Board of Trustees - Regular Meeting

Good evening. I would like to call the regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of September 8th, 2026 to order. Would you please join the Board and me in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. Thank you. Clerk Scarpiniti, will you please call the roll?

Trustee Anos. Here. Trustee Jane. Here. Trustee Manzo. Present. Trustee Martin. Here. Trustee Reddy.

Yes.

Trustee Tessinga.

Present.

President Herman. Here.

The meeting is called to order at 7 o'clock p.m. So a few introductory comments. This week the village of Oprick is honored to host the Healing Field, a powerful display of American flags commemorating the lives lost on September 11, 2001. Each flag represents an individual whose life was taken that day. The ceremonies begin tomorrow at 6 p.m. No, 6 a.m.? 6 p.m. 6 p.m. with speakers, presentations, and observances scheduled daily until Sunday. As we approach the 25th anniversary of September 11th, I encourage everyone to visit the healing field. September 11th reminds us not only of one of our nation's darkest days, but also of the unity and compassion Americans showed in the days and months that followed. 25 years later, we continue to honor those who we lost by remembering that spirit of service, strength, and unity. And that spirit carries special meaning this year as we commemorate America's 250th anniversary. And on that note, this Saturday, September 12th, I invite our residents, families, friends, and neighbors to join us for Oak Brook's America 250 celebration. This community event is being held on the polo field with gates opening at 5 p.m. and will feature great food, activities for children, live music, and an extraordinary drone show, followed by a knockout fireworks display. And then finally, I'd like to recognize members of our Jewish community as we prepare to observe Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. Rosh Hashanah is a time for reflection, renewal, prayer, and hope for the year ahead. To all those observing, on behalf of the Village Board, I wish you and your families a happy, healthy, peaceful, and sweet New Year. Thank you. Now public comments. Any public comments?

Yes. John Romanelli.

Did I touch anything? We're good? Thank you. John Romanelli, 502, Winnis Court. I didn't know whether or not this was the time to make a public comment or when this topic was going to be discussed. under active business A1, but I own the property directly south of the property that you are dealing with in active business A1 and A2. I came before this board, not fully everybody at this board, but probably 80%, and asked for the same relief, which was to grants me the right to build on eight-tenths of an acre. Personally, I don't care if the property next to me is eight-tenths of an acre or if it's a half acre, but in my case, I was turned down. I also then had to buy the property from the village right away, which I understand is still there, additional land for $80,000. I don't think it's right in terms of transparency and quality that I would have to pay two-tenths of an acre or pay for two-tenths of an acre if this is granted. And I think the village should either do the same thing or should rebate me my money. That's it. I have one other question too. The back of the property goes into the Lutheran Street and pond. I notice that there's a lot of excavation going on there. I'm looking at a property in Ginger Creek to develop, knock it down. They have issues with their creek and lakes. How did that happen? Was that a homeowner's expense? I know it's owned by the Gerges family and the Herman family, but who's paying for that?

Are you finished with your comments? Yes, yeah. Okay, thank you.

All right.

Any other public comments?

No.

Okay. That closes the public comment section. Normally, we don't have dialogue and public comments, but to answer Mr. O'Malley's question, that pond construction work is being paid for by the Gerges' and the Hermann's, and the cost is about three-quarters of a million dollars. Okay. Moving on to approval of the minutes, regular Board of Trustees meeting, minutes of August 11, 2026. I have a motion for the approval of the minutes from the regular Board of Trustees meeting of August 11, 2026. So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any objections? Motion carries. Would you please direct your attention to the screen now where the consent agenda is displayed. All items on the consent agenda are considered to be routine in nature and will be enacted in one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a board member so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered as the first item after approval of the consent agenda. Clerk Scapriniti, would you please read the consent agenda?

COUNTS PAYABLE FOR PERIOD ENDING AUGUST 20TH, 2026 FOR $1,429,388.03, AND SEPTEMBER 2, 2026, $1,753,890.37, WHICH INCLUDES INVOICES FOR DUPAGE WATER COMMISSION, ENTERPRISE F.M. TRUST VEHICLE LEASES, DOMI MECHANICAL INDUSTRIES, DUCOM, TPI Building Code Consultants, Builders Paving LLC, BLA Inc., Trine Construction Corp., EZA Engineering PLLC, Duff Entertainment. Approval for payroll for pay date August 20, 2026, $1,026,000. $933.31. September 3rd, 2026, $1,021,795.78. Village of Oak Brook monthly financial reports for July 2026. Authorization to seek request for proposal for ambulance billing, developmental services referral for 1 Templeton Drive fence variation.

Does any board member wish to have any item removed from the consent agenda? All right, I've seen none. May I have a motion to approve the consent agenda and authorize expenditures as presented or amended?

So moved. Second.

Clerk Carpenita, may I have a roll call vote, please?

Trustee Anos. Yes. Trustee Jane. Yes. Trustee Manzo. Yes. Trustee Martin.

Yes.

Trustee Reddy. Yes. Trustee Tisinga.

Yes.

Motion carries. Moving on to active business. The first item, Ordinance S-1753, an ordinance granting a variation from provisions of Section 13-6B3A of Title 13, zoning regulations of the Village Code of the Village of Oak Brook relative to the lot area requirements for the properties located at 3608 and 3610 York Road in the Village of Oak Brook, Illinois. We have a motion for the approval of ordinance S-1753. So moved. Second. Director Vondrasek, would you please present this ordinance?

Good evening. As you'll see for A1 and A2, these are related to 3608 and 3610 York Road, which is the consolidation of two lots. It currently has a single-family home on each of the lots. By consolidating, the density of homes will actually be reduced by one. And I think that that's an important point. However, when you do the lot consolidation, even though they have purchased not one but two homes and consolidated the lots, the lots are not adequately sized for the R2 district, which is the need for the variation under consideration this evening in front of the board.

Thank you. I know that this board has shown a desire to see lots consolidated as opposed to lots divided. which is exactly what distinguishes us from the lot across Lutheran Road that was just referenced in the public comment. That said, is there any discussion?

Good question.

So what's the difference between, you know, we had in public comment, what's the difference between the two situations? The difference as I see it is that the Mr. Romanelli's lot was a single lot that was improved with one house. That was divided, and there's a whole history to how it got divided, as he said, but that was divided into two lots that were non-conforming. or one lot was conforming, one lot was going to be non-conforming. That led to some discussion, some litigation. This was before my time in the board. The board, in my opinion, raised a white flag they shouldn't have and ended up selling some village right-of-way to Mr. Romanelli to allow it to be two compliant lots of one acre each, but for which it would not have been compliant. So basically, you took one lot and made two lots out of it and two homes.

Yeah.

This situation is, and by the way, these are very old sections of Oakbrook. So the original house on Mr. Romano's lot was a very old house, probably 100 years old, early 20s maybe, as are the two homes and the lots before us tonight. So they are all nonconforming lots that predate by decades the formation of Oakbrook and the zoning code. The whole area is zoned R2, which is a minimum one acre lot. As is this area these lots are both Less than one of them considerably less than one acre They've been on the market for years. They haven't sold. They've been an eyesore. They've been a Hazard a lot of teenagers have been breaking into the houses and having parties in them as they did with the house of Mr.. Roman only's property And apparently they finally found someone who's willing to buy them both on the premise that they would come here for a segregation request and combine them. But the two lots combined is still well under the one acre minimum. So I think the combined acreage is probably two thirds of an acre, which is below the R2 limit. But again, we're getting rid of two real eyesores, one house that's been abandoned for at least 15 years, if not 20 years, and we're going to get one new house out of it. So not ideal. We'd prefer to have, you know, I preferred always to have compliant lots.

So do we expose ourselves to any of the litigation risks associated with this or nothing because of precedence or differences? I'm just asking.

No, I mean, you can ask our village attorney, but I think this... know arguably is in the best interest of the village to eliminate you know houses that are in disrepair that are dangerous and replace it with one house and the other thing i'm told by jamie patterson our stormwater engineer listen i prefer for this as a neighbor i prefer for this lot to remain vacant um but uh the other thing i'm told by our stormwater engineers that unlike the two lots across the street where you took one lot with one house and you made two new houses, you had a reduction in impervious space, naturally. This new house that's proposed is actually going to have less impervious space than the two existing houses.

um could you explain to me the uh options or the alternatives so if someone were to buy an individual lot are they grandfathered in could they knock down the existing house and rebuild on it if could they take it down to only studs and add to it and would they be required to then adhere to lot or building So they're building on the lot requirements that are current? Right.

And I'm sorry, that wasn't part of their request. So I didn't update myself on the chapter three of the zoning ordinance. But there are provisions within the ordinance that explain more or less what happens when you have a lot that existed prior to the incorporation of the village. And it reduces the setback allowances. So you could possibly find someone who would be willing to buy one of those very small lots in comparison to general Oak Brook lot sizes and then build a comparable sized property. home but but they would not be then um held to the same standard in terms of 40 build space or they would be still held to the same they would be held to those standards because those are handled under the residential district standards it is just the ability for them to replace the home that is there on the site

so the alternative would be too much smaller even if they were brand new they would be much smaller lower valued homes it would not be a standard oak brook home i guess that's the best way to refer to it but one of the houses that's there the one that's been occupied uh has been a rental house for quite some time

So Trustee Mangia. Yeah, I think this is a win for the village. I support it, Rebecca. It's the opposite of Mr. Romanelli's situation. With Mr. Romanelli, we had one house, one pad converting into two. This is two homes converting into one, which is kind of what we wanted. To Melissa's point, if it remains, it would be two much smaller homes. So I think this is something beneficial to the village. converting two homes into one, basically.

Trustee Tzinga. Thank you, President Herman. As I read the staff memos, it looks to me plain as day that the applicant here is knocking down those houses and building one house. Yeah. So I don't see the problem here at all. The only risk seems to be that somebody's being clever and won't actually knock down the two houses, but will sort of spruce up two houses. So is this conditioned on them following through?

I was going to get to that. So I had the same concerns. So I worked with staff actually today, and we have some updated conditions that get at that point. So I'll read them. Let me explain them first, then I'll read them. one of the conditions is that they submitted as you saw in the packet plans for the house yes and one of the conditions is they're going to have to build as per the plans the second thing is we added a condition that um you know there's a there's a you're on a corner so there's a question about orientation does the lot orient towards the front towards york road Does it orient towards Lutheran Road? If you orient it towards York Road, as they are doing, what does that mean for the frontage on Lutheran Road, which is where you enter that subdivision? So we've added a condition that there'll be a setback of 60 feet from the Lutheran Road property line, upon which no improvements can be made. So you kind of keep that vista. What otherwise might be a front yard in a normal situation with a broad setback is going to have a additional setback that says there's no improvements on that piece. But let me read these conditions. The approval granted in Section 2 of this ordinance is expressly subject and contingent upon each of the following conditions. Final engineering approval prior to recording of the plat. That's number one. Number two, the owner and all subsequent owners of the subject property shall at all times comply with all applicable requirements of law, including without limitation federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, resolutions, regulations relating to the subject property. Three, there should be no improvements within 60 feet of the south property line adjacent to Lutheran Road, including fences. four a landscape plan acceptable to the village is required at the time of building permit the plan will include but not limited to appropriate screening of exterior equipment and installation of parkway trees on lutheran road number five the development of the property shall be in substantial compliance with the plans as submitted Number six, approval and adoption of this ordinance by the village board and final recording of the plat by village staff. And seven, not withstanding the attached exhibits, the applicant shall meet all village ordinance requirements at the time of the building permit application, except as specifically varied or waived. Is that a question?

That sounds like an expansion of what's in our packet.

CORRECTED PRESIDENT HERMAN WITH THE MOTION AREN'T IN THE TABLE I BELIEVE THAT HAD TO BE OFFERED AS AN AMENDMENT WITH A FIRST AND SECOND AND THE AMENDMENT VOTED ON PRIOR TO THE MAIN MOTION I'LL MOVE ON THAT I'LL SECOND SECOND DOES THIS UH DO THESE AMENDED CONDITIONS FOLLOW THE PROPERTY SO IF THESE UH OWNERS REQUESTING THE CONSOLIDATION IF WE CONSOLIDATE THE LOT AS AN ORDINANCE DO THESE CONDITIONS FOLLOW THE PROPERTY IF IT IF IT IT'S A VERY VERY VARIATION GENERALLY RUN WITH THE LAND Okay, so if we get a new owner, they still have to... come back to us or build substantially consistent.

As you saw in the packet, this developer has presented a very specific house situated very specifically on the property. I also had quite a bit of discussion with Jamie about stormwater runoff, which is obviously a very large concern to those of us in the neighborhood. So I think, based on my discussions with Jamie, we have a comfort level that's going to be appropriately managed. Any other discussion? OK, may I have a vote, please? This would be the vote on the amendment to the motion first. Voting the amended motion with the conditions I articulated.

Okay. Trustee Jane? Yes. Trustee Manzo? Yes. Trustee Martin? Yes. Trustee Reddy?

Yes.

Trustee Ticinga?

Yes.

Trustee Enos?

Yes.

Okay. The motion carries. Actually, that would be the vote on the amendment. Now you need to vote on the main motion with the amendment. Correct.

Okay, okay. Vote on the main motion with the amendment. That was a vote on the amendment. Now we're voting everything with the amendment.

All right. Trustee Manso? Yes. Trustee Martin? Yes. Trustee Reddy?

Yes.

Trustee Ticinco?

Yes.

Trustee Anos?

Yes.

Trustee Jane? Yes.

Okay, that carries as well. So that brings us to the second related issue, which is the plat issue, Resolution R-2377, a resolution approving the final plat of consolidation for the properties commonly known as 3608 and 3610 York Road, Oakbrook, Illinois, 60523. May I have a motion for the approval of Resolution R-2377? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Director Vondrosik, back to you.

The only thing I wanted to say regarding this step is that as part of the final plat of consolidation, staff cannot record it while there are two structures on the property. So we will require the demolition prior to the recordation of the plat.

So I have a question. One of the conditions we put on the last motion was a setback upon which there'd be no improvements made. Was that appropriately appended to the first matter or does that need to be part of the plan?

It could be noted on the plat of survey as a As an amendment to it, the resolution itself calls for engineering approval prior to the recordation of the YR10 re-subdivision, which is the name that the applicant chose. And as part of this resolution, final engineering approval is there. So we can ask that they revise the plat document.

So Trustee Martin's point about running restrictions running with the land.

It would absolutely then run with the land because it would be recorded on the plat of survey, yes.

so my question is do these conditions need to be part of this approval as well yes i would suggest okay so moved second okay we got a motion for the amendment to add the same conditions any further discussion we have a vote on the amendment

Trustee Martin. Yes. Trustee Reddy. Yes. Trustee Tzinga.

Yes.

Trustee Anos.

Yes.

Trustee Jain. Yes. Trustee Manzo. Yes.

Okay, motion for the amendment carries. May I now have a vote on the full motion with as amended?

Need another motion? No.

Yeah, we had it.

It was already on the table. Okay. All right. Is that the original one? The original one with the amendment. Okay. The last item.

Okay. Yes. Trustee Reddy? Yes. Trustee Ticinga? Yes. Trustee Anos? Yes. Trustee Jane? Yes. Trustee Manzo? Yes. Trustee Martin? Yes.

Okay, that carries as well. Thank you. Next item, resolution R-2381, a resolution to waive further bidding and authorize staff to issue purchase orders to IE2 Tech Inc. for the Network Switch Refresh and Firewall project. May I have a motion for the approval of resolution R-2381? So moved. Second. Director Gilbert, would you please present this item?

Yes, thank you, President Herman. After careful audit and assessment of networks, staff discovered that 25 out of 31 switches are end-of-life and end-of-support in 2027. End-of-life equipment no longer receives security patches and updates, adding significant risk to network security. After research of different solutions and vendors, staff feels that Fortinet solution will work best for the village. IE2 Tech is an approved vendor on the TIPS contract, which negotiated the current pricing. This is currently budgeted line item of the 2026 budget.

Thank you. Any discussion?

I just had a question about, and I'm not sure, I tried to read the memos and I don't understand it all, but is this something that can be replaced with cloud computing? Like, do we need to maintain these

These are network switches that every computer connects to this that connects to the internet. So it's an interconnection to the backbone of the system. So cloud computing doesn't do this.

This has to be actual physical things. Correct.

And the firewall keeps the bad guy out of the internet. These are stop lights that lead to the cloud, right? Pardon? These are stop lights that lead to the cloud. Correct. This controls the traffic. It's a traffic controller.

All right.

Discussion?

Any more?

Roll call vote, please.

Trustee Tzinga.

Yes.

Trustee Enos. Yes. Trustee Jane. Yes. Trustee Manzo. Yes. Trustee Martin. Yes. Trustee Redding. Yes.

Motion carries. Next item is item 2382, resolution to waive competitive bidding and authorize staff to issue a purchase order to Novoltec LLC for the purchase and implementation of the scale computing server virtualization project. We have motion for the approval of resolution R-2382. So moved.

Second.

Director Gilbert, back to you.

Thank you, President Herman. On the same note as the switches, the virtual software renewal was quoted at $100,000 for the next three years of service. And our servers that they sit on was quoted at $45,000 to extend the warranty for three more years at a total cost of $145,000. Scale computing would replace the virtual server and hardware for the next five years at a cost of $127,978.34. BOTH OF THE SOLUTIONS CAN BE TRANSFERRED TO A NEW FACILITY SHOULD SUCH A DECISION BE MADE.

ANY DISCUSSION? ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE.

TRUSTEE ANOS. YES. TRUSTEE JANES. YES. TRUSTEE MANSIL. YES. TRUSTEE MARTIN. YES. TRUSTEE REDDY. YES. TRUSTEE TOZINGA.

YES. MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM, RESOLUTION 2383, R-2383, A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF OAKBROOK And the Board of Education of Butler School District 53 may have a motion for the approval of resolution R-2383. So moved. Second. Chief Strokas, would you please present the resolution?

Thank you, President Herrmann. This is an extension to an agreement in IGA that we've had with District 53 since 2022. It acknowledges a continuation of that agreement with a three and a half percent COLA increase built in. It also acknowledges the fact that the school district has fulfilled its obligation in terms of reimbursement for vehicles that are being utilized for that detail as a deterrent. We have two vehicles actually not part of the reimbursement that we use for regular patrol that are fully outfitted, but the two vehicles that we use for the school assignment are 2023 Dodge Durangos. I checked today to have an accurate number for you. They both have under 7,500 miles on them. So, we own those vehicles outright that were purchased on different grant, and I foresee them being serviceable for at least the next three years as is.

Thank you.

Any discussion? Roll call, please.

Trustee Tzinga?

Yes.

Trustee Reddy? Yes. Trustee Martin? Yes. Trustee Manzo? Yes. Trustee Jane? Yes. Trustee Anos? Yes.

Motion carries. Next item, Ordinance G-1291, an ordinance amending the Village of Oakbrook Code of Ordinances as amended. Title IV, Chapter 1, Section 8A2, increase the number of A3 liquor licenses by 1 to 4 for RPM Raceway 2300 to Oakbrook Center, Oakbrook, Illinois. May I have a motion for the approval of Ordinance G-1291?

SO MOVED. SO MOVED.

SECOND. SECOND. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO RPM RACEWAY IS A 90,000 SO RPM RACEWAY IS A 90,000 SQUARE FOOT ENTERTAINMENT SQUARE FOOT ENTERTAINMENT DESTINATION OCCUPYING THE DESTINATION OCCUPYING THE FORMER WONDERVERSE SPACE. FORMER WONDERVERSE SPACE. THE VENUE WILL FEATURE MORE THAN THE VENUE WILL FEATURE MORE THAN 45,000 SQUARE FEET OF 45,000 SQUARE FEET OF MULTILEVEL CARTING. and will feature the longest multi-level go-kart track in the Midwest. In partnership with Sony, RPM Raceway will also feature approximately 10,000 square feet of flexible event space with various food and beverage service and will offer a variety of other entertainment such as gel blasters, duck bowling, and arcade games. Brian Bartley from RPM is here tonight if anyone has any questions. Is there any discussion?

trustee tuzinka i'm kind of reminded of um you know down in florida sometimes you'll see in the news that some guy gets arrested for driving a riding lawnmower while intoxicated so the issue here kind of also reminds me of having liquor in the the stores you know i think there's like serving limits it kind of is related can you get a ticket for driving a go-kart while intoxicated It's on private property, so probably not. But is there some kind of a limitation protocol?

We're happy to bring in Brian. What are you guys, Brian? Come on up, guys. Limitation would be a lawsuit. So I think the question is, will there be police go-karts?

Thank you guys for having us. We're really excited and feel really welcomed by the village and excited to be in Oak Brook. To answer the question directly, what we do, it is private property. We have competitions and competitors that do authorize that. What we do is have your racing before any liquor consumption. So usually we do that in the form of a wristband or a bracelet where once you have two drinks, they'll cut both bracelets and you're not allowed to race anymore on the track. But that's self-policing that we do. As you mentioned earlier, technically it's private property. And your employees have to be BASA trained?

ALL OF THE BARTENDERS, ABSOLUTELY, AND THE SERVICE STAFF.

CAN YOU PLEASE GIVE ME BOTH OF YOUR NAMES?

ANDREW FARAGE. BARTLEY. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?

Yes, I was just sort of wondering, you know, what the deal was, because it looks like a really cool business concept. Thank you. It does. You know, you can sort of be Speed Racer. You don't just race the little, you know, slot cars. You get to be a slot car.

You get to be a slot car.

Or a Mario Kart for this generation. Oh, it's funny.

We are very tech forward and there are screens on the go-karts and there's a version of our racing mode where you go over projection mapped power-ups and you get missiles, shields, really cool features like that. So yes, I love it. And we have racing for juniors. So about seven to eight years old is really the cutoff and we want to really inspire racing alongside the growth of F1 and we think we're in the perfect market and the perfect mall.

um so thanks everyone again police fire the village just feel super welcome from new york well thank you and welcome to oprah and thank you for choosing oprah so any other discussion vocal vote please trustee ready yes trustee martin yes trustee mansell yes trustee jane yes trustee anus yes trustee to singer yes motion carries next item is a discussion item and it's the soccer fields renewal discussion So as we approach the end of 2026, the Village must decide whether to issue a new request for proposals, RFP, or seek a renewal with the current vendor. Factors for discussion include potential other users for the fields, our comparative place in the overall marketplace, the Village's needs for the use of the fields during certain periods, and whether another vendor would make use of the soccer office or just the fields. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Village Manager Summers. to begin the discussion.

All right.

First of all, this is the part where we slow the meeting down a little bit. This has got a little bit more nuance to it. So we are coming up to the end of our five-year agreement with Premier Athletic Management. Premier has, in their main contract, they lease the fields from us as well as pay maintenance expenses for those fields as a reimbursement. They have a secondary contract where they also lease the soccer building that is over there for their operational office. So those are contained in two separate agreements. THERE ARE TWO FIELDS THAT WERE NEVER DELIVERED TO THEM UNDER THAT CONTRACT. THEY'RE JUST NEVER GOING TO BE THERE IN THE FLOOD PLANE. THEY'RE NEVER GOING TO BE USABLE FIELDS IN THE WAY THAT WAS INTENDED WHEN THAT CONTRACT WAS DRAFTED. THEY'VE NEVER ASKED FOR A REDUCTION AS A RESULT OF THAT, EVEN THOUGH THE FIRST YEAR CONTAINED A REDUCTION WHEN THEY WEREN'T IN USE. BUT THE LONG STANDING HISTORY HERE IS THE VILLAGE RAN THE SOCCER PROGRAM NOT VERY SUCCESSFULLY IF YOU LOOK BACK AT OUR OLD BOOKS. NOT IN A PROFITABLE FASHION. WE THEN LICENSED THOSE OUT TO THE PARK DISTRICT WHO RAN THAT FOR US. UNFORTUNATELY THE PARK DISTRICT KEPT ALL THE REVENUE AND WE KEPT ALL THE MAINTENANCE EXPENSES. THAT WAS NOT A GOOD DEAL FOR THE VILLAGE. LATE 2021 THIS IDEA WAS CONCEIVED OF TO GO OUT TO THE PRIVATE MARKET. ALL TO END UP WITH PREMIER ATHLETIC MANAGEMENT PAYING FOR THOSE FIELDS. THEY PAY NOW $100,000 FOR THOSE FIELDS. THEY PAY $74,000 IN MAINTENANCE EXPENSES. THEY'RE PRESENTLY PAYING $2,500 A MONTH FOR THE SOCCER OFFICE. AS WE LOOK AT THE MARKETPLACE, WE KNOW THAT WE SIT AT THE HIGHER END OF THE MARKETPLACE ALREADY WHEN COMPARING TO OTHER SOCCER FIELD LEASES IN THE AREA. Premier Athletic Management has been a good tenant. They have worked with us, for example, when they need to get out of the way for the taste of Oak Brook for the parking or for Oak Brook America's 250 upcoming, which is not even included in their lease, and yet they've been accommodating with us on that. We do need to consider, for example, would a new user need the office or not because we don't have an alternate use for that facility. The facility does require some investment, so we are looking for TO LEASE THAT TO SOMEBODY TO OFFSET SOME OF THE EXPENSES WE EXPECT WITH THE FOUNDATION, THE WINDOWS, SOME OTHER REPAIRS THAT ARE NECESSARY FOR THAT BUILDING. WE KNOW THAT THIS SOCCER USE HAS GENERATED SOME OUT-OF-TOWN TRAFFIC. THEY HAVE TRACKED AND CONFIRMED HOTEL BOOKINGS, SO IT'S BENEFITING OUR HOTELS IN THE AREA. WE'VE GOT AN ESTABLISHED RECORD, AN ESTABLISHED CLUB. THEY'VE GOT AN ESTABLISHED CUSTOMER BASE. But it does beg the question of whether it makes more sense to go out for a request for proposals and test the marketplace or to negotiate directly with them. They did provide a proposal which I've included on the confidential side of the board packet in the event we do go to RFP. I didn't want to put their terms out on the table. So I'd ask, you know, if you have specific questions about their proposed terms to reach out to me separately rather than put those on the board floor tonight. But the overall direction here is does it make sense? TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH THEM AND TRY TO DEVELOP A RENEWAL PROPOSAL OR DOES IT MAKE MORE SENSE TO GO TO THE MARKET AND SEE WHAT THE OVERALL MARKET WOULD DELIVER. THE DIFFERENCE WOULD BE THE ABILITY TO GO BACK AND FORTH ON A NEGOTIATION VERSUS THE PROPOSALS WHERE IT WOULD BE A ONE AND DONE WITH WHOEVER CAME FORWARD. AND I'LL TURN IT TO THE BOARD THEN AND TAKE INPUT ON THAT AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. THANK YOU. DISCUSSION.

SORRY.

Yes. Have we checked with or have we had the benefit of the review by the Sports Corps Advisory Committee of this issue?

Sports Corps Advisory Committee has not met on this under the new directives that they have in place when the code was amended to talk about user experience rather than financials.

Naveen, did you have a question?

Yeah. Just out of curiosity, have we ever evaluated what other options we have in that area? So is it just rating it for soccer fields to them or some other company? Is that the only option we have?

Would you be referring to other than soccer or other users for the soccer fields?

Yeah, I mean both. I mean it seems like right now it's the option is we renegotiate with them or see if we can get a little bit more money by putting in RFP, right? But the usage is still the soccer fields of the company that operates soccer. Is that always going to be the case for all this area we have?

Well, I think the RFP could be broader, right? We have done RFPs before where we said, for example, this is the facility we have. Tell us what you would do with it and how much you would pay for the privilege of doing that. So the RFP could have probably a broader base, whereas they're already established in soccer and would want to negotiate a soccer contract.

I think there's a, to be fair, there's probably a balancing act on what you would want to do there and not want to do there.

right that's true so that's true trustee manzo um the way i understand this is you negotiating with them for a better offer doesn't stop us from eventually going to an rfp or an rfq so i mean from what i'm seeing it's not enough for me personally um it would need it would need to be um it would need to be a better renewal offer. So what I would recommend is what you're asking for is get the best offer from them. If it's good enough for the board, then we don't have to, but if it's not good enough, and I think it's leverage at this point that you can go and say, GIVE US YOUR BEST RENEWAL OFFER, AND THEN WE CAN DECIDE. BUT JUST BECAUSE YOU NEGOTIATE WITH THEM, IT DOESN'T PREVENT US FROM DOWN THE ROAD GOING TO AN RFQ OR AN RFP.

I THINK THAT'S AN INTERESTING POINT, BECAUSE NEGOTIATION DOES NOT PROCLUDE THE BOARD'S ABILITY TO TURN IT DOWN AND GO TO RFP. THE RFP WOULD ESSENTIALLY PROCLUDE THE ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE.

BUT YOU COULD STILL TURN DOWN THE, WHATEVER OFFER COMES IN, YOU DON'T HAVE TO ACCEPT.

CORRECT.

no the board would be under no obligation to accept the offers that come right yes i mean we'd have to go to rfp again potentially right to find an offer that we would be willing to accept but absolutely but going out doesn't mean we have to take whatever they come or anyone comes back i think as village manager summer said i think part of it is important to note that if you're talking about continued use of soccer fields there's a limited market out there of soccer field organizers users AND SOME OF THEM ARE ALREADY USING THE PARK DISTRICT FIELDS.

NEW SPEAKER I THINK IT'S BIGGER THAN WE THINK. I THINK THERE ARE MANY OPTIONS. THERE IS, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE FOOTBALL OPTIONS, THERE'S LACROSSE, I MEAN, THERE ARE MANY OTHER SPORTS THAT USE FIELDS IN A SIMILAR MANNER. I MEAN, WHILE I HEAR THE IDEA THAT WE CAN NEGOTIATE FIRST, I mean, they're there and operating a substantial business from there. I have, I mean, I think they technically operate as separate entities, but doing some back of the envelope calculations about Empire, how many teams and players they have, how much money they're bringing in. THE TERMS ARE THAT PRESENTED TO US ARE ABSOLUTELY NOT ENOUGH AND I JUST AM STRUGGLING TO SEE THE HARM AND GOING OUT FOR FOR RFP MAKE THEM COME WITH THEIR BEST OFFER BECAUSE I MEAN I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT ELSE IS OUT THERE AND THIS IS CLEARLY I MEAN IF THIS IS THEIR BEST OFFER I WANT TO GET IN THE SOCCER FIELD BUSINESS BECAUSE THEY'RE THEY'RE MAKING A BIG PROFIT FAIR COMMENT ANY OTHER DISCUSSION

I AGREE WITH YOU, THINKING EXACTLY IN THE SAME LINES.

I DO TOO. SEE WHAT THEIR BEST OFFER IS AND THEN WE CAN STILL GO TO AN RFQ OR RFP.

Yeah, I think it's clear that what they provided is not going to be an acceptable offer in my opinion. I doubt it is based on the comments I'm hearing from the board from most of the board members. Certainly, you know, I'd be seeking something much higher before I'd be willing to bring it back to the board. But if the board wanted to go to RFP, I mean, that is an option that's available to us as well. But then, like you said, we'll have a fixed set of numbers that we can either choose from or at that point issue a new RFP and see if we wanted to modify terms or something else to get a better proposal.

Okay. All right, so we need a motion then?

I'm looking for a motion for some direction from the board on which way to go, whether staff should prepare an RFP or whether staff should negotiate and bring a better offer back.

enters a meaningful season of reflection. Can you hear now?

Yeah. Thank you, President Herman. As we turn the page from summer into September, our community enters a meaningful season of reflection, celebration, and togetherness. I hope everyone enjoyed a wonderful Labor Day weekend, and we extend our gratitude and respect to the hardworking men and women whose labor has built and strengthened our great nation. Warm wishes for a joyous upcoming Ganesh Chaturthi to all those who celebrate. Lord Ganesha, the beloved elephant-headed Hindu deity, is revered as a remover of obstacles and a symbol of wisdom, prosperity, and protection from adversity. May his blessings bring peace, happiness, and success to all. To our Jewish friends and neighbors, warm wishes for a happy, healthy, and a peaceful upcoming Rosh Hashanah. This week marks the 25th anniversary of September 11, 2001, a solemn milestone we will all never forget. Please join us for our September 11 commemoration and flag salute as we honor the lives lost and our heroic first responders. As America celebrates 250 years, please join us in celebrating this historic milestone. God bless Oak Brook and God bless America. Thank you.

Thank you. Trustee Martin.

Yeah, today my son turns 15. My older son turns 15 today. And I took him last night for a little drive, his first time ever in a parking lot. And he did it for about five minutes and said, oh my god, this is so stressful. This is the most stressful thing I've ever done. And he said, mom, how could anyone possibly text while driving? And I just thought, yeah, you're right. How could anyone text while driving? And it made me really think about I've been contacted several times recently about the intersection at 31st and Myers. And there have been accidents consistently for a long time. And we have the traffic signals there that should correctly conduct traffic at that intersection and so what i encourage the village to think about and the residents to think about is not that we need additional controls right in the form of stop lights maybe we should all put down our phones while we're driving put them away because i think that's the thing that's contributing to a lot of crashes at that intersection people sit in long waits they're on their phone the entire time they're not paying attention and they're getting into accidents and so um from the mouth of a 15 year old how could anybody text while driving maybe if we took it all a little bit more to heart we could improve safety on the roads around the village well said thank you trustee manziel

Where did the time go? 25 years, holy cow. I mean, everybody remembers that day, obviously. Had young kids. My wife had just taken my son to preschool, and she comes back, and I'm like, you know, honey, look at this. And no sooner do I say that, but the second plane hits that building, and um you know unless you're alive at that time and it's amazing because all these young kids they don't remember that they weren't even born or they weren't old enough to remember but it was a horrific day for us the only positive was we all came together after that seems like long ago and in some ways it doesn't seem long at all but i'm so happy that the healing fields are back I think that it's just a wonderful tribute to 9-11. And people can go there and pay their respects. And then next door, a separate event, but we can enjoy America 250. And I hope everybody comes out. It's a completely free event. Free parking. free admission the food and drink you got to pay for but uh the parking admission is free hope everybody comes out and sees a great fireworks show 300 drones next year it'll be 400 right but anyways um uh just those are my comments for today thank you thank you trustee tozinga

Yes, thank you, President Herman. I was thinking about Rosh Hashanah. I looked it up. The year, the Jewish New Year this year is the year 5787. And as I understand it, the tradition that takes it back to the creation of Adam and Eve. using sort of the traditional numbering, going back through the Bible. And the second thought that occurred to me was thinking about our technology. We got so worried about Y2K. Remember Y2K? The Jews got past Y2K 3,787 years ago, and nothing broke. So I think we're fine. Looking forward to the next year. Thank you. Trustee?

Thank you, Mr. Herman. Firstly, I'm excited about Healing Fields. I think it's great. It's fantastic that the village is doing it, and we as a board are supporting it. So I'm excited to participate in that and encourage everybody. It's very touching, and I feel for that. On the topic, Melissa, you talked about that crossing. Greg and I talked about it. It's right next to my house, and I have a number of accidents. There actually is a solution for that. Greg and I talked about it, which is it's a visibility issue there. There's a house with a fence that goes around so when you are standing there you can't see if someone is going to go on a yellow light and turn so it's a very simple visibility issue solution where you put a mirror in the front where you can see and a lot of other crossings have that. So I think it's how we work it out with the county to solve for it because it's their thing. But I think the solution is visibility and it's a simple mirror solution. So yeah, I would really appreciate if we can somehow facilitate that and make it happen.

so i i am aware that there's been a lot of concern raised by residents lately the myers road intersection as well as the midwest road intersection on 31st street and my guess is it's reached your desk several times chief but um maybe we could just get offline and sometime this week and maybe the village manager yourself and me and talk about you know things that we might be able to look into and i you know i know we looked into this before the data actually suggested that there's not been an increase in accidents is what i recall but i'm sure every one accident is one too many but i also know this is county jurisdiction the road so there's a limit to what we can do but let's have that discussion thank you

Last but not least, I want to thank again, I've commented on it on the last meeting, but I think we should thank everybody on the sports core committee, the superintendent for getting the golf course back to where it's where it was. We've had multiple storms this year. And as everyone else said, I encourage everybody to stop by the healing fields. It was pretty touching today pulling up and seeing all those flags and it's quite something to see.

Thank you. Okay, you may have a motion to adjourn the regular Board of Trustees meeting of September 8th, 2026 at 7.48 p.m. So moved.

Second.

Clerk Scarpiniti, roll call vote, please.

Trustee Anos. Yes. Trustee Jane. Yes. Trustee Manzo. Yes. Trustee Martin. Yes. Trustee Reddy. Yes. Trustee Tasinga.

Yes. Meeting adjourned, thank you.