City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the Tuesday, September 8th City Council meeting. Trish, please call the roll.

All the women, Beanie. Here. All the men, Glab.

Here.

All the men, Doherty.

Here.

All the women, Bassey. Here. All the men, Davis.

Here.

All the men, Cook.

Here.

All the women, Miller.

Here.

Thank you. Please stand for the pledge.

Congratulations. Here's the flag of the United

First item on the agenda is a presentation by Illinois Realtors and Heartland Realtors Organization. If you would like to step up to the podium. And if you could hit the center button, turn on that mic. Thank you.

Got it. Hello, City Council. Jim Heisler. I'm the CEO for the Heartland Realtor Organization. We're the local arm of the National Association of Realtors through them and with my colleagues here. So Neil Erickson is the Government Affairs Director from Eleanor Realtors. And we have two of our chairpeople, Nisa Franski as our Chairperson of the Government Affairs Committee. and Sandra Anker is our chairperson for the Realtor Political Action Committee. So we're really honored to be able to reach out to the National Association of Realtors to be able to secure a couple of grants. We were here a little while ago for a $15,000 presentation, but tonight it's $30,000. I have passed the money along, so the checks are real. We do have the fake check as well. So we want to thank you for your participation. We love working with you. That money, as you know, is used for some of you through our Smart Growth grants to help offset some of the costs that you've incurred in some of the studies that you've done for density and other things. So we're glad to be partners. We want to help support housing. We know that that's been an issue. We thank you for the housing. So there is positive feedback. There are positive people that want to see the housing growth, and it is necessary to So what else? What did I miss?

So with the grants, it helped with the unified development ordinance. Many times you will see developers come to your planning and zoning asking for variances. They're coming and asking for variances because the last time the unified development ordinance was written was back in 1980. and we don't develop housing like we did 20 years ago. And so that you have undertaken that giant task of rewriting your unified development ordinance. We wanted to make sure to help offset some of that cost. So a portion of that check of 15,000 is for that unified development ordinance. Also, as you're going through your unified development ordinance, there's lots of codes, right? And so you want to know kind of what will that housing look like. And so the other 15,000 was to allow your staff to work with Opticos Inc. to see what that housing would actually look like in some of your infill development sites. So you could test fit some of what that development would look like should you choose to allow that housing to be rezoned in some of those zoning areas. So it lets you know what it looks like before you actually have it look like that and you pass it in your unified development ordinance. So it gives you that visual picture so you can actually see what it looks like. So the money was for your unified development ordinance and also to have a opportunity to look at what that code would look like as the housing would be developed for the other 15,000.

Could we get a photo? Absolutely. Okay, thank you.

Once again, thank you to Illinois Realtors and the Heartland Realtors Organization. Thank you, Jim. Appreciate it. All right. Next item on the agenda is conceptual presentation by Hamilton Partners. You can hit that center button, sir.

There you go. You're live. All right. Sounds good. Thank you. Well, good evening, Mayor Jett and members of the City Council. My name is Tim Beechik. I'm here with my partner, Todd Berlinghoff. We are with Hamilton Partners. We're a regional development firm headquartered in the Chicago area, and we're involved in commercial, retail, industrial, office, and recently development of multifamily residential apartments within the suburbs of Chicago as well. We're here this evening joined by two of our development partners that we've been able to come together with and focus on doing new ground-up development in the suburbs of the Chicago area, primarily multifamily housing, apartments, and a mixture of townhomes typically. First, Harlem Irving Companies is celebrating 70 years in the development business this year. And Rick Filler, Chief Operating Officer with Harlem Urban Companies is here as one of our development partners and will be providing more information during our presentation to discuss a little bit more about our background and what we find so interesting with the Green Street site in downtown McHenry. The second development partner that is teaming up with us on this project is Zeller Real Estate. Zeller's headquartered in Chicago. They've been involved in commercial real estate for over 35 years. And tonight, Sam Zeller, chief operating officer, and Jeremy Ormland, principal with a focus on multifamily development, is here as well representing Zeller. We're looking forward to teaming up with Harlem Irving Companies and Zeller, along with us Hamilton partners, to provide a trio of expertise in what we believe would be quite a bit of background and experience to bring to the table in looking at and embarking on a new project. There's tremendous opportunity with the Green Street site. provide housing within your community in a unique way and we're excited to be able to share a conceptual plan with you and tell you a little bit more about why we're so interested in this particular property with that in mind uh oh and i didn't want to forget andy coglin is with us andy is he's uh he consulting principal with OKW Architects, and Andy has been involved in Instrumentl in working with us on many site plans, as well as design of apartment buildings, projects that we've worked on in the past. So he's here to answer any questions that you might have on the plan as well. At this point, I'd like to give the podium over to Rick Filler, and Rick will be sharing with you a how we go about analyzing projects and putting the pieces together to get something done that we believe will be very successful for the city of McHenry. Rick?

Thank you, Tim. Good evening. Rick Filler, president of the Harlem Irving Companies, as Tim said, celebrating our 70th year. I've only been there 32 of them, though, so... As Tim mentioned, we have extensive development experience through retail, multifamily, for sale housing, high rise residential in the city of Chicago, Minneapolis. And during the pandemic, Doing high-rise residential buildings, $350, $100 million a process, becomes very impersonal to what you're doing through a process. And I went to my good friend Todd, said, I want to put a group together to study suburbs, follow the rail, do TOD buildings, put scale within. with what the scale should be. A hundred unit building in a Fox River Grove is good. In downtown Mount Prospect, we just finished our second building, 200 unit buildings there. Scaling them, adding amenities that are appropriate to that community. Tim brought your site and it didn't have the rail. But it was intriguing. So we had to come here and take a look. And what's going on in your downtowns and what's going on with your retail, what's going on with your food and beverage is dynamic and excited us. It's like this needs more people. This needs development. This needs new residences to be part of that. And what Andy Coughlin, our architect, will walk you through is our our look and thoughts behind what we could provide. So currently, just to give you a little background where we're at as a team, the team behind me, is we are in Fox River Grove. We will close on that property next week. The property is 100 units with 6,000 square foot of retail on the first floor. It's all surface park. And the nice thing about our product that we're providing, I can tell you exactly what a studio looks like, what that one bedroom is going to look like, and that two bedroom is going to look like, because we've done it so many times. We know what leases, we know what our residents want. We know what it has to feel like. We are very hands-on on what we do. Fox River Grove is typical of what we're doing. And what happens on the inside, We try to really understand the community, try to understand the residency that will populate our buildings and match up the design, the architecture, the art within the building, the experience that our tenants will have. We are also in downtown. So closing on Fox River Grove next week and start construction the next day in Highwood. we're in sheridan road with a i think this is a 97 98 unit building once again retail on the first floor this is a podium building so it does have parking inside but on the back side that you're not seeing on the upper right is um is the metro parking lot and that's to us part of our program in fox river grove the metro stations across the street And then the Skokie project is is in its infancy. But that once again, close to 100 unit building close to the Skokie Swift across the street. So you can see these all start lining up and kind of takes the guesswork of of of what we do and how we how we go about it. Can we go to the next slide, please? So these are the three last completed projects. I can't read those. Two of them were in downtown Mount Prospect. The first one was I believe we broke ground in 2021. The city had condemned a derelict shopping center and had knocked it down. And they came to Harlem Irving because we have 70 years of retail experience and kept coming every year. Rick, can you do a new shopping center there? I'm like, eh, I think it's not a shopping center. It's residential. And after a great debate, they worked with us to create the residential opportunity. They had $650,000 into it. We paid $650,000 for the property. But at the same time, they forgave all of our fees, all of the impact fees, everything, building permit fees. So we basically were able to secure that land basically for free. As that project was finishing, their police and fire station were moving out of their current location and going to a better place. Once again, we stepped in and we have a good partnership with Mount Prospect. And there we paid $2 million for that piece of property. In turn, they gave us $2 million of brand new TIF because it was tax exempt because it was a police and fire station. In addition, they gave us $3.7 million out of their general fund, which was payable when we put our first and only retailer in the base of that project. as of this weekend or the last couple weekends, is 100% occupied. The other Mount Prospect project, their first one, is 100% occupied, which just goes to show the quality of construction, the type of detail we put into our projects for our residents. The one closest to here would be Crystal Lake, which is at Main Street and Crystal Lake Road. That property had sat fallow for many, many years, I believe over 20 years. It was a developer that had gone broke. And we worked very closely with Crystal Lake. The developers that had tried to develop that project prior to us all kept leaving because of the mandate that you had to have retail on that site. And if you know that site, their downtown is what attracted us. The same attraction that we have with McHenry, that downtown. The activity... the tenancies, a place for people to go at in the evening, a place to go in the day, close to the river. It's appropriate in McHenry, but in Crystal Lake, it was, you don't want us to put a Starbucks at the base of this building. It's going to distract from your own downtown. And so in that situation, if you drive by at night, you'll see the first floor of our apartment building is always lit brightly. TVs are going. Lights are on. It's a boutique hotel. It's supposed to show like a boutique hotel. That there's activity going on there. It's not a hair salon or a nail salon that's gone dark in the evening. Right. all of this is leading up to, you know, our ideas, our plans, um, that would like to present to you this evening, um, that we feel with our first take it's, it's, it's checking all the boxes. And so looking forward to hearing your comments, I'll have Andy come up and, uh, walk us through the plan and, See what you can do, man. Thanks.

Good evening. Again, I'm Andy Coghlan, consulting principal of OKW Architects. And as Rick said, our firm's about 65 years old. We've done... We're a city-based firm, but we've done work in pretty much every suburb in every direction of the city of Chicago over those 65 years. Have built great relationships with the communities we work. Look forward to doing the same with McHenry. I have a connection here because... My dad bought a house from my grandparents at Whispering Oaks 52 years ago, just a little bit west of downtown. And we used to travel out here from Evanston, which is where I grew up, to visit them and try and catch things in the creek that runs through the middle of Whispering Oaks. So it's kind of fun to be back. The plan. We've gone back, had a number of conversations with the city staff over the course of the last year or so as we've been developing this plan. And I think that it's a pretty solid direction. to accomplish what the city is looking for in terms of development and meet the needs of the developer, which goes hand-in-hand with these public-private partnerships. The biggest component of this is the mixed-use building, the apartment building that sits along Green Street. The intent in this case is because it is already thriving, it's a vibrant street, but take this one sort of kind of empty spot, mostly empty spot, and populated with retail on the ground floor. So we've planned this around 10,000 feet of street-edge retail restaurants along the street that ultimately kind of leans into Boone Creek and is a great opportunity for outdoor dining and all the alfresco opportunities they already have along the river. particularly north of 120, all the little restaurants, taverns that sit there with a great outdoor dining in the evening. And this opportunity along the street and along Boone Creek creates a really unique opportunity for the retail along there. Behind that... take advantage of Boone Creek and have apartments along from ground level. We have a four-story building, but on the back behind the retail, we'll have ground level apartments that actually open up with terraces out onto the creek. And then as it heads further west, northwest along the creek, 14 apartments that are, excuse me, townhomes that kind of populate this kind of this residential edge to kind of complete the development, kind of this continuous river edge, call it, residential development along that frontage of Boone Creek. The parking for this, in order to make it work, is entirely surface-driven. It's all surface lot to service the tenants of the apartments and the townhomes. Townhomes also have garages. They're serviced by two-car garages, three-story units. And guest parking is all handled within the proximity of what's defined on that development plan. The remaining site will serve as the city's parking to service the community, the public parking. And we've done a number of different layouts of this, which we've removed off of this current site plan, but believe we can probably accommodate most of the parking requirements based on the parking study in surface parking without necessarily having to go to a decked parking environment, but it's really ultimately driven by what your interests are, what the interests of the community are in terms of accommodating restaurant users and retail users and shopkeepers and employees. But believe we can accommodate that within that site pretty adequately. We haven't begun to develop architecture yet. That's kind of next step after we get feedback from you regarding the overall planning. But I think you've seen from some of the examples that Rick shared that the goal of all of these projects has always been to work hand in hand with The communities, we develop these projects so that when these are completed, we've got something that you're very satisfied, you're thrilled with, we're thrilled with as a piece of architecture. It means a lot to us because it's our reputation as well. And the community is really happy with the result, and it creates, kind of extends the vibrancy of what is this really kind of dynamic little downtown you have. With that, is there some other kind of follow-up that you have, Rick, before we ask questions? But other than that, I'd like to open it up to questions.

Is there any questions by council? Hold on a minute.

Good evening. I have a couple. Thank you for being here. So in your notes, obviously you identify, first of all, thank you for being here. In your notes, you identify as a property owner and rental manager. So I'm assuming that both the townhomes and all the apartments are rental units, correct? Yes. Perfect. Somewhere along some path, there was consideration of approaching IDOT to get in and out access to 120. Is that something on your radar screen, or is that something that's been decided and eliminated at this point? It's been eliminated. It's been eliminated.

So all of the... We're showing a single access in, a one-way in, which IDOT has tentatively approved, and an exit out, what is currently the alley on the East side of the public parking.

So in would be where they exist, pretty much where the existing in is right now by the ATM machine. And then out you're somehow taking the hill away to get up to the current public parking and then out onto 120 where the current alley access is.

Exactly.

Across from the old bank.

Yes.

And then the other access is Green Street.

Correct.

Yeah. That gives me great concern. Again, I love the concept, but assuming that you, in fact, do have all 104 units full, I'm going to make an assumption. You have 200 people. I'll make an assumption that there aren't 200 cars, but probably 125 cars. And that's a lot to get in and out of those two spaces. But again, you've probably done the math. I'm just reacting from a first glance position. As far as the future village parking deck, we obviously have a parking lot there. So your proposal has nothing to do with that. It's just left there and it's ours to deal with what we have. other than the, are you proposing the excavation where you're coming off of Green Street and making that slow north curve? Are you improving access to our lot, or are you just cutting that hill and calling it our problem?

everything from Green Street in that you see within the boundary of the development area would be work that we would do as a part of our scope of work. I think coordinating with what you ultimately decide to do as a city with that parking area, the public parking, we'd coordinate with you to whatever extent we needed to.

Because right now there is no access from where you're at and where that's at. Literally, there's four stairs that are in between two Arborvites with a really scary old wrought iron rail. So, I mean, you can't get from here to there.

There's lots of interesting grade issues that will ultimately solve, but they're actually not as severe. Once you spend some time with the topography, it's very solvable. Perfect. We're very comfortable with it. Perfect.

I think that's all I have for the moment, but I'd like to reserve the right to come back. Thank you.

Sounds good. Ambassador?

Thank you. I actually have six major concerns about the concept. My first concern is the development does not complement or enhance existing character of Green Streak. A four story mixed use building on Green Street is too tall. 104 new units of housing is too dense. My second concern is the potential decrease in available public parking. Per the $58,500 downtown parking study, any new development needs to not only accommodate new parking needs, it also needs to maintain the current available parking supply. It is important to note that the downtown district does not have a minimal parking requirement, but eliminating the requirement does not eliminate the necessity. So an accurate number of new parking spaces required per unit will need to be established. 1.48 spaces per apartment unit would most likely not be sufficient. My third concern is the 104 units of new housing and over 10,000 square feet of new restaurant or retail space will increase traffic congestion. This development site is enclosed by an immovable body of water and a state-controlled highway. The addition of two one-way access roads off 120 and the additional congestion of... Let me say that again. The addition of two one-way access roads off 120 and a future connecting street through Green Street will not be enough to offset the additional congestion the development will bring. My fourth concern is the future connector street on the site on the east side of Green Street. The alignment of the future connector street means this is Venice Avenue. Extending Venice Avenue will necessitate the demolition of private property, including a building from 1980. Extending Venice Avenue to the site across Green Street would be detrimental for pedestrian safety. Per staff, this has been discussed in planning sessions, but with no current future plan in action. If this detail is on a high-level concept plan, it's time to have an open discussion. My fifth concern is the purchase of the city-owned property on the site. $2.36 million of taxpayers' money was used to purchase the McHenry Savings Bank building and lot, the former carpet store, the former Houston funeral home, and the to be demolished Green Street Cafe. These are wealthy developers and a minimum the city needs to be in reimbursed for the $2.36 million. My sixth and final concern is using the three complete projects included in the packet as a reference. The management of retail units are outsourced to large property management companies. Apartment rentals are not inherently bad, but large property management companies are. These algorithmic rent price fixing schemes, which keep rental rates artificially inflated. These artificially inflated rates increase the overall market rate and add to the affordability housing crisis. The city is in a unique position because the city owns the site plan parcels. So has full control over what development occurs. The only development that would compliment and enhance the existing character of the street, maintaining available parking levels, not increasing traffic congestion and prioritizing pedestrian safety is a continuation of the one to two story commercial or mixed use properties along green street, and a landscaped parking lot rather than the current poorly maintained heat island. I do not support this concept. Thank you.

Any other questions? Alderman Binney.

First of all, thank you so much for the kind things you've said about the city and for putting something together. I really appreciate that. I do have some concerns, some that have been mentioned already, but for the point of just discussion, could you talk to us a little bit about your intent with extending the river walk and what that would look like? And if you'd be maintaining, like working with the foundation, maintaining the same experience that people are having on the east side of the river walk as well.

Yeah, go ahead.

Sure.

I know you have the bridge. So the bridge is waiting to be reinstalled to put it across the creek. And for right now, the plan really depicts kind of, it's conceptual. So defining a space, it would be this kind of gathering point on the project side of the creek. And then having a continuous river walk that connects green up to 120 as a part of this. So it's remained public domain. It isn't part of the private project. private development, so to speak. It's all developed as part of the project, but it remains, it would be remain a public concourse. And I think that the intent would be whatever the kind of the architecture of that, what is, whatever thematically, how that's done and being done elsewhere in the city, we'd keep that consistent with the work we would do along Boone Creek.

So that would be something you'd be taking on the expense for versus like this future parking deck that, you know, the city would be building. So, you know, if you did move this forward or something was adjusted, you are intending on covering the cost to extend the Riverwalk.

It's part of the townhouse portion experience. I think it'd be fantastic. You know, the residential that you have on the other side of the river, on the other side of the bridge, you know, It's inspiring. It's a beautiful buildings. Their lawns are the best ones I've ever seen. And the Riverwalk is fantastic. So yeah, it's all part of the plan.

Okay. Thank you.

Yeah.

Number one, I just feel that with this project, we're giving up a heck of a lot of parking. You know, there's been a lot of discussions about parking garages and everything else. I think one thing is the dollar amount of cost to build it is one thing. But then to maintain it 10 years down the road is a lot more money as well. So we're going to give up level space to parking garages. I tend to kind of hem and haw on that. I like the concept of the townhomes along Boom Creek, but I definitely don't want to see any apartments there. In fact, I don't want to see any apartments in this development. I think we've got enough apartments in town. I don't see adding 133 parking spaces for these apartments, 133 cars that are going to go out onto Green Street If you take a look at Green Street now and a lot of times during the day and especially on the weekends, you find that traffic can get backed up. And with this, I can see it getting backed up all the way to the bridge and kind of concerns me there. I just think it's too much as far as density, as far as the amount of traffic type of mixed uses as far as apartments. Like I said, the townhomes would be great, but apartments, I would never support. Never. I mean, you look at this and then you got to look at the other side of Boom Creek. Don't forget, you still have the area where the old city hall is and everything else that has never been finalized as far as development. That's going to add more, more, more traffic. So I think we have to be very, very careful on the density that we approve on these type of projects. And I've seen some of the pictures of your units. I've been by some of the projects that you've had. You had a card up there that said Harlem Irving. So I would kind of take it. That's probably about the area you probably started in. That's correct. I haven't been there in several years, but I'm quite familiar with that area. I grew up not too far away. I can remember the old drive-in theater on the corner. That's how old I can remember. Did you have anything to do with the Harlem Irving Plaza when they decided to turn it into a mini mall? Was that part of your projects?

I was at there, my partner, Michael Marchese's father built Harlem Irving Plaza in 1957. And that was opened as a 330,000 square foot open strip center. We have expanded it over the years to what exists today, which is one of the most successful malls in the state of Illinois.

One thing I noticed about that from what I remember from years back as those type of projects were developed They fit into that area. From what I've seen as far as the type of looks of a lot of the development and buildings that you've done in the last few years, it doesn't seem to fit with the ambience of the McHenry downtown area. It doesn't seem to fit into... the feel of the downtown, and that concerns me as well.

And as I mentioned, I'm sorry, but as I mentioned, that is why we're here is to, and I will spend a lot of time here, understanding what is appropriate and what is inappropriate. Each one of those projects were unanimously approved by those municipalities. Input of the municipality was in lockstep with us. Andy, myself, Teams of people from each municipality sit at the table and work for us. What's appropriate and what's not appropriate. We would be doing the same process why we're here today to kick off a process. That's why we don't show a rendering. We're not so presumptuous.

This isn't Crystal Lake. This isn't Fox River Grove. McHenry.

We're not saying it is.

What I feel as far as what the looks of McHenry downtown could look like in And some of those developments that I've seen just don't seem to fit with the downtown theme.

Once again, we will do appropriate architecture with the input of McHenry and the stakeholders of McHenry to make sure that it's appropriate for that street. That's why, once again, that's why we're not showing you a rendering because we're not that presumptuous to tell you what our building should like on the street that you live in.

i'm going to be straightforward with you completely on how i feel i mean uh if it sounds just uh negative tones i'm bringing out all the things that uh i don't like about the project and that doesn't necessarily mean that uh there can't be other things that happen but you know if you're talking a three-story apartment complex that you're not going to get my vote on at all uh no matter what you do with the rest of the property uh uh sorry you know i mean If that's a bust as far as the project, then it's a bust, but I just can't see apartments over there. And I can't see the density being that, that, that dense over there. I, I think it's a perfect area to have the townhouses. I just can't see apartments along the Boone Creek. We understand.

Thank you. Sure. Thank you again for coming. Love the concept. I'm a fan of your enclave in Crystal Lake. I think it's an truly an enhancement to that piece of property. The parking is the issue with me as well. However, I don't want to stop the discussion. I mean, I think between yourself and the city, I would love to get back together, talk about a little bit. We definitely know this is going to be generating TIF dollars. We know that TIF dollars can be used for improvements. I'm not saying I necessarily want a parking deck. However, I would certainly like to investigate how our TIF dollars could pay for that parking deck. It's an investment in the community. This is an investment in downtown. This is such a big part of our downtown. And I think your buildings from what you're, Your current projects, the projects you've done already, would truly enhance the look of downtown. I think you're sincere in the fact that you're going to do what's best for the city of McHenry. I want the discussion to continue. I don't want this to be a close. At least that's my vote, that we continue this discussion. We look at the numbers. We run numbers as a council to see what the parking lot would cost, how many cars could fit in it as it exists right now. What would a parking deck do? What would that cost? How could we pay for that? We've got TIF dollars. We've seen what the TIF has generated from the Riverwalk and the benefit that has done. It's paying for the Riverside Drive enhancement. It's paid for the Riverwalk. It's paid for numerous projects. There's no reason why we can't use those TIF dollars to our own advantage to provide this extra parking because, right, we need the parking. There's no question about it. We can't eliminate the parking that we have right now because there's the need is there. Our parking study shows that. So I'm in favor of the project. I like what you've presented so far. I would love to continue the discussion. That's my vote. Thank you.

Alderman Cook.

Not that it's a problem downtown, but it's a problem. I mean, I like the city of McHenry and all that. I like modern stuff too. What you did on Enclave and Crystal Lake. My thing is that in Crystal Lake, you have a lot of roads that you can in and out, easy access. Here you're kind of confined because of the creek. If that creek was a road, I see no problem with putting that kind of thing in there to alleviate traffic. There's no outlet of traffic. Parking, it's always been a problem. But your ideas are pretty good. I like them. We just, to me, we don't have the main streets that we can get traffic in and out easily. Every day you come in, it's a fight. I went down there, down Bearville Road into Green Street, and it wasn't really a busy day, and it was, I don't know, took a little bit of time. Not that I'm in a hurry or anything else like that, but... And then they have many vehicles to it and all that. It's a tough nut to crack. I hope you guys come up with a damn good idea, you know?

I think just as it relates to Crystal Lake, if you look at how close that is to the intersection of Crystal Lake Road and to Main Street, Main Street has a right in and a right out. Very limited spot there. So the only other place is right on Crystal Lake Road. And that can be jammy because of the backup for the turns and everything at the traffic line. It's not a problem. An apartment building is on your neighborhood street. All the cars get back out of their driveway at the same time to go to work, and they all don't come back at the same time. Is it true with a community like that? It is, and this is something that we deal with and we talk to every municipality, and we do studies and everything else, and we will prove to you that historic downtowns have a historic problem with traffic being They're usually not as wide as what is done today. They're more narrow. It slows the cars down. You want the cars to slow down because you want to see the retail. You want to see where you could go shop. You want to be able to experience in that street. So life comes to a slower place as it relates to that when you go into a downtown district. And as it relates to every one of these projects, parking and traffic is always tough. But it always comes to prove people are all, they're all different schedules. And none of those schedules appear to be in the same, especially with work at home, which a lot of these younger people are doing. They're not leaving. They're not even getting there. So, you know, we understand the concern. We will deep dive with you and show you example after example of example where this really does work.

At the Enclave, how many units are at the Enclave?

48 apartments and 51 townhomes. 99.

Thank you. Alderman Davis.

Yeah. So I liked the overall concept. Again, we're going to have a lot of dislikes because we are landlocked and just the nature of this property itself. I would like to see more. I'd like to see what we can come up with. I think there's Again, this is an early concept, so I think there's a lot of questions that haven't been answered that we have questions on, just as with any other design that we've seen. So I think there's some adjustments that could happen. And as long as you guys are willing to work with us and make those adjustments, I'd like to see more.

That's why it's a hand sketch.

Yeah, so I, you know, from what I'm hearing, it sounds, hold on, Vanny, go ahead.

Yeah, I just, I talked about the Riverwalk, but I just want to also say I agree with Andy and Mr. Doherty that I'd like to continue the conversation. There are a few things I'm really concerned about. I almost feel like it might be the wrong time for this development, but would like to continue to the discussions. I don't know that I love the parking deck in that location right in the heart of our town at a three-way intersection, but my biggest concern is the businesses that are existing on Green Street right now. On a Friday night, there are multiple busy restaurants. There's an entertainment venue. This basically eliminates nearly all of our parking. So that would be my primary concern. I don't have a huge issue with a four-story or three-story apartment building. There's one right across the street, and it's beautiful. And not as many units, but I live right there. And Green Street can get very backed up. It also moves very quickly because of the no left turn. So I would be willing to have more of a conversation, but just knowing that there are some pretty big concerns that I think might you know, initiate some major redevelopment of the plan, you know, not just little tweaks because we just can't lose the parking.

I think it's also how we phase it. That's part of the conversation with the city and with the staff is solving this so that it doesn't affect the local shops. And because ultimately we're trying to enhance all with the development. So we have these conversations routinely with municipalities to solve these very problems because once construction is disrupting, And if you're cleaning everything out at one time and making it all unavailable, this is a big enough piece of property that this is certainly a feasible development so that you can maintain a level of parking to serve the downtown while this is under construction.

Well, I hope we can keep talking about it. So thank you very much. Thank you.

Alderman Miller.

The parcel to the north of the Green Peapod, the Thai restaurant, that little white strip with the dotted lines, is that a parcel you're looking to acquire, or is that a parcel that would be retained by the city?

I believe it's part of the city's property currently. We just don't have a particular purpose for it.

Is that a piece that you're looking to add?

It's simply included as part of the overall parcel, and we're just defining that.

Is that an option to make that? Is that an option to make that an access?

Possibly, yeah.

In my brain, I just am thinking if we have multiple access points, then potentially it lessens the load on any one access point. That literally is a driveway right now. And again, maybe that's a solution. My only other solution sitting here listening to my other council members is the apartment building with the first floor restaurant and 10,000 square foot of, you know, whatever restaurant mixed use, any opportunity for underground parking there on a sub level to leave the 57 private residence space on the front end and, Public parking? Did you look into that? I mean, I know it's the topography. There's the creek. So we got watershed. We got a floodplain challenge. And again, I don't know if you even went that far to say, is that a potential to leave some additional parking up there? Because to Alderman Bainey's point, our Green Street businesses use the land your proposal's on for parking. And that's a big number of parking spaces. And what our parking study taught us is we have adequate parking. People just don't like where it is. So they don't want to walk. So unless you're putting in a people mover, you're pretty much saying we're taking all your downtown parking. So I'm just trying to think out of the box and come up with what else can we do with parked cars that you've done a great job in the townhouses of giving them two car garage. So essentially they're not going to use those spaces. It's the apartment dwellers that, you know, that may use those spaces. And if we could move those 140 cars somewhere else, and I don't think you can get them all underground because you're certainly not digging two levels of, I mean, they could be submarines, but not cars down there. But just trying to think out of the box. And I do believe part of our housing study that we did two years ago absolutely spoke to the fact that we need downtown apartments. We need downtown residential rentals. We have previously not supported high density housing. In my world, I wouldn't call this high density. I would call this low density. So I support the number of units that you have. I just get a little itchy about the parking and the access. That's my big, I guess that's my bigger deal. Thank you for listening. Thank you.

Any other comments at council? So I think the majority is we want to continue to work with you, come up with some ideas with staff and with council members. I'd like the council members to send emails to, uh, Chief Burke and I just to kind of hear other things that you're thinking or ideas along with your feedback if you did not share any of that feedback tonight. So I'd like you to respond to Chief Burke and I on that. And then we'll get back to you and see how we can continue these conversations and, you know, come up with a game plan. Does that work?

Yeah.

Any other questions, comments?

No, thank you all for your time.

Thank you, gentlemen. Appreciate it. Thank you, Matt. John Smith, I know you're here from the Riverwalk Foundation. If you'd like to come up and say a few words, that'd be okay. Sure.

Hello. I recognize a number of faces that were here when we started 26 years ago on the Riverwalk. And the reason I'd like to talk here, and we probably should have started first here, is the Riverwalk was always designed to be an economic development project. It wasn't a lineal park that did not contribute to the TIF, and none of it worked economically unless we did projects like we've done in the past and projects like this. So, The Riverwalk Committee put together 37,000 in design concepts so we could recruit a developer to look at what I think is the key to McHenry. If you really think of where we're at, we're at the busiest street in McHenry County, I think still. And the visibility looking down, on that area will make or break McHenry in the long term. So we realized this is the key to McHenry. So we went out and we talked to a number of developers and it's a niche market. I can tell you that the good ones with track records are being sought after. They're not coming in like a track home developer and you know, begging communities to take them in. They are the experts in this area. So we have found somebody that we brought here. I have to explain, the Riverwalk is no different than the old plan commission. We're advisors to the city. You guys control the purse strings. And this key area to McHenry is a partnership. There is no win and loss here. Anybody that wins too much on one side, like Algonquin with the Taipar apartment building that sat there five, ten years... It doesn't work. If there's too much density, if there's not a traffic solution, it doesn't work. So the only thing the Riverwalk would like to say here is our job is to bring the horses to the trough, whether people drink from the trough or not. You guys are the principals. The developers are the principals. And we're here to help. But I will say they have answered all the Riverwalk questions. Commission's questions in terms of location, including the bridge, including the pocket park in there. And so from a Riverwalk standpoint, we're happy, but that's not the key here. You guys hold the keys. This is the future of McHenry. And if it's not done right, We're willing to walk away and maybe our grandkids will do it. I'd rather not see this, but if it's not done right, we don't want to be part of it. And we're sure you guys don't want to be part of it. And I'll guarantee you these guys don't want to be part of it. Thank you. Thank you, Kent.

All right. Next item on the agenda is public comment. Is there any public comment this evening? All right. All right. You gentlemen do not have to stay. We appreciate you coming. Have a good one. Thank you. Appreciate it. Next item in the agenda is 7A through 7M in the consent agenda. Is there any items that the council would like to pull for separate consideration? Alderman Bassey?

Could you pull aye, please?

Any others? All right. I'm looking for a motion to approve 7A through 7H and 7J through M. Alderman Bainey?

I will make that motion as presented.

Thank you. Second. Alderman Doherty? I'll second the motion. Any discussion on these items by council? Trish, please call the roll.

Alderman Bainey? Yes. Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Glab?

Yes.

Alderman Bassey? Yes. Alderman Davis?

Yes.

Alderman Cook?

Yes.

Alderman Miller? Yes.

Thank you, Council. Item pulled by Alderman Bassey, 7I is a passing ordinance amending title 9-2C-5 subsection B and title 9-4B-1 subsection F of the McHenry Municipal Code in relation to waterworks and wastewater rates. At this time, I'm looking for a motion to approve.

Alderman Doherty? I'll make the motion to approve item 7i as presented.

Thank you. Second? Alderman Vaney?

I'll second that motion.

Thank you. Alderman Bassey?

Thank you. As I stated during this year's budget discussion, I do not support a sewer and water increase for residents. As I also stated during this year's budget discussion, I'd like to see the sewer and water capital development fees be increased for developers. The biggest concern is the additional base fee for sewer and water capital development for lead service line replacements. Per staff, the detailed budget for the Riverside Drive streetscape includes $785,000 from the sewer and water capital development fund and reserves for the lead service line replacement. Riverside Drive is in the TIF, and the public utility upgrades are a TIF eligible expense. This is part of a larger issue I have addressed many times of TIF district projects, spending more than the TIF fund generates and requiring funds meant for the entire city. I don't support this and I'm voting no.

Thank you. Any other comments by council? Chair, please call the roll.

Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Bainey? Yes. Alderman Glab?

Yes.

Alderman Bassey?

No.

Alderman Davis?

Yes.

Alderman Cook?

Yes.

Alderman Miller? Yes.

Thank you, Council. Next item on the agenda is 8A, is STP Engineering Services Agreement. Motion to approve the local public agency engineering services agreement for $95,092 with HR Green Incorporated subject to IDOT review. I'm looking for a motion to approve 8A as presented. Alderman Miller.

I'll make the motion to approve 8A as presented, please.

Thank you. Second. Alderman Doherty. I'll second the motion. Thank you. Discussion by City Council. Any public comment regarding this item? Trish, please call the roll.

Alderman Miller. Yes. Alderman Doherty. Yes. Alderman Bainey. Yes. Alderman Glab. Yes. Alderman Bassey. Yes. Alderman Davis.

Yes.

Alderman Cook.

Yes.

Thank you, Council. Next item on the agenda is 8B, pass an ordinance approving a budget amendment to the Sewer Division's Contractual Services Account 510-32-5510 in the amount of $40,050.07 for the costs associated with the emergency repair of the sanitary service for the property located at 13 John Street in the city of McHenry. Looking for a motion to approve 8B as presented. Alderman Cook? Make a motion. As presented. Thank you. Second? Alderman Miller?

I'll second it, but I believe it should be 613 John Street. Is that not correct?

Correct.

Okay.

Thank you. 613 John Street. Got it. Thank you. Any discussion on this item by City Council? No. Any other discussion? Any public comment? Trish, please call the roll.

Alderman Cook? Yes. Alderman Miller? Yes. Alderman Davis?

Yes.

Alderman Bassey? Yes. Alderman Doherty? Yes. Alderman Glab?

Yes.

Alderman Vaney?

Yes. Thank you, Council. Next item on the agenda is 8C, Route 31 Business Relief Fund. Motion to approve a non-endowed, is that how you say that? Endowed. Endowed. Passed through a designated fund agreement between the Community Foundation for the McHenry County and the City of McHenry, as well as the City of McHenry Route 31 Business Relief Fund eligibility application packet as proposed. Looking for a motion to approve 8C as presented.

Alderman Doherty.

I'll make the motion as presented with the corrected spell. Alderman Bainey.

I'll second the motion.

Thank you. Discussion on this item by City Council. Alderman Bassey.

I want to thank Director Martin for including my request. My requested provisions that businesses not have received financial incentives in the past five years are ineligible for the grant. This will make sure funds are distributed more fairly and equally. Because this is a limited short-term assistance program with strict criteria, I am voting yes.

Any other discussion by city council? I'll move on.

Again, I want to bring up the fact that private business is private business. Granted, we want every bit of business we can have in the city, and I don't think that city tax dollars or mchenry's residence tax dollars should be used to support businesses and um i think of the widening of 120 years back we had a lot of you know a lot of problems there uh but uh the businesses survived we didn't lose businesses because of it now i don't know what their individual uh financial situations were, but it's not like you saw businesses closing up all over the place and it didn't cost the taxpayers any money there as far as relief funds. So I, I don't know. I just don't see, are we looking at relief funds for gaming establishments? And, you know, I think of a convenience store that we have out there on 31 and basically they've always been supported by the KUNAD departments that are behind there. that's how it originally started. And that was always their biggest support. So, you know, you need, you need certain rentals. Uh, you're going to go to, uh, uh, you know, as rental, no matter what, I mean, you know, you need a, you need a certain, uh, type of, uh, uh, whether it be a, a, a saw cut, uh, type blades, uh, or cut, uh, saws, uh, uh, whatever they rent out, if you need it, you're going to go. I mean, you know, you're not going to say, oh, well, gee, they're tearing the place up and it's a little hard to get in. You know, the only one that I could see maybe hurting is maybe the car wash because you sure wouldn't want to go through that, get your car washed, and then go out, you know. But other than that, I just don't see spending the money. You know, we've got enough problems just looking at, well, we've got to pay for – you know, moving all our infrastructure and everything else rather than keying in and giving money out to this. So I am not going to support it.

Thank you. Alderman Cook, go ahead.

It's a double-edged sword. I mean, I want to help the businesses, but then again, I don't. You paid your money, you take your chances. I have a problem with designated fund agreement between the community foundation for the McHenry County. If they need the money and all that, why can't they just call right to the city? Why do we have to include the county on it? I trust them as far as I can spin it into the wind. And if we're supporting the businesses of the city of McHenry, why can't they walk up to us up to the city and ask, you know, or put in the application. Why do we have another entity going through with this money? Do we not trust the city of McHenry to help businesses that have helped the city of McHenry? Am I barking up the wrong tree here?

Well, there's two reasons. One, people can make donations to the community foundation. Not anonymously. Secondly, we're doing it for transparency reasons. So they come to the city first for eligibility to determine if the business is eligible. So we determine that, the city, and then we put them in the community foundation's grant portal and they fill out their application and they have a committee that reviews it and they decide, and the city's on that committee, there's two representatives on that committee along with the community foundation members. And then you decide which businesses they feel are, or should get the awards. And then the money's distributed to the city and then the city decides how much they get. So it's, it's for transparency. This is a large part of it.

And it's not McHenry County government. It's a nonprofit entity that specializes in giving out grant funds. That's just the title of the nonprofit.

I may not be understanding, but to dole out this money, I understand there's an application you needed and all that. Too many hands are in the pot, that's all.

Any other questions, comments by council? Any public comment? Trish, please call the roll.

Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Bainey? Yes. Alderman Glab?

No.

Alderman Bassey? Yes. Alderman Davis?

Yes.

Alderman Cook?

Yeah.

Alderman Miller?

Yes. Thank you, Council. Next item on the agenda is 8D1, which is a motion to pass an ordinance removing parcels from the City of McHenry downtown project redevelopment area. I am looking for a motion to approve as presented. Alderman Doherty? I'll make the motion to approve item 8D1. Alderman Bainey?

I'll second that motion.

Thank you. Discussion on this item? Alderman Bassey?

Consistent with my feedback and votes throughout this entire TIF process, I am voting no on all TIF motions. The primary function of a TIF is to increase property value within the TIF district. At the August 17th public meeting, Mary Mahady, the McHenry Township Assessor, warned against the new proposed TIFs, stating the value of homes are already increasing by 7.24% next year, regardless of future development. If McHenry Township Assessor states that property values are already increasing, then the but for requirement is not there and the TIF is not necessary.

Any other comments by council? I'll move on.

Yeah, I just want to say that, you know, the longest time we were talking about tips and everything else. And I have brought up the fact that I don't, number one, like the way it's presented to us is the fact that, no, it's not a new tax, but it is additional tax for our taxpayers. It's also additional tax for everybody in the county. Just as well as there's additional tax to us for every tip that goes on in Algonquin and Huntley and Marengo. We're pennies, but we're still paying for that. So the way I look at it is, even though I don't like the idea of TIFs to some extent, I just feel that by not going forward with TIFs, then we put ourselves at a disadvantage compared to the rest of the county. So I will support that. The only thing I, I really have reservations is I don't want to see a lot of development as far as residential and staff seems to feel that we'll be looking at a lot more commercial and all that, which is I think what we want to see. So that's where I stand on it. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other comments? Alderman Miller.

I support TIF districts. Tax increment financing is a way to incentivize, help our community grow in the right direction and be very involved with what happens from here to the future. Without creating TIF districts, we lose interest by developers and redevelopers in making our community better. So I believe that TIF districts are an absolute mechanism designed to do just that, improve what we have, and redevelop what we struggle with. So I absolutely understand a TIF district. I understand valuation. I understand the incremental financing and I am a strong supporter of creating and implementing TIF districts.

Thank you. Any other comments?

Yeah. You know, you take a look at some of the pictures that we show along 120 and everything else. And you know, there's some of them that in fact, the times that, uh, I brought it up, uh, in the past, there are violations out there that, uh, should be taken care of. Uh, and I don't want to see tip dollars being used for people, you know, landlords and everything else that aren't following the ordinances. They're not following the ordinances. We should go out and find them before we start dishing out tip money to fix them. It's not tax dollar money. That's a well spent, uh, Not if the, if the, uh, property owners, uh, are not complying, then, uh, we need to be tougher and just take them to court or whatever. But that, you know, those things, especially you see them in some of those pictures, that stuff should be taken care of. And it's a shame that it, you know, what everything that Ross's department has to do that they have to, you know, constantly push on this, uh, with some of the landlords. It'd be nice if a lot of them were more cooperative. And unfortunately, like the Kmart building sitting there so long and everything else, some of them just use it for tax write offs or whatever, but really we need to get tough on some of them. I've got one that where the front of the, signboard has been gone ever since that business opened up from the previous business. And that stuff needs to be, even if it's just a plain solid piece of plexiglass, I mean, at least it's not just looking like not even half done. So like I say, I just think to some extent, I want to see those property owners paying for what needs to be done and not the taxpayers. just so that it's up to the levels where they should be as far as our ordinances.

Thank you. Any other comments by council? Any public comment? Church, please call the roll.

Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Bainey? Yes. Alderman Glab?

Yes.

Alderman Bassey? No. Alderman Davis? Yes. Alderman Cook?

Yes.

Alderman Miller? Yes.

Thank you, council. Next item on the agenda is... 8D2, motion to pass an ordinance approving the Richmond Road and McCollum Lake Road Redevelopment Plan and Project. Although I'm not.

Thank you. As disclosure and transparency, I still have an ownership interest in property that would be within the Richmond Road and McCollum Lake Road redevelopment plan and project. Therefore, I cannot be part of the discussion, participate in the discussion, or vote. So I will be silent, and I will be abstaining for voting for agenda item 828384. Thank you. Can we do those together?

or do we have to do them all separate? Separate. Separate, okay.

Thank you, Frank. Thank you.

There's some unexplained reason. No, that's fine.

Can I have a motion and a second on this? Alderman Bainey for a motion?

I will make that motion on D2.

Thank you. Alderman Doherty? I'll second it. Thank you. Discussion by the City Council. Any public comment? Church, please call the roll.

All in woman, Bainey. Yes. All in woman, Doherty. Yes. All in woman, Glab.

Yes.

All in woman, Bassey. No. All in woman, Davis.

Yes.

All in woman, Cook. Yes. All in woman, Miller, Epstein.

Thank you, council. Next item on the agenda is 8D3. On this item, there was a typo that's supposed to say on section three, make payment. And then council had two L's in it. So just FYI, those little typos there. So- Thank you. The item is 8D3, a motion to pass an ordinance designating the Richmond Road and McCollum Lake Road TIF redevelopment project area. I'm looking for a motion to approve as presented. Alderman Banning.

I'll make the motion to pass an ordinance designating the Richmond Road and McCollum Lake Road TIF redevelopment project area, D3.

Thank you. Second. Alderman Doherty. I'll second the motion. Thank you. Discussion on this item by City Council. Any public comment? Trish, please call the roll.

Alderman Bainey? Yes. Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Glab?

Yes.

Alderman Bassey? No. Alderman Davis?

Yes.

Alderman Cook?

Yes.

Alderman Miller? Abstain.

Thank you, counsel. Next item is 8D4, motion to pass an ordinance adopting tax increment financing for the Richmond Road and McCollum Lake Road redevelopment project area. Looking for a motion to approve as presented. Alderman Maney?

I will make a motion to approve, to pass an ordinance adopting tax increment financing for the Richmond Road and McCollum Lake Road redevelopment project area. Thank you.

Alderman Doherty for a second? I'll second. Thank you. Discussion by City Council. Any public comment? Clerk, please call the roll.

Alderman Maney? Yes. Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Glab?

Yes.

Alderman Bassey? No. Alderman Davis? Yes. Alderman Cook?

Yes.

Alderman Miller-Ebstein?

Thank you, council. Next item on the agenda is 8D5, motion to pass an ordinance approving the West Illinois Route 120 redevelopment plan and project. Looking for a motion to approve. Alderman Doherty? I'll make a motion to approve item 8D5. Thank you. Alderman Bainey? Switch it up a little bit.

I'll second that motion.

Thank you. Discussion by city council? Alderman Miller?

So for full transparency and disclosure, I do own property in the proposed West 120 district. I have removed that property from the TIF district. Therefore, I can participate in discussion and vote on this item.

Thank you. Any other comments by city council? Any public comment? Trish, please call the roll.

Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Bainey? Yes. Alderman Glab?

Yes.

Alderman Bassey? No. Alderman Davis?

Yes.

Alderman Cook? Yes. Alderman Miller? Yes.

Thank you, Council. Next item is 8D6, a motion to pass an ordinance designating the West Illinois Route 120 TIF redevelopment project area. We'll also say that it was right after boundary map. There's two commas. There's supposed to be one, so a little typo there. I'm looking for a motion to approve as presented. Alderman Doherty? I'll make the motion to

8D6.

Thank you. Second? Alderman Davis?

I'll second this.

Thank you. Discussion by City Council? Any public comment? Trish, please go.

Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Davis?

Yes.

Alderman Cook?

Yes.

Alderman Miller? Yes. Alderman Bassey? No. Alderman Glab?

Yes.

Alderman Beeney? Yes.

Thank you, Council. Next item on the agenda is 8D7, motion to pass an ordinance adopting tax increment financing for West Illinois Route 120 redevelopment project area. Alderman Binney.

I will make a motion to pass an ordinance adopting tax increment financing for the West Illinois Route 120 redevelopment project area.

Thank you. Alderman Cook. I was going to call you anyway. Yeah, I'll second it. Thank you. Discussion by City Council. Any public comment? Trish, please call the roll.

Alderman Bainey. Yes. Alderman Cook.

Yes.

Alderman Miller. Yes. Alderman Davis. Yes. Alderman Bassey. No. Alderman Doherty.

Yes.

Alderman Glatt.

Yes. Thank you, Council. Next item on the agenda is 8D, no, 8E, sorry, Council Staff Communications and Requests. Before asking for a motion, Attorney McArdle passed out language amendment to the Section 12, so I will be asking for a motion to pass a resolution establishing a City Council staff communication and request policy for the City of McHenry, McHenry County, Illinois, with the added language presented to Council in Section 12 of the resolution. So at this time, I'm looking for a motion to approve 8E as just presented. Alderman Miller.

I'll make a motion to approve 8E as presented.

Thank you. Second. Alderman Bainey.

I will second that motion.

Thank you. Discussion by City Council. Alderman Miller.

Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. I feel it's important to recognize that this is a policy that important not only for us but to recognize that staff has a million things to do each and every day and all those we need them to give us information so we can make great decisions as one who is always information seeking I'm sure that I have probably taken up more time than others of my great staff and directors and department heads, because I need them. This establishes not only what we can do, but the organization chart and the protocol and with which to do it. And I think that is so important for each and every one of us to follow. For example, I had a resident call today. There were multiple questions needing to be answered. I could have picked up the phone because I was in my car, and called four directors for those answers. Knowing this staff, this proposal was coming forth, I picked up my phone. I made one call and dumped my whole load on chief slash city administrator Burke and said, thank you for the new protocol. Good luck with this. Here are the four things I need from you. You do the work. And he'll prioritize it as it needs to be prioritized. None of those issues needed to be solved today. But had I picked up the phone and called Ross and Russ and Bill and Doug, I would have sucked up four hours, not seven minutes. So I think this policy is long needed. It will give me guardrails because I am an information junkie and I'm sure I've used up more time than I was allotted from my directors. So I'm grateful for it. Thank you.

Thank you. Discussion and all the women, Benny, go ahead.

I just want to say that I think that the details of the policy were very fair to council members and to staff. And I concur with everything that Alderwoman Miller just said as well. And I do think this is in the best interest of our taxpayers. It will save taxpayer dollars. It will help communication to flow in a more organized fashion. And I'm grateful for the creation of this resolution.

Thank you. Discussion by city council. Any other members? Alderman Glenn.

Yeah, I just look at this and I say to myself, um, I remember years ago, I had to go to the city administrator if I wanted to get any information. One of the prior mayors made the declaration on that. But I just look at this and I say to myself, if alder persons take and ask for certain things that staff can't answer then they should probably just automatically and maybe it should state in there that it's referred back to the uh city administrator to make that decision uh and uh if an older person is not happy with the decision that's made yeah they can always bring it back to council to discuss if it's that important to them but i just I don't know. Just throwing this in front of me and wanting me to vote on it tonight, I just kind of... I think I'd rather... I'm going to balk on it tonight. I'm just going to pass.

Okay.

Could I respond to that?

Yeah, go ahead.

You know, Andy, there's a lot... that goes behind one of these ordinances and some towns adopt them and some don't. I spent a lot of time looking at other places and what they do and talking to other attorneys. And some of it has to do, it almost borderlines on protecting the employees from the apparent power of the alderman. It may not come from the alderman to the employees in that way, but it's received that way that, you know, I have to stop whatever I'm doing because this person's my boss. And they, you know, it's you have to be really careful that the intimidation factor that that has to a normal everyday working stiff person.

And that's why it comes back to the council. That's why it comes back to the council to make that decision. Because that person does not have any authority. I don't have any authority until we're all together.

I know, but when you walk into the city hall or you make an email or whatever you do today and communicate with that staff person, They stand up like you're their boss. They don't say, oh, you don't have any power because you're not voting and you're not at a table with all the other people. They feel like they have to stop what they're doing to do it. It's almost like, I don't want to use the word harassment, but harassment protects employees from feeling uncomfortable with a certain aspect of what's going on. And the aldermen in their position as aldermen have to be careful that they're having that effect, even though there's no intent. Don't get me wrong. It's not the point. It's just we're trying to make sure it's a level field where everybody follows the rules. And it's not up to the employee to say, well, you know, maybe I ought to send this to the boss, my city administrator, because it's over my head or I really am too busy. And they don't want to go back to the alderman and say, I'm not going to do what you asked me to do. They don't want to do that. So we're just setting a policy that it's clear and that's the path you follow.

We could create a policy that if we're going to change something at the last minute, you don't hand us a piece of paper a minute or two before the meeting for us to look at it and dwell on it. You don't have to do that. I'm sorry. You don't have to do that. Now I have authority because I'm here with the rest of the council. So Dave, all I'm trying to say is the fact that I've got the rest of the agenda to look at that I'm thinking about and everything else. I don't want to be looking at this and deciding how I'm going to vote on it. This way, if we have to change something just before the meeting, then maybe we need to pull it and bring it down to the next meeting. That's all I'm saying. I think it's common courtesy for us to have it, to look at and think about it before... you know, have a few minutes to think about it before we take it and vote on something. So that's where I stand on it, and I'm going to abstain on it because of that.

Okay. So this was added because of a council member asking and requested this. So it wasn't the city staff or myself adding this. This is something that any of you could have reached out and said, hey, you know, can we make a change? If we want to remove this and back out the motions and go with the original item, we can certainly do that. But this is obviously something that we're listening to other council members and what they were requesting. And so here you go. So if you don't, we'll go ahead and get the other council members to back out of their motions. And then we'll go make a motion on the item that's on here. It's that simple.

It's whatever the council decides.

I'm just telling you, it's not like we're just, you know, you make it into the public, like we're just adding this trying to, you know, throw it down your throat. It was something that was requested by a council member, not staff.

No, no, I get the intent. I just wanted to make sure that was clear. I get the intent of why it was given to us. It's just two minutes before the meeting, you know, how does it tie in? I'd like to have time to think about it. I just don't like when something like that happens, that's all. And I understand the intent is as to solidify it more, but it's still the way it was presented. So that's, that's just where I'm at. Thank you.

Just a couple of things. I do understand exactly what Alderman Glab's saying, because honestly, even reviewing it, my head's thinking about other things, so I can't even say I'm fully comprehending what's in here. I was perfectly fine what was sent in the original packet and would have no problem withdrawing this and sticking with that. But I guess a question, if it's easy to answer, is what might be in here specifically that wasn't in the original packet? policy that we put in the packet.

Right. So we received a comment from an alderman that suggested, hey, there's no time frame in which the staff's going to respond to any of the procedures we have in here. And we thought that was a good comment. So I said to the mayor, why don't we just make it that the staff should try and follow the same time frames that are provided for in the FOIA rules. You know, except if it's excessive or, you know, they're overburdened or whatever. And those calls are, those exceptions are in here. But in general, the rule is follow whatever the FOIA rules are for timeframes. And that was a hole in the ordinance that there was no real timeframe in responding.

And again, I would be okay with eliminating that if it makes it easier to get this passed, only because I trust that our staff is always looking out for the best interest of how they're serving council and would make these things a priority based on what... And we can always bring it back with this and other changes too.

I mean, if we want to go ahead and back out of your motion and so forth, we can certainly do that. This is obviously something that we can always... change down the road too.

As the maker of the motion, I will not withdraw my motion. I want to proceed as presented with the amendment.

Thank you. You good? Who made the second?

Yeah.

I mean, I respect what Sue was saying. I'm good with it. I just, you know, was trying to make counsel in general, you know, a little more comfortable.

Okay. Motion's on the floor.

I think the amendment makes the policy better. Without the amendment, there was no timeframe.

Exactly.

So I could ask for the moon and it could be delivered 50 years from now. With the amendment, it says it has to be within the same time constraints as a FOIA. So it rises to the occasion of I'll get back with you as if it were a Freedom of Information Act request. I think that's perfect response time. So that's why I'm standing strong on the motion. Thank you.

Thank you. Yeah, I'm good. Any other discussion by council? Alderman Bassey.

Okay. The purpose of the resolution is individual council members cannot direct or supervise staff, assign staff work, or establish work priorities. Inquiring about past and present city business to inform future legislative decisions or following up on the status of current city business is not directing or supervising staff. Inquiring if technical reports were created for major developments is not assigning staff work. Requesting that questions submitted Thursday to be answered by the end of the day Friday for an agenda item at Monday City Council meeting to allow sufficient time to analyze information, inform residents, and prepare is not establishing work priorities. Following up or requesting clarification or confirmation for answers that are indirect, incomplete, or inaccurate is not excessive, disruptive, or intimidating. A city cannot restrict access to public documents or obstruct oversight duties of an elected official or hinder an elected official's ability to make and informed legislative decision. Because the interpretation of the resolution states, quote, this policy shall be interpreted to preserve the legitimate oversight and information gathering responsibilities of individual city council members, end quote, and quote, the purpose of this policy is not to insulate city employees or administration from appropriate questions, communications, or oversight, end quote. I have no issues with this procedural document. A resolution is a procedural document and ordinance is a law. Title I, Administration, Chapter 7, Officers and Employees in the City Codes Ordinance States. Quote, all records kept by any official of the city in the course of their duty shall be open to inspection by the mayor or any other member of the council at a reasonable times. End quote. whether or not such records are required to be kept by statute or ordinance, end quote. It further states a specific duty and responsibility of the city administrator is to, quote, provide the city council with adequate information to help it reach sound decisions and establish policies, end quote. My only concern with this procedural policy or document is barring an emergency or unforeseen development, staff priorities should remain answering questions or clarifying information for agenda items for the upcoming city council meetings. This is especially important because packets are typically posted late Wednesday for a Monday meeting. Every council member has a different threshold for informed and prepared. but what is reasonable and what is adequate information should be decided by the individual council member. This is because seven council members hold an extraordinary amount of power and our legislative decisions are enormously consequential. The understanding has always been that the council members have all agenda items, agenda questions asked and answered by the city prior to the meeting So we do not blindside staff with questions they are not prepared to answer. This process is a mutually beneficial arrangement that provides ample time for the staff to answer questions and ample time for the council to prepare. This process needs to remain. In items of concern about staff time, answering individual council member questions, Ward four is the largest ward in terms of both population and land size. With such a huge variance in population between wards, it is a reasonable expectation that the larger the ward, the more staff time will be required to address the resident's concern. While this imbalance in staff resources might have the outward appearance of unfairness, It is important to remember that the city might have seven wards, but these wards are grossly unequal by the city's choice. Until the city corrects the unequal wards, which violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, the amount of staff time expended will likely remain in balance. In terms of document requests, particularly because There seems to be concerned about the document request for the preparation of the CPIU adjustment vote. Printed documents are essentially required, are occasionally required for both ease and reference and annotation. Per the city, a black and white printed document costs 0.0065 cents per page. The non-wholesale and non-bulk rate for a 50 sheet ream of paper is as low as $6. I find it hard to believe that less than $10 worth of printing documents are an actual issue and that I suspect the real issue is I independently researched development impact fees and discovered that the city skipped seven years of required CPIU annual adjustments without decisions, notification or the required council approval which indisputably resulted in artificially low development impact fees. In terms of legal fees incurred by individual city council members, it is important to note that just because a question was the impetus that required legal counsel, the city or individual elected officials not enforced or following rules, ordinance or conflict of interest laws was more often than not the real reason for the legal counsel was required. If individual matters would like to be discussed, that can be done. As I stated, I have no issues with this procedural document provided the interpretation section is followed and the city does not restrict access to public documents or obstruct oversight duties of an elected official OR HINDERING AN ELECTED OFFICIAL'S ABILITY TO MAKE AN INFORMED LEGISLATIVE DECISION.

NEW SPEAKER ANY OTHER COMMENTS BY COUNCIL? GO AHEAD.

NEW SPEAKER WHAT IS THE TIME FRAME FOR NEW SPEAKER SEVEN DAYS?

NEW SPEAKER FIVE BUSINESS DAYS.

NEW SPEAKER FIVE BUSINESS DAYS.

NEW SPEAKER THEREFORE WE COULD HAVE OUR PACKETS AT LEAST FIVE DAYS BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEETING. NEW SPEAKER WHY IS THAT? NEW SPEAKER IF THAT'S THE CASE. I mean, come on. If we're going to create something to work, you got to wait five days to get the answer.

We never said you have to wait five days. That's not.

Well, that's the outside.

No, that's not. It's the outside limit. Listen, publicly, this is all political. We have never in city staff ever since I've been here, never have had an issue of getting information out. The concerns that I have. is the fact that there's 40 questions, okay, from a council member, okay, and I, 100%, I didn't say your name, but you made this political. So, you know, I said there's a council member that would take up a lot of time, and it is. I'm on the phone Saturdays, Sundays with staff members trying to figure out what angle, what things you're looking for, and it Versus just picking up a damn phone and saying, hey, I'm looking for this or this. We've had council members respond to you saying, hey, what is the angle? What are you looking for so we can help so we're not wasting hours and hours of time? You don't respond. So as far as I'm concerned, this is all political. You're trying to make yourself look good. And this ordinance needs to be put in place immediately. We've never not provided information to any council member ever. Right. And, you know, I know. So, you know, as far as the five days, that's for things that there is a hundred questions and a lot of them might not even be on that agenda. It's not staff will never not respond to something that's on the agenda on Monday.

That's not the issue. But you've got something now that would be in the books that. four or five years down the road, it might be different. You might have different people in those situations. You've got to remember you're setting this up for whoever's down the road.

But if there's an issue, get the majority of council to make a change.

I'm sorry?

Business days, not calendar days.

We don't take those days for members of the public who file FOAs.

They get it in two days, three days, unless it's a really huge job.

But you understand what I'm saying, that if it's on the books and down the road, You've got different people, whether it's an alderman person sitting here or staff that's there, and somebody reads that and says, well, you know what? They can wait. You don't know, but you're setting yourself up where that could happen. I'm not saying it will, but it could happen.

They could do that today. Today they could say, we're never going to give it to them. You can't do anything. You can't sue them.

Huh?

The most you can do is submit an FOA. There's no policy today in getting documents back to the city council.

But every agenda, there's a city council comments. If you have concerns or there's something that you're not getting, you're more than welcome to make a comment.

I agree.

But this staff will never do that. That's just, you know what I mean? They just won't.

Like I say, I'm just looking at it. It's something that's on the books and it, We put something like that on the books. How could it be affected all of a sudden five or six years from now? David's not here. You're not here. I'm not here. Make a change.

If they give us the package five days early, it's going to change three times by the time it gets hard.

You're right on that. It changes day by day.

I'm just bringing up the scenario.

We just want to have it all together by then.

I mean, I think... In the years I've been here, I don't think I've ever had a complaint from any department head that I've ever asked for too much of anything.

That's where you can't wait for that. That's the intimidation factor. You don't want that. You don't know that they weren't. put off or set things aside because it was you. In fact, I know that's the case.

Most of the time years back, Dave, it was because of the fact I'd ask it here and they would have wanted me to call them up and ask two or three days earlier so that I'd get the answer.

I'm just saying. There were issues. Remember? We had some knockdown drag outs about, you know, going back to the back room and talking to people between meetings. And it was just, You just, it's that intimidation. Do you want to avoid that? Okay. Again, it's not that you are intimidating. It's just it's perceived that way or could be.

Be careful of that. If somebody put it years back and that's the fact that we'll agree to disagree and leave it at that. I'm ready for a vote if anybody else. Alderman Miller.

I just have two comments to make. First and foremost, I think every member of council should go to a Robert's Rules of Order class because there are a hundred different ways to act and not act and move things forward. This policy has nothing to do with that. If you don't have enough information to make a decision, you table a decision or you move it further. If you know how to navigate through Robert's Rules, you can stop any action on any agenda. End of story. So if I were queen of the world, everyone would be taking a Robert's Rules of Order course. And I think that's been very successful for me in all the leadership roles I have. Second thing I want to share is when I was in management, I took all the chairs out of my office. Because 1,000 times a day, someone called you or walked in and said, can I have a minute? and a minute is never 60 seconds. It's always longer than that. So for the physicality of if you think your question is going to be more than a minute, bring a chair with you. Because that told me I had to focus and I had to stop multitasking. Every person in our city administration, from administrator to department heads to employees is multitasking every day. This policy intends to keep them on track and give us still full access to the information we have through the proper channel. The rabbit hole chasing has to stop, otherwise the efficiencies stop. So I believe strongly that this policy is making an effort at creating open available communications without spending excessive resources. whether that's time, talent, or money. As a person who has probably abused her access, I'm glad this is in place. Thank you.

Alderman Davis.

Yeah, so I'm in support of this. I've asked for this since I've been on council. I saw it when I was on planning and zoning. It's not like everybody has, staff has things to do every day. Again, a minute is not a minute when someone comes in and asks you a question. It's gonna take you a minute to read the email. It's follow-up that's gonna happen for that. Now, depending on the amount of effort it takes to get whatever the question is, I would actually like to see, this policy is necessary. I actually would like to see if it was over a certain amount of time that it's going to take to generate the answer, whatever the question be. that that could even come back to council to say, okay, yes, are we gonna pursue this? Is this even worth staff going through down a rabbit hole for? Because it's not necessarily just a couple of minutes here, a couple of minutes there. We did the math on just this one particular item, but there's been other items where it takes eight hours, 10 hours, 20 hours to get this. And that's 20 hours that we're paying the staff to do something for a council member that takes them away from their normal job. And to me, that's the pain point here is we're wasting tax dollars to go down a rabbit hole on something. And if it needs to, because there's an identified issue, problem, whatever it be, then okay, then that's fine. Let's bring that back and discuss it and say, okay, yes, this is worth taking the extra time. And if that's the case, so be it. But for every other week when we have, or twice a month when we have our meetings, To have this happen all the time, I think it's just a waste of resource time. I don't think we should, we're not saying that they're not going to answer our questions because that's not the case. We haven't seen that. If we see that, we can always put in something to address that, right? We can modify this policy. for Andy's point on the five days, I kind of agree with that to a point, but what I would like to see maybe is if it is something that is gonna take five days, then we table that item on the agenda and say, okay, we need to table this because there is a need to get this information. It's gonna take five days. We're only getting it on Wednesday for the next meeting. So in those instances, I think that we can, We can address that. We're all adults here. We can figure that out. So that's all I wanted to say.

I mean, and just for the record, you know, I know I don't say too many great things all the time, but I will say that, you know, Aldo and Basti, I give you credit for how many hours you deal with all this stuff. I will say I even told Aldo and Glad when I talked to him on the phone, I'm like, hey, you know, you ran on the city, you know, not doing the correct things or whatever the case may be. And you're finding things and that's great. And we're not here hiding anything that you're. putting out there in the public, making it look like we're hiding things. But at the end of the day, picking up a phone call and calling the city administrator and taking a couple minutes saying, hey, I'm looking at the CPIU. What can we look at? Is there some things that we, you know, I think it's not, you know, whatever. And it'd take a two minute conversation. It's like having a kid, you know, my child, I'll talk to him for two minutes. I can get what he wants. I, you know, get what I want out of him. That's all we want and make it easy and what you're looking for and we'll get it for you. So once again, uh, you know, I, I, we want to streamline things, make it more efficient and this is going to do that. So any other comments by council, any public comment? Chairs, please call the roll.

Alderman Miller? Yes. Alderman Binney? Yes. Alderman Glab? Abstain. Alderman Doherty? Yes. Alderman Bassey? Yes. Alderman Davis? Yes. Alderman Cook?

Yes.

Thank you. Any staff comments, staff reports?

So the UDO is up on the website. We sent out some information. I just want to make sure that you all have time to review this document. So we had some issues with the comp plan where maybe we didn't get the review like we wanted to from the council, but it is open to the public right now. There is a survey out there as well. We did a social media post. So, again, this is just me telling you guys that it's really – It's a unique document. It's probably going to be tough to read and understand a lot of it because it's so technical. But, you know, I am here to answer the questions that you have. I'll do it within five days. So please go read it.

All right.

Thank you. It's posted on our website under planning.

There's a link to it on the email I sent you last week.

Bill, go ahead. Just a reminder that Friday morning at 9 a.m., this city will continue to host the commemorative 9-11 ceremony at Veterans Memorial Park. We'll raise the flag that Mark Houston donated to us that flew over Engine 10, Ladder 10 at Ground Zero. We'll also have speeches by the mayor, the police chief, and the fire chief, and a color guard, and the high school choir will sing some Cronenberg songs for us. So Friday at 9 a.m. at Betts Park. Thank you.

Anything else? Mayor's report, obviously a big week ahead right now with Rise Up. Yeah, that's it. Thank you to all the volunteers and those that are on the council that have been participating and will be participating Thursday through Saturday. Anyone that wants to volunteer, reach out. Other than that, it's going to be a great weekend. Good weather. So knock on wood. Hopefully it doesn't change. What's that?

I'll sit on my deck and light my ear.

Okay, perfect. Let me know how it is. Any city council comments? All done, Ben?

I would like to know where Alderman Davis was when it was raining at Chalk Fest with your Aquanet, because there was such a great turnout. The artwork was so beautiful, and it was so sad that it all got rained on.

I was wondering that same question. Chief said that he had all the time to care and all that. Oh, okay. Yeah. I made a public comment that hairspray would work. I didn't say that. He would be out there to spray it. By any means, there's no hairspray here. I can assure you of that.

Well, it was a great event and it was really nice to have seen it grow. And there was also the wine walk this past weekend that the chamber put on, which I had volunteered to work at one of the stores on Green Street to help them out. And what a great way to get people into local businesses that, you know, shopping increased dramatically that day for everybody. I visited all the tiny shops. They were just slammed. There was empty shelves. So kudos to the chamber for another successful event and bringing so many people into our shopping district.

Agreed. Aldo Miller.

I just wanted to echo the chalk walk was just amazing right up until the moment the skies turned gray. And then I was channeling Bill Hobson going, how do I get 2000 people out of this park safely without falling? Um, but it was all done. Well, Bill, thank you. Um, river walk foundation. Thank you. Uh, 50% of the artists had their work done. 50% were well in progress. And it was just so sad when the sky opens. But anyway, it was, um, it was a great day. It was great to see, do you know how many people were down there?

It would just be a guess that there was probably throughout the time from 10 a.m. it started coming until we closed around 2. I thought 1,500. I mean, it was a steady flow of people all day.

Steady flow of people and a lot of people that hadn't been there before. Those were many of the comments that I had. Just, wow, we've never been down here, and what a great event, and the food trucks, and the mini shops, and there was just a whole lot of energy there. The other comment that I want to put out there for the public is in the last couple weeks, staff has had a meeting, and I'm just looking at the staff notes really quick. Staff had a meeting with the Riverside Drive merchants to discuss the upcoming streetscape I thought that meeting went extraordinarily well between our directors. Thank you, Doug, for your leadership there on just explaining the project, explaining what we're going to do to help them, what they can do to help us and how we can cooperate with the first streetscape makeover of our downtown district. So I just want the public to know that it's coming and there's gonna be inconvenience but we're doing the best we can from all sides to make sure that it in fact goes smoothly. So thank you, Doug. And again, thank you, Team McHenry.

Any other city council comments? Motion to adjourn? Alderman Cook? Make a motion to adjourn. Second, Alderman Glemm?

Sure.

Trish, please call the roll. Alderman Cook? Yes.

Alderman Bain?

Yes. Yes.

Thank you, everyone. Have a good evening.