City Council - Regular Meeting

The June 1st City Council Meeting.

Please stand and join us in the pleasure of allegiance.

Congratulations 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.

We have a quorum that takes us to questions, comments, and announcements of a general nature.

We put this item on our agenda a few years ago to give people an opportunity to bring up anything not on this agenda, that they didn't want to wait till the end of the agenda, the end of the meeting. If there's anything anybody wants to say, either that's on the agenda or not on the agenda, this is the time to do it.

Eric's raising his hand.

Eric? Yeah, I'd like to make a comment.

Okay.

I just want to take time to publicly thank a lot of people that, frankly, saved my life while I was working in Canada. I finished up a long day of work and was preparing dinner when I suffered a severe stroke. Fortunately, my future son-in-law was with me, and he called 911. A few minutes later, I had seven volunteer paramedics at our cabin and two police officers. I initially didn't want to go to the hospital, but was told by the police either I go with them or I go to the ambulance to the hospital. I chose the ambulance. The paramedics and police officers were able to get me alive and get me to the hospital within 45 minutes. I always wanted to thank them for all of their efforts. The ER department at Dryden Hospital were able to work on me and give me medication to clear the blockage in my head. As soon as they got me stabilized, they sent me via a medical plane, which is one heck of a hope. Nobody ever has to go through this. a medical plane to a specialized hospital 45-minute flight away. I want to thank the plane staff for keeping me alive once again through that entire flight. I spent the next four and a half days in the hospital at Thunder Bay in their intensive care unit. I want to thank all the doctors and nurses in the intensive care unit at Thunder Bay and I appreciate all the great care that I received there. I then returned back to the United States. I had an appointment with my cardiologist last week, and after he read through all the medical documentation, he was amazed that I was still alive after suffering such a severe stroke. I feel back to normal now, but I still have a stress test, which I have tomorrow. and an appointment with my neurologist in Chicago. Especially, and I can't emphasize this enough, a great deal of thanks to my future son-in-law that saved my life. If it wasn't for him, I wouldn't be here tonight. Thank you, Cal Ritchie. I just want to say that if your paramedics ever tell you it's time to go to the hospital, just go. I just want to thank everyone that was involved in the process and I'm hoping now for a quick and complete recovery. Thank you.

Welcome back.

Thank you.

If you want to talk about the item H on the agenda regarding the Carmelites, you can do that when the item comes up.

Can I just make a general comment? I'm related.

Just come to the microphone. Just state your name.

My name's Heidi Ramirez, and I'm with the Carriageway West Homeowners Association. I JUST WANT TO EXPRESS A LEVEL OF CONCERN AND FRUSTRATION WITH THE PERMIT PROCESS. WE'VE HAD SOME ISSUES THAT HAVE COME UP IN OUR COMMUNITY REGARDING FENCES AND POSITIVELY POOLS AND SHEDS, AND ALL OF THESE ARE AGAINST OUR COVENANTS. I RECOGNIZE THAT THE CITY ISSUES THESE PERMITS, THEY CANNOT POLICE OUR COVENANTS, BUT WE NEED SOME KIND OF COORDINATION BETWEEN THE PERMITTING PROCESS AND THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. BECAUSE WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS THE FENCES ARE GOING UP AND WE HAVE NO IDEA THAT THEY'RE GOING UP. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE IF WE WOULD HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED AND WE COULD HAVE TALKED TO THE HOMEOWNERS IN SAYING THAT THESE ARE NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR COVENANTS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME WAY SOMEHOW WHERE THE PERMITS ARE ISSUED THAT THERE HAS TO BE A LETTER FROM THE HOMEWORKERS ASSOCIATION SAYING THAT THE REQUESTED USE IS APPROVED BY THE HOMEWORKERS ASSOCIATION. I KNOW THERE'S A PROPOSED STATE LEGISLATION REGARDING WHAT? AFFORDABILITY HOUSING WHERE THE STATE WILL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GRANT THESE ZONING CHANGES WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY. AND THIS IS SORT OF WHAT I FEEL IS HAPPENING TO OUR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, THAT THE CITY IS GRANTING THESE APPROVALS AND GOING ABOVE OR AROUND THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. SO I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW THIS CAN BE Resolved, I believe, an easy situation would be just before the permit can be granted, there has to be a letter from the Homeowners Association saying that they have reviewed and approved these modifications that are going through. And that's it.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I understand your concern. I appreciate that. Also, I spoke with Gary this morning, late. On the old permit system, we used to have, on paper, are you part of a homeowner's association? We recently switched over to what's electronically, electronic permits. On that electronic permit, there's one question. Is there a homeowner's association? and I did bring this with me this evening, the answer that the residents applied to was yes. Okay, so they were well aware of the actual covenants that you may have. For us, the department, to be able to police all the associations would be very, very difficult and timely. Number one is some associations are basically stagnant. There's no president. There's no contacts. Some are very well organized, Darien Club for one. I believe that Carriage Greens, Carriage Ways, they all, both of you have different associations, and there's others throughout town. As associations come, some go. They still might be recorded with DuPage County, but they're not active, is what I'm trying to say. So in this particular case, the homeowner did acknowledge that there was a homeowners association, so it was their responsibility to reach out to the homeowners association.

I understand that, but would it be possible with their permit application that they have to have a letter saying, we have run this through the homeowners association and it has been approved.

We have no way to know which association is active, which one is stagnant. I mean, the best thing I would recommend to you is that you guys send a letter out to all your residents or to all your members and let them know.

Well, my point is for their application for the permit, included with that application, there should be a letter from the homeowners association saying that this fence, pool, shed, whatever, has been reviewed and approved by the homeowners association, and therefore it can continue as a permit process. If that letter is not there, then the permit cannot be issued.

The simple answer is we really can't do that. Like I said, the best information that I can give you is for you, the president, to reach out to all your members and let them know that when a building permit is asked, you can...

I'm sorry.

We can have this conversation another time.

Okay. I'm missing it. I mean, to me, it's just... If the letter is not there, then you don't have to handle it.

There's, you know, we have a lot of permits.

I understand.

So to ask every resident that comes in or general contractor, if there's a, you know, we need something from the homeowners association. We don't have, many times, the homeowners association's contacts. So it's very difficult for us. Okay. If you're an association, the members of that association should know what their covenants are. I mean, they basically signed off on them when this home was bought two years ago and the residents knew that there was covenants in place.

Right, but this is not, it's just not that particular home. There's other instances. I understand.

Again, that's why I say a letter to all the members would be the most appropriate action at this point. Okay. And we can talk about it further. I'd be more than happy to give you my card. Gary has my number as well.

Okay, but I just think there should be some coordination because I believe the city does not like the state coming in and telling them how their area can be zoned. And it's basically, that's what's happening to us.

May I ask just a question? When, if somebody does something within, say, your, we'll take away the fence, you know, and the pool thing. If they do something to violate the rules of your homeowners association, typically, typically homeowners associations typically will send them a fine or send them a letter and they got to pay a fine. Wouldn't that system work in this case too? If somebody were to put a fence up, then they would get a fine from your homeowners association?

We have never had to do that in the past, but we have prevented other improvements from happening by talking with the people saying that these improvements are not allowed for the covenants.

Okay, thank you. Joe, I'm an officer of an association, not here in Darien, but someplace else, and we have those situations as well. And as Mr. Gombach is saying, though, there's no way we can police each individual. You might have 100 different associations in your community, and we have no idea what those rules are. But what we do, exactly as Joe Kenney just mentioned, if someone violates it, then we issue a fine to them to get them to respond to it, because it's a matter between your association and your owner. Your owner, when they purchase it, they sign off on this agreement. These are the bylaws, and we're aware of it. They are violating your bylaws.

I understand that, but it's once the shovel is in the ground or the fence is up or whatever, it's awfully hard to get that...

Well, if you don't enforce it the first time, then it's going to continue snowballing, and you're going to continue having the issue. Once you start enforcing it, people, I think, will get the idea that, okay, we can't do that.

I mean, obviously, you have a very active, fairly active association. My community, which is just down the street from you, I remember it being a big deal at our closing, signing a covenants. but we have a non-existent, we have a homeowner's covenants that we all sign, but there's no active structure. There's no homeowner's association. So if someone was going to do something like a fence that isn't allowed or chickens or something that is not allowed in the covenants, there's no enforcement because there's no homeowner's association. So it would be like a holdup then in the permitting process because yes, we have a homeowner's association and we have a covenants, but there's no enforcement in place. So I think it's just, we so need to remind, like you said, the issue that came up last week, like things were in process and it's hard to stop something once it's underway, but the homeowners need to be reminded that they signed a document and you probably have to now revisit your enforceability and your fees and your fines, I should say, so that people will think twice about violating it.

TO ME, THERE JUST SHOULD BE SOME KIND OF COORDINATION BETWEEN THE PERMITTING PROCESS AND THE COMMUNITY. I MEAN, TO ME, THERE CAN BE A SIMPLE FIX, I WOULD HOPE.

I'LL DEFINITELY PROMISE HEIDI AND THE REST OF THE, I WILL EXPLORE IT MORE WITH DAN, BECAUSE I MEAN, I THINK MY WARD FIVE HAS PROBABLY THE MOST HOMEOWNERS GROUPS. than any other one and to see if there's something that could be in place. But once again, like Dan mentioned, there's several homeowners groups that are basically non-existent, even though there's a covenants.

Could the wording on the permit be changed to the effect saying, has this improvement been run through the homeowners association and gotten their approval?

We can put that under, sure.

Yeah. Okay. That would help.

As a start.

And obviously when a permit's issued, it's supposed to be hung in the window. I mean, obviously then you're, you know, counting on someone noticing it. Right. But, you know, you would like to think that everyone would be a respectful neighbor and abide by the covenants. But I myself have had plenty of neighbors not.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? Okay, we'll move on to approval of the minutes. I'm looking for a motion to approve the May 18, 2026 minutes. Moved by Alderman Stampinato, seconded by Alderman Belzac. Any questions or comments regarding these minutes? And on the roll.

Stampinato. Aye. Belzac. Aye. Gustafson.

Abstain.

Kenney. Aye. Liganski. Abstain. Schauer. Aye. Sullivan. Aye. Five ayes and two abstentions.

Minutes have been approved. Takes us to receiving of communications. Do any of the aldermen have communications they'd like to share with the council? Alderman Sullivan.

Thank you. As indicated by Heidi Ramirez's talking, I did get emails and calls last week regarding a fence being installed over in the carriage green and it being in violation of their covenants. So we've had that dialogue. We had our city... code enforcement officer go out on site and try to troubleshoot and answer questions. And so obviously that line of communication needs to continue. I have received several emails, texts, and calls from residents primarily in the Terra Hill subdivision regarding the item on the agenda tonight. THE CARMELITES SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR 8825 ROBERT ROAD. AND A COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL COMMUNICATIONS REGARDING THE TWO FROM MUNICIPAL SERVICES. THERE WERE TWO REQUESTS FOR CHANGES OR EXCEPTIONS WITH THE CHICKENS AND FENCING. AND THEN ALSO A RESIDENT IN Carriage Greens, I had attended their homeowners association and spoke and had the opportunity to talk to many residents that evening. It was a lovely exchange. And there was a resident that had concerns with some neighbor who was doing some extensive landscaping work in their back and front yard and its impact on other neighbors in terms of drainage and rainwater. And so I looped some folks from City Hall in and hopefully they've, I've done some follow-up. I haven't heard back yet from the residents, but Hopefully, you know, municipal service has been able to. I know Chris Thron was going out to talk to them.

Anything else?

Ms. Sullivan, excuse me. We did meet with that resident and had a conversation with him.

Yes, I got a message from Matt Reinker. He was inquiring about the fact that in Oak Brook they have signs up on the medians down near 22nd Street that says it's unlawful for any pedestrian to sit, stand, or remain on a roadway. It's a $250 fine. I inquired and passed it on to Brian as well as Chief Thomas. And, you know, it was in reference to the fact that there's a lot of people that beg for on the mediums for on Cass Avenue. And basically it stated I pass on the information for the response from Chief Thomas. It can't really be enforced because then we'd have to pretty much eliminate any... any charitable groups like the Lions Club and so forth. But that information I do appreciate. I did pass it on to Matt in detail, and it's something that sounds great on paper, but in reality can't really be enforced unless it affects everybody.

Anyone else?

Alderman Kenney? And Mr. Gombach is going to talk about it a little bit ago and a little bit regarding Easy Fiber. Got a question from a resident regarding the telecommunications going into the yards. So Dan is going to give us an update on his time to speak. Thank you. Okay.

Takes us to the mayor's report. The only thing I'd like to mention is I continue to get e-mails from people complimenting us on our banners. In the 250th anniversary of our country, we decided to offer an opportunity for people to nominate someone from their family who was in the military or is currently in the military to drive through the city. There's 50 banners that are recognizing those individuals, and they were very nicely done. And I want to also thank Modell Funeral Home, who picked up the cost of all 50 of those banners. We will do this again next year. People have been asking, will you do it again next year? You're going to use the same banners. And I said, no, we're going to look for 50 new banners next year. So it is a wonderful program. We're very happy about it. And we're going to do it again. Then we move to our city clerk's report. Joanne? No report this evening, Mayor.

Our city administrator's report.

No report, Mayor. Thank you. Takes us to the department head. Information, questions. Any questions for... Chief Thomas or for Mr. Gombach? Chief Thomas, we'll let you go first. I know Dan has a presentation to make.

I have nothing.

Thank you, Mayor Marquez. This evening, I'd like to introduce Alan Rott. He's the Easy Fiber Government Affairs Director. This evening, he will be presenting a short video PowerPoint in respect to who Easy Fiber is, what do they do. Basically, in a nutshell, it's another fiber company. This fiber company was vetted through the municipal services earlier this year, January, February. And this is the first time now that Easy Fiber will be presenting a presentation. And the agreement, the final agreement, is also within the agenda this evening. One thing to note, we have right now three... franchises or fabric companies in town. One is Metronet, which is still active. They're approximately 65 to 70 percent completed with a build-out. Now the final build-out Unfortunately, they've encountered some concerns in timing processes with the county of DuPage. That means that a lot of their main arterial routes need to go through Plainfield Road, Cass Avenue, 75th Street. And their DuPage County process for permitting takes a while, along with specific items they always look for. So at best, number one, Metronet, I don't think anybody is going to see it until September. I should take that back. There are certain subdivisions that are adjacent to the hub do have the opportunity at this point to hook on to Metronet. Lumos, on the other hand, basically is not moving forward as far as we know at this point. We've tried several emails, contacts in respect to them if they're still going to be building out in Darien. And it's been silent. I can't tell you that Lumos did do parts of Darien and mostly in Alderman Gufferson's ward, Florence, and a couple other streets because they are in Downers Grove. I mentioned that pull out of Donner's Grove. Again, it's all part of this whole merger with T-Mobile. So this evening, Easy Fiber is here. They haven't merged with anybody yet that I know of.

Not yet.

So with that said, the biggest exception here is that they are going to be in the front of what we refer to as right-of-ways slash parkways. So with that said, I'd like to turn it over to Alan for presentation.

Thank you, Dan. Appreciate it. Mayor, honorable members of the council, I appreciate your time here this evening. My name is Alan Roth, as Dan mentioned. I'm a director of government affairs with Easy Fiber. So the reason why I'm here today is, as you probably heard two other times from Metronet, is Lumos, is we're looking to invest in the city, right? We go into communities where we typically don't have a name, we have zero network, and we come in and we offer residents a choice for services, a choice that they typically don't have at their door. And what I mean by that is typically there's a cable provider, there's a phone company, but they never actually compete with each other. So simply you're kind of stuck with one option. And so this is where EZ comes in is we offer 100% fiber services directly to residents to their home. Again, 100% fiber. I'll give you some items that really separates EZ from other fiber providers out there as well as other companies that are currently in your area. I totally realize we're a new company, we're a new name, so I'll touch on just a little bit of history of who Easy Fiber is. I don't want to belabor that at all. I just want to get really to the construction process, which is what we're here for, and the services themselves. A little bit about EZ is we actually didn't start off as a resident provider. We started off providing services to governments, hospitals, and schools. This actually continued from 1986 until around 2021 when COVID hit. And a lot of those customers that we provided services to, their businesses shut down. And the same level of service that they were getting from us at their job, They weren't receiving that same level of services at home and being able to continue the services that they need to do to operate. And so this is what's driving a lot of investment that you're seeing today is COVID really threw a wrench in our infrastructure and telecommunications. Our living rooms became our doctor's offices, schools offices, our telecommute offices. And what it did, it really put a strain on our internet services, as you probably experienced at a time. And sometimes you may even experience when you go home and try to watch your favorite show and you're stuck with buffering. With EZ, we want to change all of that. We're doing 100% fiber directly to your house, and we have one promise, and that's to be different. We have no contracts, no data caps, no hidden fees. The price you sign up for today is the price you pay for life. The equipment is included, as well as the installation. There's no fills, no fees. What you see is what you get. The slowest speed that we're currently offering is two gig internet. We offer all the way up to eight gig. We currently offer services in six states. This kind of shows you, hey, we're expanding, and we have the operations to deliver on that. But the biggest thing that I want to highlight is even though we are a national company, this is a local team delivering on this. We're out at Elk Grove. This is local construction, local folks, and there's local accountability. When you're calling somebody, you're calling somebody local, you're calling your neighbor, most likely that's going to be me picking up and responding to your emails and phone calls. So we just want you to know that. And not only that, you don't have to take my word for it. You can see what the expert's rate is for as well as our customers. And that's because, again, our goal is to simply just be different. We want to provide services that customers can rely on, pricing they can budget for, and services that are reliable because no one really knows about the internet until it doesn't work. And so our network is built on what we call carrier grade. It's basically the highest kind of level of fiber in our industry. And that's because, again, we grew up, our business was made off of servicing governments, hospitals, and education institutions. Some of the benefits that come with having a new fiber provider, of course, is the choice. But you also get reliability. You get future-proof services for the community. And you get competition. More companies in the community forces everyone to step their game up. Better prices, better speeds, and of course, better service. One of the biggest things I like to point out is future proof. When fiber's in the ground, we don't have to dig it up anymore. The only thing that changes are electronics on each side of that that power that. So what's 8 gig today can easily scale to 10, 20 gigs, and so on. Now all of that is kind of the end result. To get there, it's the deployment. What we like to do is we break this up into smaller projects and what we consider FDAs or fiber distribution areas. Those are those three different colors you see there. We then break a city up into smaller areas called segments, and those are all those different shapes you see. It's called polygons or segments. Think of it like a little neighborhood. And it's basically, it's around 200 to 300 homes, and that's how we're going to submit a permit. We're going to send you a communication. We're going to build. We're going to activate your services. And then we're going to move on. And so what I mean by that is each one of those little segments of polygons, it's going to take us around 30 days to move through that. And so what that means is for each one of your constituents, they're probably going to see us in front of their house maybe for one day. maybe two, and they may see us again to brighten up the area with some grass seed or some new sod. And that's one of the biggest things that I'll touch on too, as well as the restoration. Our plan for Darien is a plan to service the entire city is that yellow is actually city limits. And these are the exact same segments for Darien and how we're going to split that up. So those will be the permit areas, those will be the communication areas, construction areas, and so on. And then we also have where we're going to be starting there is that DR 101 there. But most importantly, the communication part of that. Construction is disruptive. No way around it. I don't like to sugarcoat it at all. Not only is construction disruptive, it's underground construction. So one of the biggest things that we've learned is communication, communication, communication. It's the key part of it. Be transparent, be visible. And I always like to sum this up into three things. Our goal with any project here is to be visible, be accountable, be respectful. Know who we are, know what we're doing, and if we ever mess up, know who to call and where to get a hold of us from. So throughout this project, we'll send out numerous communications. In fact, residents will see a minimum of three communications. Some residents may even receive up to six communications. And again, that's just to be accountable, transparent, and visible to the community. And each one of those has three types of communication for us, phone number, email, QR code. Again, we want to be accountable to any resident's concerns. What can residents in the community expect to see? We have three type of facilities at MAC. One is a fiber handhold. This is kind of a bigger box at the end of a neighborhood. This is where kind of everything splices out, comes together in one area. What residents will see kind of every other house is this fiber access point we refer to in the industry as a flower pot. Little green circle box, kind of looks like a water shutoff valve, gas shutoff valve, and in the grass there, blends in pretty seamlessly. And then last but not least is this cabinets, similar to like what you see for traffic lights or traffic signal box. Now back to the real goal here, the communication. On all that, this is what you'll see. You have our customer support number, our construction support number, our email. Your residents call in, email us. We want to have somebody call back to them within 24 hours and have that issue resolved within that week. In fact, we're able to track this, so once we start construction, I'll actually schedule construction update meetings with you, and I'll show you how many calls we received, how long it took us to resolve those, and what actually was the reason for the call. So again, I want to be transparent, I want to be visible, and I want to be accountable to you and to the community. This is our leadership contact information. Again, we want to be accountable to the community there. If there's one thing I always say if you could take away from this is we're not just here to provide services to the community. We're here to be a part of them. We take an active approach to be coming into a community where we're not just looking to come in, construct, and build a fiber network. We actually come in and take an in-kind approach to that. So we're active in a lot of events throughout communities that we're currently constructing in, and we'll continue to grow that local approach here as we continue to grow locally. Otherwise, that's all I have. I appreciate any questions that you have for me. Yeah.

Several areas have been done by MetroNet already. You start doing your work within the city of Durian. You go where MetroNet is not and start there and then do the MetroNet areas later on? Correct.

Okay. How many cabinets, which are more intrusive, obviously, than the other two things, are there going to be in the city of Darien?

Potentially up to two, but based on engineering. So right now we're in what we call high-level design. It's basically saying, hey, this is where we want the fiber to go in order to make this work. We need to put our cabinets here. Once we actually get the city's GIS plans on saying, hey, this is where MetroNet's current facilities are, this is where our water and gas is, we'll adjust that in what we call low level design. And so then that will actually be GIS correct or visually correct and say, hey, we're on this side of the street to make sure that we avoid any instances like that.

So you obviously will know where the Metronet fibers are at already.

Correct. Yeah. They typically will turn over their as-builts to like a location.

Because I know like obviously Metronet was rear yard, but like in my situation, a lot of It was side yard to get to the rear yard, which the side yard almost becomes the front yard. So do you avoid then dropping flower pots and the other grids near those so that it's not like someone's lawn is just full of a lot of plastic now?

Yeah, we'll try to avoid double dipping in those areas just because of the construction that does take place. So typically we want to focus on those areas that have been built by Metronet yet, but typically we do want to go back and service those residents so they all have the opportunity to become an easy customer.

Right, and I know Metronet did postcards, then they did little flags in people's yards. You'll be doing letters and all that communication so that people will know when you're arriving?

Yep, we actually send out three postcards.

Because a lot of people have sprinkler systems and things like that that need to be marked and avoided, and if something's broken or damaged, then your crew will be fixing it?

Correct, yep.

So you had Illinois highlighted as a state you're in. How many town cities in Illinois are you in? Because the whole state was large.

I hopefully get to that point. We currently have agreements in, oh my goodness, it's... worth of 50 agreements now with communities, and then we're currently actively constructing in multiple communities right now throughout the state of Illinois.

Because my ward, like Dan referred to, the homes are done, but we have no service because of these issues on Cass and Plainfield to actually give us the service.

Yeah.

So how do you think you're going to be any different? I mean, how many years have we been with MetroNet now, Dan? process has been at least... Four years, I bet?

Three years? Three years for sure. Maybe we were...

I think three years, because I've only been on the council.

Yeah, we've been negotiating with them prior to that, so I'm claiming that as well, yes.

So, you know, in my ward, you know, yards were dug up fairly well. It went pretty smooth, I have to admit. But now, there's no service because of these issues with the county on Cass and Plainfield, so people are asking me, you know, when are we going to have it? And I'm like, I don't know. So, and then... I mean, my yard still has a problem because Metronet cut Xfinity cable with Comcast, and I still have a cable above ground servicing homes. And I think they're still doing this. Well, you know, Metronet did it, but it's Xfinity's line. And so, I mean, I know it's all about competition, free market. You have to write a way to do this. But the practicality sometimes is these things sound great, but then you're three years into it and only 65% of the town has service. And here we go again, you know, so.

Yeah, definitely. Our goal is to have customer service activated. So once we go down their area or down their block, we want to have services activated within 60 to 90 days after that. I guess there's no way for me to actually guarantee that. It's more about I can show you our work. One of the Place I would highlight is Naperville. It's been a great community. We know other providers are also down there building. And we hear the same concerns from residents is, hey, you guys are the only ones that kind of been able to activate services here. What kind of happened? Can't say we have a magic, but our engineers and construction crews are very good. What is the timeframe for 100% completion, Darian? It's really about capacity. So if Dan's team can handle us bringing in multiple crews and teams to be able to work that, we can get it done very quickly. So each one of those segments is 30 days. I believe for Darien, we're looking around like 20 segments. So basically just multiplying that out. Two years. Yeah.

Yeah.

If I'm not mistaken, you haven't submitted permits to the county yet for us, correct? Correct. So the county, as I stated earlier, is your big animal that's basically going to take a lot of time. So I would add two months, two to three months on that permitting process.

Any other questions for Alan? Okay, we're moving on. We have our treasuries court. We have two warrants tonight, our treasurer quorum.

Thank you, Mayor. I'm requesting council's approval of warrant number 252627 in the amount of $80,703.34 from the listed funds. Motion to approve.

Alderman Sullivan, seconded by Alderman Schauer. Again, any questions or comments? Roll.

Sullivan. Aye. Schauer. Aye. Stampinato. Aye. Belzac. Aye. Kenney. Aye. Liganski. Aye. Gustafson. Aye. Seven ayes.

The warrant's been approved. 26-2703, Mike. Requesting council's approval of warrant number 26-2703 in the amount of $112,090.67 from elicited funds.

Payroll for the period ended May 14th in the amount of $343,842.56. Total will be approved $455,933.23. Motion to approve. Alderman Sampanato, seconded by Alderman Belzac. And again, questions or comments?

Moving on to the roll.

Stampinato. Aye. Belzac. Aye. Gustafson. Aye. Sullivan. Aye. Kenney. Aye. Schauer. Aye. Liganski. Aye. Seven ayes.

The board has been approved. Takes a standing committee report. So any of the chairs have reports to provide the council. Alderman Belzac.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The next municipal services committee meeting will be held on Monday, June the 22nd at 6 p.m. in council chambers. Thank you. Alderman Sullivan.

Thank you, Mayor. The administrative finance meeting happened tonight, and our next meeting is scheduled for Monday, July 6th. And if that meeting does not happen, it'll be then the following first Monday of August, August 3rd.

Thank you. Alderman Kenney. Thanks, Ms. Mayor. The next police committee meeting will meet on Monday. June 15th at 6 p.m. across the parking lot in the police training room. And I've been told by Chief we will have items on the agenda that evening.

Thank you. Okay, we move to questions and comments agenda related. These are questions you might have regarding an item on our agenda. And again, anything that's under new business, you will have an opportunity to speak during that time as well. Anybody want to come forward? Okay, if not, we move to old business. There being no old business, we move to the consent agenda. Please bear with me. Item A, motion approving to extend a contract with Compass Minerals America Incorporated to purchase a rock salt in an amount not to exceed $196,825.84. Item B, motion authorizing the Mayor to execute an intergovernmental agreement with Senator Cass School District 66 for the reimbursement of rock salt through the city's 2026-2027 rock salt agreement. Item C, motion authorizing the Mayor to execute an intergovernmental agreement with the Darien Park District for the reimbursement of rock salt through the city's 2026-2027 rock program. Item D, motion authorizing the private property stormwater management assistance projects in the Farmedale Drive and Sawyer Drive and Wildwood Court Public Works storm sewer projects in an amount not to exceed $142,193. Item E, motion accepting a quote from National Wash Authority LLC for the pressure washing services for the city's potable water tanks at a cost not to exceed $26,700. Item F, motion accepting a proposal from Precision Pavement Marketing Incorporated with a proportion of prices and an amount not to exceed $16,000 for the 2026 road striping program. Item G, Motion accepting a drainage easement from the following properties, 6714 Tennessee Avenue, pin number 0922403-014, and 6718 Tennessee Avenue, pin 092243015. Item H, ordinance authorizing the sale of personal property owned by the City of Durand, Item I, motion accepting the expenditure of cannabis funds to uplift a Dodge Durango using emergency vehicle tech EVT in an amount not to exceed $23,000. Item J, an ordinance amending various sections of Title III business regulations, Chapter 8, massage businesses and services of the city of Darien City Code. Item K, an ordinance approving a master license agreement with Easy Fiber Texas LLC for the use of the city's right-of-ways for the installation, operation, and maintenance of telecommunication facilities. Motion to approve. Alderman Balzac, seconded by Alderman Kenney, and the roll.

BELZAC? AYE. KENNY? AYE. SULLIVAN? AYE. GUSTIFSON? AYE. LEGANSKI? AYE. SHOWER? AYE. STAMPANADO? AYE. 7 AYES.

THE CONCEPT AGENDA HAS BEEN APPROVED. IT TAKES US TO NEW BUSINESS. THE FIRST ITEM UNDER NEW BUSINESS IS THE FORMER ITEM H, AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE FOR A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION, RECTORY SLASH RESIDENCE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DURIAN CITY DURIAN ZONING ORDINANCE, PZC, 26-7, Society of Mount Carmel 8825 Robert Road. Motion to approve. Alderman Belzac, seconded by Alderman Sampanato. Discussion? Now we're open for comments. Anyone in the audience like to make a comment?

Good evening, my name is Brian Ngozi and I live in Terra Hill. Lived there for 29 years, raised my children there, sent them to District 63, Concord, Hess, Hinsdale South, graduated, all members of our community and doing well. I'm speaking as a member of the community because I'm against this special use. This is my third time on this issue. Once before the Planning and Zoning Committee, which did not approve it. Once before the Municipal Services Committee, which did recommend it to the council. I'm glad this was taken off the consent agenda because this is not an item that has no dispute, it does. And in fact, every time I spoke and the other people who spoke on this issue, overwhelmingly, with the exception of the applicant, were against this use. And we're very protective of our neighborhood It's an R2 zoning, and the use is for single family. That's the use that we've had for probably 40 years since this property was brought in by, I believe it was Gallagher and Henry, and brought into the city as a planned unit development as R2. This is not the planned, the special use is not an authorized use here. It's a special use. It means you've got to have reasons for it. There are no reasons to put this use in this spot. Some of the things that I read, and John Murphy, your attorney, who advocates very well, has put together a memo. I read his memo, and... Couple things I want to point out. This is not a use that is necessary at this point. You have an organization that has a 40 acre campus, two miles from this house. You have a house that is one of the most expensive houses in the community. $1.2 million it sold for. The applicants acknowledged that they spent $200,000 renovating this, all while they did not take advantage of the land that they have that is already tax-exempt. the building on that property, which they said they hadn't looked into as far as renovating that everybody refers to as the white house. Now to say that this tax impact, the impact of this property coming off the tax roll is, uh, infinitesimally small, I think is a gross understatement. As I said, I sent my kids to District 63. This house would pay $10,000 in taxes for that school. school district. It would also pay another $6,000 to the high school district. Now everybody in government talks about stakeholders. I don't believe anybody looked and talked to the stakeholders in the school districts about what impact this would have. Granted, that $16,000 may not be significant in their total budget, but it is a significant amount for a house of this type anywhere in Derry. The other thing I'd like to focus on in whether you will grant a special use is you have to determine whether the use will not diminish or impair property values. At the last meeting, the neighbor of this house indicated that he believed it would impact it, and he said he would come back and look at this, and if it does impact his values, he would be looking for compensation from somebody. There's no study as to what this will do. This use is not necessary. It is not related to the campus. It is so far remote. It has no legitimate basis for it. This has nothing to do with the people that want to use it. If I wanted to open up an office in my house as an attorney or as an accountant or as an engineer or an architect, I could only do that if I was in one of three places. Plainfield Road, Cass, and 83. Now we're saying, well, this use, which has nothing to do with this community, is going to be given the special use off of Oldfield Road in an area of R2 housing. I see no reason to approve this. I'm urging you to turn it down.

Good evening, council members, Mr. Mayor. I'm Rich Hauser. I'm at 2221 Dunmore Drive. I had also attended the meetings that the motion attended. And frankly, I find the process a bit confusing in terms of what's actually getting approved. And now I finally see on the agenda the actual ordinance that's being approved, and it's deficient. Because if you go ahead and approve this, it only contains two of the conditions that that we've asked for, at least to help protect the neighborhood, assuming you're going to go forward. I see the condition about if a property gets alienated, it won't run with the land, and that it has missing the provisions that were in the petitioner's document dated May 21st. They said the home will not be used for ministerial purposes and will not be open to the public for ministerial activities. That should be added to any ordinance because they're agreeing to this. They're saying, we'll do this. And the second thing is the home will be used exclusively for residential purposes. My concern is, as drafted, it looks like it's a rectory, and it's gonna be open for a rectory for people to conduct activities there. Two years from now, three years from now, their needs change. I don't deny petitioners might have the best intentions and say, we're not gonna do this, but I'd like it to be in the ordinance. If you're gonna approve this, to make it very clear that these are the restrictions that they agreed to in submitting their petition, we should see those in the ordinance as well, because right now, it only provides that the issue on the alienation and that the home will be maintained as a six-bedroom home with no more than six occupants. So where are the other restrictions? And I do concur with Mr. Nogosian. This is kind of a strange thing to have a rectory in a residential neighborhood that's more than two miles away. It doesn't seem to be directly connected with a church right across the street where the religious people are conducting activities for the church. This is really, to me, it's just a residence. And if it's going to be just used as a residence, then let's make it very clear that that's what it is and it doesn't morph into a rectory with active activities and people coming and going and all sorts of other things going on that doesn't fit the character of the neighborhood. Thank you.

Yes, good evening, Mr. Mayor and board members. Michael Gerrigan, the attorney for the petitioner in 2021 Midwest Road, for the record. I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to have the opportunity to present this special use. And I just want to reiterate that we want to be good neighbors. And based on that fact, as outlined in the ordinance and what's also on the record, we are willing to make sure that this property is solely used for residential and that there will be a sunset clause. And when the property is sold, to any special use with terminate. So we want to be sensitive. to the community, more importantly, sensitive to the neighbors. There will be no, as we reflected in my letter of the 21st, there will be no ministerial use for this property, no type of meetings, no gatherings. That's clearly incorporated in our intent and the correspondence which I forwarded, which is also incorporated in the minutes. So with that, I want to be very brief. If you have any questions, I have our whole team from the petitioner here this evening. Thank you. Thank you.

Anyone else?

Yeah, I got to say something. As a resident of South Terre Hill, if you allow the church or this church, okay, to build a rectory, because that's basically what it is, what's going to stop other churches from wanting to come in and do the same thing? So then all of a sudden you have these housing developments that are rectories. What's gonna stop that? Where's the endpoint? You gotta think about how it's gonna affect us that have to live there, right? A short Google search before I came here, the Catholic Church has 453 priests that they've been moving around to different places since 2023. They don't give up the information very easily. You can make your own assumptions as to why they're moving them around. It's not good for us. It's not good for us as parents. We don't want it. I don't know anybody that does want it, except for the gentleman that just got done talking. So keep that in mind.

Anyone else? Council members, quick comments from the council?

If anyone else wants to speak, I have something to say, but I was going to let other people speak first.

I can't, but nobody's coming forward, so go ahead, Mary.

Okay. Well, full disclosure, I am a resident of Terra Hill. I live right down the block. I'm your alderwoman. I'm also a member of the Catholic Church and a member of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, which has nothing to do with my decisions tonight, but I have talked to many residents. Initially, there was very little that was brought forth, but then once the notice went up, lots of people were asking questions. We have had people question the process, the communication, but... You know, I was unable to attend planning and zoning because many of us were in Springfield that day, but I did attend municipal services, and all the other, for the most part, aldermen were there too. We have had many communications through Brian Murphy, our city planner, and the petitioner trying to make modifications to the request. As Attorney Gerrigan had said, he had put a letter together that was shared ahead of the municipal services meeting that definitely has more detail, more specific language that I would like to see amended and put into the ordinance if the ordinance is going to be voted upon tonight so that it can be very specific. It is the intent of the petitioner to make this strictly a residence. I know growing up in a community in the Chicago area, a rectory was not only a residence but a place of business where lots of activity happened, gatherings happened. The petitioner has stressed that that would not be the case at this residence, similar to what happens on Winterberry, which is another priest residence that's been in our community for over 30 years. But I want that spelled out. I want that language in the ordinance so that if something was to change, we could refer back to the ordinance and have some methodology of enforcing it, as well as the no ministerial services, that it's strictly... a home for clergy. And the petitioner also requested three to four clergy. I know at Municipal Services, they created the number of six because of the number of bedrooms in the home, even though four of the bedrooms are en suite. I'd like to see us go back to the number at the maximum of four because that's what the petitioner requested instead of making it more than has been requested.

Anyone else have comments? Alderman Cunning?

So, like Alderman Sullivan, I'm also a parishioner of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. I'm also a real estate agent, a realtor that understands fair housing laws and what the case may be. I do understand... setting a precedence for other groups possibly coming into a community into a community, and I understand that. But I also understand, like I said, there are fair housing laws to go into place. I understand that if somebody were one of the things that came up. Regarding to the exemption of the taxes that. The school district would lose that dollar amount. And we always hear, what if, if this happens or if this happens or if this happens? Well, what if the United States military veteran was hurt and he was exempt from paying taxes? He or she. You wouldn't be able to stop it there. I agree with Alderman Sullivan. There's still zoning in place. There's still rules to go in place with it. If it takes removing the word rectory from the ordinance, then I'm going to go. But I've got more reasons to vote yes on this than I do no.

Attorney Murphy, one gentleman brought up something you referenced in a document with regard to the loss of $24,000 in taxes, and you used the word infinitesimal impact. And he stated that tonight. I'd like you to explain why you wrote that and how you arrived at that conclusion.

and I've known for 30 plus years. Very good lawyer and a better person. But you may recall, I should probably say something full disclosure, especially with Alderman McKenney here. I'm not a member of Mount Carmel Parish, but I'm a proud graduate of Mount Carmel High School at 6410 South Dante. So I know a little bit about the community and the issues.

And I wasn't going to throw you under the bus on that one.

Let me, Alderman, you may recall this discussion about property tax impact in the context of Chestnut Court when we were talking about the TIF and the impact of the TIF. The local government's levy amounts, whether it's $5 million, $10 million, the number doesn't matter. So that levy gets applied against the whole tax base. Now, if one single home out of that entire tax base gets exempted, fully exempted or partially exempted because somebody turns 65, they get a senior exemption or whatever, or they are entitled to it by virtue of being not-for-profit, That will not affect the amount of the levy. It will not at all affect the amount of money that the school districts, the city, all of the governmental bodies receive. Why? Because that is just one tiny little part of a lot of moving parts that constitutes our property tax structure. So for every house that gets exempted, Other houses increase in value. New property comes on the tax rolls, the townhome project on Plainfield Road. So in a thriving community like our community where property values generally are stable or rising, local governments, if they levy an amount, they will receive that amount, guaranteed. And when I use the term infinitesimal, you can see that one house over an entire tax base that happens to get exempted cannot even be measured, in my opinion. So there won't be any loss to any governmental bodies.

Attorney Murphy, at the municipal services meeting, a speaker indicated that by that particular residence, being tax-exempt that the other residents would be having to make up the difference. Could you explain that a little bit more?

Well, that's why I used the term infinitesimal. That, if that were the only property where there would be activity, that would mean that the pie that constitutes everybody within that taxing district or school district would shrink by a tiny little smidgen. But that's not the reality, because for the most part, other property values rise. And it won't be felt at all. Now, there's a couple policy matters here that I pointed out earlier. By making religious institutions, and that's a very broad special use. I know you've all read it in the zoning ordinance. That's a very broad, allowable special use that references religious institutions. That presupposes, as a matter of prior legislative judgment by the council when the council adopted the zoning ordinance, that this property would likely be exempted. So it's part and parcel of the same thing. But there is no risk there. that allowing this allowable special use to do what the owners have the right to do, which is to seek an exemption from property taxes, will impact the vitality of the schools or the amount of a homeowner's tax bill. It's just one of thousands of pieces of property and one of tens of thousands of dynamics within a taxing district.

Now, is it possible with the additional language that could be amended into the ordinance that was indicated earlier?

First of all, does anybody have any questions on the property tax business? Let's take a look at the ordinance. Ordinarily, when we put together a special use ordinance that says you are allowed to do A, B, and C... you don't put in that same ordinance, but you're not allowed to do D through Z. Follow? The special use granted is specifically for rectory slash private residence. To respond to Alderman Kenney's point, we view that language as being synonymous. because after all, what a rectory is is a place where the priests who served that parish or that area reside. So it's not two separate uses, it's one use. And so it's limited to a private residence for the religious people. That means that if something were to happen selling things, homeless shelter, you name it, that would be a violation of special use. And that would become an ordinance enforcement matter, no different than any other ordinance enforcement matter.

So if they started doing things beyond just...

a residence, they would be in violation. They'd be in violations, and we'd do an ordinance enforcement procedure no different than any other property that's in violation of zoning restrictions.

So what you're saying, John, is we don't need to add anything to the ordinance. It's very specific.

Yes, in my opinion, no. And of course, we've got a very strong record, but the use of the property as rectory slash private residence... in my mind, and as we drafted it, that sets forth the specific limitations that could not, if they started to sell things out of that property, they'd be violating the ordinance, they'd be violating the conditions of the special use.

I know there are several people brought up, you know, you can say residents, but I know the intent of the petitioner is this is a permanent residence, like people's IDs and mail will come there. But several residents have expressed concerns of it being more transient because of the Carmelite campus is obviously a very big area where you've got the shrine, you've got the retreat center, and a lot of visitors come. And I think the pattern at the Winterberry House has been the priests move in there and they stay for an extensive period of time. And if their health dictates that they no longer can be independent, then they go on to St. Patrick's in Naperville where they can get more hands-on care. So, I mean... Is there a way to be more, you know, I know residents can kind of be a very broad term that this is meant to be the permanent residents of these four to six individuals.

Well, of course, those individuals may change.

No, no. Understand my own children change.

And but. if that were to evolve into something where people would transient live for a week, two weeks, period of time, that would be a violation because it's not a rectory by its terms means it's a private residence of somebody affiliated with the religious institution.

So you're saying that specific language doesn't have to be in the ordinance because it's understood already in the ordinance under the category of rectory residence? Yes.

That, that, you know no transient activity would be allowed no retail sales of religious memorabilia, whatever you call it, would be allowed. You cannot put in an approval ordinance that's restricted to one thing, everything that it's not.

I think from what I heard from the resident was they're not having retreats there. They're not having meetings there. Now, I know this need has come up because what we know is the White House, they're moving from that White House into this residence. So I think for the record, everybody needs to know This need has come up because of, I guess, expensive repairs in the White House, so they have a need to have to move. And I would assume, or I guess I never should say that word, but what's going on in that White House is just a residence. They're not having meetings there. They're not having retreats there. So in my mind, what's going to change is really not that much from what's going on currently in our community, correct? That's correct.

And all of those activities, retreats, periodic get-together, things of that nature. It's not within the scope of the private residents.

And then I know it came up at the last meeting that I attended, like Alderman, Alderman, Alderman Sullivan said we ran out of planning zoning because we were down in Springfield addressing that Senate Bill 4060, which is very scary. Like the one resident brought up where the state's going to dictate and I can have a right to really say a whole lot, is I know at that meeting it did come up to the petitioner, well, why don't you buy the house that's right there on Bailey that's adjacent to the property? And I was told at that meeting, and I think it was made clear that anybody needs to know, even on the record and for all residents to know, that that home is not for sale. It's just that there's a small lot for sale there, correct, Dan? Correct.

Yes, it's a subdivision, yes.

That home itself is not for sale. It's a lot.

It's part of a bigger development that was approved years ago and obviously is not sold yet. It's a flag lot, basically.

Because I know that came up at the meeting, like, well, why are we buying here when there's a resident right next door to the property? Okay.

Alderman Belzac, your committee put an upper limit of six. Do you guys have a rationale for that? Six bedrooms.

Six bedrooms. Okay. I mean, based on the representations of the petitioner, There were going to be individual bedrooms for people that could stay there, and it would seem silly to say four when there was a six-bedroom house. I don't have any problem with that. Six people could live there. If a family bought it, there would be six people living in six bedrooms. What difference does it make whether it's a rectory or a family at that point?

Mr. O'Connell, did you have something to add? No, I agree with Tom. That's exactly why we moved it to six, because of the amount of bedrooms there.

But if the petitioner is only asking for up to four, why wouldn't we just have it be What the petitioner requested.

I would prefer you go with what municipal services recommend. I mean, you may only have four that ever lived there, but you may have another priest who retires.

But it's like we're making the decision, the petitioner requested. It's like, why don't we go along with what the petitioner put down in the maximum of four?

What if they have a need to put another retired priest?

And they should have asked for more, but they didn't.

Or they'll have to come back and then we'll have to go through the same process to add one person. So we kind of talked about that very issue and decided that if there's six bedrooms to start with, that would be the limit, so.

And if they go beyond six, you can't go higher than that.

Right, right.

Any other questions for Attorney Murphy?

Any questions? I want to make sure everybody understands the additional restriction about not running with the land. It's a very important one. We spoke about this at the Municipal Services Committee. Ordinarily, in zoning, a special use runs with the land. The example I gave at the committee meeting was we approve a special use for a BP gas station. If they sell that property to Shell or Thorntons, the new person, in effect, buys that zoning entitlement. It's a significant restriction. and an acceptance by the property owner of that limitation. So one of the concerns that people might have that this could somehow degrade or be modified into something that goes beyond the rectory slash private residence, when it's sold, it cannot. Now, as an administrative matter, we always have the right to record this ordinance. We heard at the beginning of the meeting the homeowner from the Homeowners Association talking about the private covenants. Nobody's aware of it. Of course, that's a difficult thing for the city because the more restrictive controls, but we can't deny a permit if it complies with code, but they've got a right to enforce their covenants. In much the same way, we can provide what would amount to an HOA type of protection moving forward because it could be two years, five years, ten years when the church may decide to sell this. But that would, when it's recorded, it shows up on a title commitment and it would give fair notice to any potential purchaser who is contemplating any other use other than the private residence that it's not going to be allowed. So I think I don't want the neighbors to overlook that very important restriction, and the owners have agreed to abide by that restriction, and we can record that in the ordinance.

Right, and it's enforceable, obviously, because you said it's going to be on the title. Well, that only came about because we requested it. The community requested it. I conveyed that. Messages they sent happened, because that was not originally, but that was requested, and the petitioner did, make the modifications. So, I mean, that was all obviously done in good faith, but that was because the residents had basically said that was a major issue.

It was a great idea, and it was accepted.

Yeah, and so I made sure it was put forth. But another gentleman spoke about this setting precedent. So, say another, hypothetically, another organization came in and wanted to do something similar whether it's in Carriage Greens or in Darien Club or anywhere else in Darien. I'm not just saying it's going to end up in Ward 5. Would this issuing of a special use set precedence so that other organizations could use it legally against us if we said no to them?

No, because each case in zoning always has different nuances and different facts, and each one... STANDS OR FALLS ON ITS OWN FACTS. YOU KNOW, REMEMBER, THAT SPECIAL USE IS VERY BROAD, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S AN AUTOMATIC. AS I MENTIONED IN FRONT OF THE COMMITTEE OR BEFORE THE COMMITTEE, A CHURCH IS AN ALLOWABLE SPECIAL USE, BUT CHURCHES MAY NOT WORK AS A SPECIAL USE IN CERTAIN AREAS. WHY? BECAUSE CHURCHES ARE VERY CHALLENGING IN TERMS OF PARKING. There's nobody there 90% of the time, 10% of the time overloaded. All in all, that's a way of saying that there is nothing called binding precedent in the case where we've got zoning with unique uses.

So Murph, just to reiterate, you said zoning obviously is an individual situation. So if the Catholic Church, if we were to prove this here, if another religious organization that may not be Catholic or similar or whatever, they couldn't come back and sue us if we said no to them at another location.

Take it.

It's all based on zoning for that property.

They'd have to prove up that at the application, we'd have to analyze it individually, but not, you know, we can't, we would have to have an individual analysis.

Questions for John?

I think what all McKinney was talking about, we couldn't. If something was completely satisfactory, we couldn't deny a use because we didn't agree with the precepts of a particular religion. I think that's what you were talking about with FHA.

But this doesn't set a precedent for anything like that?

No.

Okay.

I just want to double-check one more thing. I know I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I just want to, once again, so you're saying There would be no reason to amend the language in the ordinance as it is to include the home will not be used for ministerial purposes and will not be open to the public. That would include counseling, treatment center, church administration offices, event space. The home will exclusively be used for residential purposes because that is already understood under the way the ordinance is written. Yes. So if any of that was to happen, we would have reason to enforce a violation of the ordinance.

And religious uses, especially when they've agreed to these restrictions, are not exempt from neutral governmental regulatory enforcements.

May I ask the attorney a question? I know it's not my time to speak.

completed, you can go back up. Thank you. Thank you, Chuck.

Mr. Murphy, I have a question. Is that okay?

I'd be happy to answer.

Sure. This ordinance refers to priests, brothers, and then there's another category for the life of me. I can't figure out what it is. Religious occupant. I don't know what that word is. And if you could tell me who would define what a religion, who a religious architect is.

None. Well, you'll have to show me where it says that.

It's in the, it's not in the ordinance. I apologize. It was in an earlier, it was in an earlier draft. I apologize.

You'll have to talk to the other side of the room about going to confession on that one.

mean that under the rules, if someone says, I've been granted a rectory, I don't care that I originally said I was just going to use it as a residence, even though it's implied. A rectory means I can have people come over. I can counsel them. I can do the things that would otherwise be expected for a rectory because you granted me a rectory and you didn't limit it to just a residence. Is that what you're saying?

Well, if you take a look at the slash

helpful if you could draft it that way. I think that's what we're asking for. That's what we did. No, I don't think so. I disagree with the way this is drafted. I took this as rectory slash or residence. When I have a slash, it's or. Right?

Common use. I think that these... I think that... Let me make a suggestion. Okay. I don't have any authority.

No, I know, but we're talking, this is what I think is useful for the council.

Okay, so if we say rectory, paren, meaning private residence.

I think that's what we're seeking here, is trying to get some clarity around the use of the property. If you're going to be inclined to vote on it, which it seems like you are, then we just want these restrictions that are clear about what it's going to be used for. And it fits into the neighborhood as a house where people are living.

I think that's fine.

The rest of this is just to make clear of that. And yes, I think these conditions matter to us.

And we concur with that.

This petition concurs with that. Yes, and I think we're aligning with what you had said. So we're just saying this is not drafted the way you intended.

So all in all, if you take a look at the... AT THE SECTION TWO, LINE THREE, AT THE SECTION TWO, LINE THREE, AT THE SECTION TWO, LINE THREE, WHERE WE'VE GOT RECTORY SLASH WHERE WE'VE GOT RECTORY SLASH WHERE WE'VE GOT RECTORY SLASH PRIVATE RESIDENCE IF WE SIMPLY PRIVATE RESIDENCE IF WE SIMPLY PRIVATE RESIDENCE IF WE SIMPLY SUBSTITUTE, ELIMINATE THE SUBSTITUTE, ELIMINATE THE SUBSTITUTE, ELIMINATE THE SLASH AND PUT PAREN, MEANING SLASH AND PUT PAREN, MEANING SLASH AND PUT PAREN, MEANING PRIVATE RESIDENCE. PRIVATE RESIDENCE. PRIVATE RESIDENCE. I THINK WE'VE ELIMINATED I THINK WE'VE ELIMINATED I THINK WE'VE ELIMINAT

the point that if it's recorded, a buyer looking at the property can't stand in the shoes of the seller and say, I want to see a rectory because I'm buying this. I have to conform to it being a private residence.

Yeah, so we'll do that.

Right.

Anything else? Anything else by the council? Anything else by the audience?

ALL RIGHT, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? SO WE'RE VOTING ON THIS WITHOUT THE WORD RECTORY UNDER IT.

WELL, NO, IT'S STILL THERE. IT'S JUST IN PARENTHESES, PRIVATE RESIDENCE, INSTEAD OF A SLASH.

I GUESS MAYBE IF I ARTICULATE IT, YOU COULD MAKE THAT MOTION TO AMEND. I GUESS IS THERE A MOTION TO AMEND SECTION 2 OF THE ORDINANCE by changing the phrase rectory slash private residence to rectory meaning private residence. Do we have to make a motion and a second?

I'm going to make a motion to amend section two, special use granted to be changed from rectory slash private residence to rectory parentheses private residence TO INDICATE THAT MEANING PRIVATE RESIDENCE.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? SECOND. ALL IN THE RULE?

JUST FOR THE AMENDMENT.

OKAY. WE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT FIRST AND THEN WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL. CORRECT. SULLIVAN?

AYE.

Stompanato. Aye. Schauer. Aye. Liganski. Aye. Kenney. Aye. Gustafson. Aye. Belzac. Aye. Seven ayes on the amendment. And now on the original ordinance, Belzac. Aye. Stompanato. Aye. Gustafson. No. Kenney. Aye. Liganski. Aye. Schauer. Aye. Sullivan. Aye. Six ayes and one nay.

Motion has been approved. Thank you very much, folks. I know this has been a real difficult issue for a lot of you. You followed a process, and the process has led to this, so I want you to know that all the women in Sullivan and all of us are very sensitive to both sides of the issue, so thank you very much. That takes us to item B under new business, and item B is motion granting approval of a variation pursuant to section 7-5-1C of the city code to allow fencing of only the portion of the rear yard immediately surrounding and associated with the chicken coop enclosure rather than requiring fencing of the entire rear perimeter of the property located at 2224 O'Donoghue Drive. Motion to approve. Alderman Bell's accident, but Alderman Schaller. Now, questions or comments? Mary.

Thank you. It's Tara Hill night at the Zerian City Council. So this residence is in Tara Hill. It is down the street from my residence. It's been a, an ongoing thing with, they had a rooster. The chicken coop was on the side of the house. It was in complete disrepair for a while. And it is a large parcel. It does back up to Brooker Ridge, which is unincorporated Downers Grove. I know sometimes people feel on the committee level, whether it's planning and zoning or municipal services, that if there's not an outcry by the residents or the public via in-person speaking or in writing, that everything's okay, but not necessarily. I mean, a lot of people are hesitant, especially when it's a neighbor thing. They don't want to upset their neighbor. They don't want to go on the record. I have talked to neighbors about this and right now they feel it's a lot better than it was because the chickens were just running around all the way, all the places. I could hear the rooster down the street and it is more contained. I just feel we spent a tremendous amount of time So Kenny and I spent a whole weekend visiting chicken coops all over Darien to educate ourselves and research. Um, I began to realize that chickens have existed in Darien probably longer than I have. Um, and that we worked very hard to come up with an ordinance that would help people continue to keep their chickens, but also keep their surrounding neighbors and their community, um, who weren't chicken people to be able to live their lives in their backyards and in their front yards. And so I am concerned about us making exceptions like this when I'm sure there's many people in Darien that had to put up privacy fences over the last few years because that was the ordinance and they didn't come in appealing to not have to do that. So that's just, I worry when we start to stray away from what we established. I have visited the rear yard and seen the structure that's in place. You cannot see it from the street. And like I say, there's nobody behind, but I still believe we need to stick, unless there's special exceptions, besides not wanting to put up the fence and the finances of it, that we should try to stay true to our original ordinance.

Jerry. Thank you, Mayor. I kind of echo what Alderman Sullivan is saying. I was on the council when you approved it, but I know you guys spent a lot of time painstakingly going through it. So the reason why the fence isn't going around the entire perimeter is just because it's been deemed too big? Is that the term? Or it's too big of an area where you have to fence?

That's basically correct, yes.

Right. So... You know, again, it's just a cost of doing business if you want to have a chicken coop and dairy because that's the way the ordinance was written. So I get it. You know, I know there's another one going to be coming up as well. But at what point does the fence have to be big enough to where it would still fall under the current zoning the way it's written? You know, they say, listen, well, the fence has to be at least 30 by 40 because that's what most backyards are or whatever. You know what I'm saying? So if you start getting smaller than even what maybe someone has had to do, again, is that a slippery slope where we're starting to?

Well, I think each case is taken individually, number one, and it is analyzed. In this particular case, yes, it is a larger lot. Does it make sense? You know, again, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. There are different circumstances. There's corner lots, there's interior lots. So it's not a simple yes or no. And this is, you know, when we originally brought on this ordinance or this policy, you know, we discussed a lot of these items, you know, if they're on corners, what should the structure look like? How high can structure be? So there was a lot of time that was taken and there was, you know, scenarios out there that were pre-existing and we tried to work with all the residents to bring it into some type of standard. And that's why this variation process, it's not part of a public hearing, but it's a variation. And we hand deliver or mail out to the adjacent residents.

Dan, tell me if I'm wrong, but last week when I was there sitting there, somebody said something about the contour of the lot. fence wouldn't actually hide it from... That's the other coop.

That's the coop on the other side of Terre Hill.

That's coming up in the future.

That's because of the swales in the yard and stuff. Hold on. That's coming down the road.

Yeah, I just want to say the spirit of our ordinance was to protect neighbors from not seeing chickens if they didn't want to see chickens. This variance does the exact same thing. Whether it's around the whole yard or whether it's on a portion of the yard, we had the same goal in mind, and we're hitting that goal because the neighbor won't be able to see. If they didn't like seeing chickens, they wouldn't have to see it. That was our compromise when we did it. I don't think it makes a difference whether you're encompassing the entire yard or encompassing a portion of the yard. It still hits the goal that we were trying to accomplish when we did it. So I'd be in favor of it. Anyone else?

Can I ask Ryan? So Ryan, we talked about this on the phone, but I just want you to verbally to everyone else. So the current structure that's there is the structure they're wanting to keep, right? There won't be modifications made to it.

I'm assuming yes, they would have the right to come in with something else if they chose. They would still be required to obtain the building permit for the chicken coop, which I believe I have in my office pending this approval. So we would review it at that time.

And it would have to fit the certain specific specified square footage so that the entire coop would be enclosed and the chicken run anything like that, right, the chicken run would be included, we'd be looking at that whole kind of 400 square foot area. Right. So the chickens then would not be able to roam freely in the unfenced yard?

Not anymore. As we discussed in the municipal services meeting, it would still be in an enclosure, because that question was brought up as well. Are they going to be running around the yard? With this proposed privacy fence, they wouldn't be able to.

But they'd be inside the privacy fence?

Correct. Yeah. Okay.

Which sounds like it would be better than having a fence around the giant yard and having the chickens running all over.

Well, like Dan said, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Any other discussion? I'll call the question. We have a motion and a second. I have the roll.

Belsak? Aye. Schauer? Aye. Gustafson?

Aye.

Sullivan? Aye. Kenney? Aye. Stompanato? Aye. Leganski? Aye. Seven ayes.

Anybody in the audience or anyone on the council have anything they'd like to share with the council at this point? If not, I'd like a motion to adjourn. Alderman Schauer, seconded by Alderman Kennedy. All in favor? Aye.