my opinion.

And and alderman I I think you'll recall when I was an alderman, I proposed that and unfortunately was board it was voted down and we've it's since been proposed uh reproposed by Alder and others scenarios on on how that was worked. it was voted down to PDM, but I I don't I don't disagree with you. However, I would say that it ought to be definitely based on council because committee is great, but that's just the recommending body that the council is actually where the decisions are made. So, if you're not here then in these council meetings, then you're not making decisions on behalf of the people you represent. That's where the real one lies. So that's why I propose a perdm per meeting where each assigned to or y'all are each on one committee and then you have two you have uh two city meetings that it be per meeting uh of of your assignments. Now, if you want to come, I love it when you guys come when you're on public works and you come to services or vice versa, that's great. But I'm saying the things that you're assigned to, I feel like it ought to be if if we were going to do that, it ought to be conditioned on that personally because city the city council is where the business is actually conducted.

Um, alderman, chairman Bor, doesn't the county do a predium roll call at the end of the meeting? And if you haven't been there the whole meeting, you don't get paid. you don't get credit in theory. In theory, but I I know a couple of individuals that get paid whether they whether they're or not.

You're supposed to call in and I've heard several of them that don't call in and we're still getting paid. And and going back to what Alderman Arin said about not wanting to get paid, I voted down every raise we've ever offered to an alderman. this election, this past election a year ago, that's the first time I've ever received a wage because or increase in 20ome years because of the 20 the language that women te and everybody put together to boost it to that 350 or whatever is a month. But I mean I know Alderman Streman myself I give everything I make away you know and then some. I mean I don't do it for the income you know as as most of you here. We do it because we truly care about this city.

That's right. And um you know um I I would never I'm sure had a little extra money but I never have once voted for a raise for the alderman. Um and still won't because I do it because you know community service, public service. But I think there has to be, you know, we had several alderman in my 20some years and coupe, you've got just as many that you'd never see him. You would never see him at a function. You would never see him at a meeting and um there wasn't a thing we could do about it.

No. Which doesn't make sense. It does. Back into the election deal and you you can't touch it. You know, we tried twice. I I would just offer a final thought. Regardless of whatever you do for the mayor's position, I do think we have to increase the treasurer's pos salary because if you want somebody to again, if you want somebody that's competent to run, you're not going to get a highly qualified you're going to rarely get a high highly qualified person to run for that position for the salary that we're paying when they can go and start at entry level and make close to that with far less scrutiny and responsibility. So, we're I mean, we're Chris, you're a a godsend to us. Yeah.

I mean, you really I mean, what you've done and what you've had to go through and to actually get a reconciliation report for January of this year, holy mackerel. That has and just sir,

mayor, just follow up on that. I I don't necessarily disagree as Alderman Lewig indicated that both may need to be done. And what I hope I communicated earlier is I will support that if we have voted on the referendum for the ballot initiative. So that's all I'm saying is administration find out what's it take for us to do that. Obviously if it's going to be on a referendum we won't know how that vote turns out. So we will need need to approve a salary regardless just like they did under a previous circumstance. So I'm I'm prepared to do that. So let's get that information. So, will this be brought back to committees then, mayor, or how are we going to know for followup on this?

So, I I guess what I would request is that if you all provide any feedback you have or suggestions or recommendations so that we can discuss them because if we can put it on the committee agendas for discussion um because otherwise we just have what's been proposed. Well, I I think really important is is what he finds out what what what we can and cannot do without that talking. Well, and I think research in the past has shown we as a governing body, we can put a referendum on on a ballot to vote on, right? Right. I think I think that's

Yeah, we got to verify. Yeah, we can we can put we could draft the or the referendum vote or proposition to put on the ballot. That's a referendum. What I stated was a recall vote. No, I've talked about but the mayor to change the treasure position. Yeah. As far as that is and that's what I'm saying is if we've had the vote and we've all agreed it's going on the referendum, then I'm fine with approving a salary increase in case the referendum fails. There's no problem with that. the other one not so much. You know, with the changes we've had over can't get rid of a president or a governor or anything like that without the changes we had over the few years, you don't know if a lot of that's changed

if you have to have a clerk or you have to have this or you know, but this is things I got to figure out because I'll limit it to you. Well, it's not like we have to do this by the end of this month or by the end of the next month. We have time. So there's time available to us to do the research so that we can actually have all of the information before it comes back for a vote because I believe we don't have to vote on this until September or October at the latest because it's 6 months prior to the election. The election is in April. Yeah. One thing brackets are available in September.

One thing that I would encourage you though is that as Alderman Arin said before that might the salaries may or may not be a deterrent for people running. So, I I that's one of the reasons why I think we need to figure it out sooner rather than later, you know. Um that'd be my only only thought. All right. Well, thanks everyone for your input. Um having said yes, Alderman Jones, that has nothing to do with this. Okay. But it's something that I want to announce. Yes, sir.

So, um I have been in a traumatic um incident over the past weekend, Good Friday. um that has traumatized me and my family and it's a ongoing investigation so I'm not going to speak on details of it but I just want to make people aware of the thing the evil that is still around and you know um in the world basically and uh just that uh it is uh great feeling to be here to be with you all and you know to still be alive and to um able to go home and see my family and yeah I just I'm very um happy to still be here and able to be an alderman in Danville and pretty much that's it but that's all I wanted to say.

Thank you Alderman Jones. We're glad we're glad you're here. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Having satisfied the agenda, I would entertain a motion to adjurnn. So moved. Second. It's been moved in multiple seconds. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Same sign. We are adjourned.