Town Council - Regular Meeting

for folks to block or obstruct access points, take up an inordinate amount of space, leave their belongings strewn about, or engage in disruptive or even dangerous behavior. It's just that I think a more detailed code of conduct that focuses on punitive steps does nothing to find a real solution to the problems as they're being experienced today. And so my invitation, let's keep working together. Let's work together at a level even higher than what we are doing right now. The success of the bridge, which today is serving 54 of our previously unsheltered neighbors, shows that when our community comes together, we can make a real difference. It should be no surprise, though, that the bridge alone hasn't completely resolved homelessness in our community. The difficult reality is that despite everything we're doing, we still have some people who are left to survive outside in public spaces. We must continue to focus on building trusting relationships with our unsheltered neighbors and on getting people the help that they need in order to move them inside. This includes linkage to mental health, substance use recovery, and health resources. It also includes ensuring that our community has an adequate supply of affordable and supportive housing available. Let's continue to work on these issues together. Home Sweet Home Ministries is committed to finding these solutions with you. After all, working together to address homelessness is surely the best and highest use of our time, energy, and resources, isn't it?

Thank you.

Too many papers here.

Next speaker is Mark Adams.

Good evening, Mayor Koos, Mark Adams. Good evening to the Council of Normal. Thank you for having us. My name is Mark Adams. I'm the board president of the Plummeton Normal Community Land Trust. I'll begin reminding the town that we are sitting on stolen land of Kickapoo, Peoria, Miami, and other tribes. The town of Normal has a little and moral duty to serve the public's interest, which includes our unhoused neighbors. and to work collaboratively with our nonprofit service providers. I call on the town to sit down with major stakeholders in the community, such as Salvation Army, Home Sweet Home Ministries, and the Center for Human Services, many of whom are in the audience right now, or any members that belong to the McLean County Housing Coalition, to collaborate on a more humane solution that does not further traumatize our unhoused neighbors. This proposed ordinance does feel rushed only to be made public last Friday and has not been presented to the local unhoused experts for feedback. Moving us forward without doing so shows bad faith and ill intentions. Housing is a human need, not a commodity. In the book, Homelessness is a Housing Problem, the main thesis states that high rental costs and low vacancy rates create a challenging market for many residents, and those challenges are compounded for people with low incomes and health issues. A rise in rental costs and declining vacancy rate, as the book points out very clearly, always correlates with a rise in homelessness. The reality is that word has already spread beyond our community regarding this potential adoption of this ordinance, and it is spreading an ugly light on the town's image. The town must invest in more permanent supportive housing or homeless shelters in normal and collaborate with service providers. Otherwise, whereas the city has chosen to build the bridge, the town may burn theirs by putting their unhoused citizens on alert for criminal punishment. Thank you.

Next speaker is Dave Bentley.

Good evening. I'm Dave Bentley, a resident of Normal. I am here on behalf of the Central Illinois chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois. When the chapter first saw the draft regarding the ordinance addressing a code of contract at Uptown Station, we were concerned and flagged the text for the legal staff at the ACLU of Illinois offices in Chicago. Unfortunately, we were able to share this draft only this morning. The ACLU staff is working on a detailed written response, raising concerns about the constitutionality of particular provisions of the draft ordinance. We encourage the council to delay action on this matter this evening, allowing the ACLU the ability to share its concerns and for town staff to review and make any necessary changes. A slight pause is the best way forward to get this right for all community members. We thank the council for their consideration. Thank you.

Next speaker is Alexandra Gray. We'll give her a moment to put her at the end of the list here. Next speaker is Adam Lovell.

Good evening. My name is Adam Lovell. I am the community services director for the Salvation Army and the co-chair of the McLean County Housing Coalition. I'm asking you to delay the vote on the amended uptown station code of conduct. This ordinance clearly states that, quote, it is in the best interest of the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Normal, end quote. As an agency that works with the homeless every day, I can tell you that this revised code of conduct is not in the best interest of our unhoused community members and neighbors. There is no dire health, safety, and welfare threat in Uptown to those who have a place to live. Living on the streets is the last option people have when they have tried to stay with family and friends or find a bed at a shelter. We cannot deprive the unhoused of one of the few places they have to go to feel some sense of security. For those of us working in the front lines of homeless services, We have seen the detrimental effect that occurs when we displace people and take away that little stability, that little stable environment that they have. I believe the town had good intentions when it drafted this revised code of conduct. However, concerns such as ADA compliance and emergency access are already covered by town ordinances that do not inhibit advocates from making connections and providing services. And they should continue to be addressed in the appropriate manner. I realize the town staff don't think about the needs of the homeless on a daily basis. That is why the Salvation Army, Home Sweet Home Ministries, and the McLean County Housing Coalition need to be involved with the planning to make Uptown a healthy and safe place for everyone, both the housed and unhoused. The town of Normal can make a choice to serve as a model community for homeless services. by facilitating never-before-seen collaboration efforts between local government, social service agencies, and including the voice of residents, both housed and unhoused. We already see the need, but who will meet the challenge? Tonight, I am making the commitment to step up involvement in Uptown Normal to increase support and create a plan that will make sense. I ask the town council and the town staff to step up with me in this commitment and serve all of our unhoused citizens as well as our housed citizens.

Thank you. Next speaker is Abigail Sample.

Hi, my name is Abigail Sample. I am 25 years old. I have been homeless for nine years on and off. I have lost apartments. I have lost cars. I have lost my children and I've lost my happiness. Before I moved into the Salvation Army a month ago, I've been staying uptown for a few years here and there during the wintertime and during the summertime. This place was and hopefully still can be a safe place, not just for me, but for my family who are also unhoused. We don't deserve to be treated like we are nothing. We are human beings and we deserve to be treated the same way you get treated. We are not all drug addicts or drunks, but the ones who are also deserve to be treated as human beings as well. We are mad that people like you, like you guys who have all the money and they want to make a tunnel for bikers for their convenience, but nothing for the homeless, yet you guys are the ones who are complaining. Do you guys just not like us just because we don't have the car and the house? I'm not being rude, I'm being honest. We are hurting and we need to be seen without being hated and discriminated against because we don't have the same things you have. I'm not only doing this for my Hun House family and myself, I'm also doing this for Gavin Marsack. He was a human being and he was a wonderful person and a friend who wasn't seen or heard. This is not where we want to be for the rest of our lives, but to some it is home for now. For some it's the only place we are seen and feel heard. I am begging you guys to please think on it more. We all deserve a second chance and please don't vote on it today. I appreciate you guys for letting me be the voice for those who can't speak tonight or ever. May God bless all the souls in here, and I hope you guys have a blessed night. Thank you.

Next speaker is Liam Wheeler.

Good evening, everyone. My name is Liam Wheeler. I am someone who has been homeless in this town. Thank you town council for letting me share my experience on the matter of the expanded code of conduct for the uptown station. I'm asking the council to remove the changes to the code of conduct from the omnibus as this is something that warrants extensive discussion and planning before implementation. I am furthermore asking the council to vote no or table the decision to adopt these changes to the code of conduct until an intentional plan can be developed with both McLean County Housing Coalition and persons with lived experience. As both a professional working in homelessness and someone who has slept on these streets, there are several important points that I would like you to consider. We have seen across our region and in this county specifically that when homeless residents are pushed further from the city center, they often must find more dangerous areas to sleep in. They become harder to find and are less likely to engage in services. For those of us that have been homeless or are homeless, these types of policies create distrust in systems of care that are designed to help us. 64% of the persons experiencing homelessness in our region are doing so for the first time. For approximately 8% deemed chronically homeless, they are the most likely to have barriers to shelter and more unlikely to engage with services because of past harm caused by persons, service providers, and local systems. This does not mean that they are beyond help nor want help. It means that they benefit from coordinated and intentional care. Healing happens in and because of community. When we take the time to get to know their names, their barriers to housing, what they have experienced, and what they need in order to be successful, it benefits the entire community, not just the individual. When we are told we are no longer welcome in public spaces under any ordinance, it makes us feel like criminals. This increases the level of shame and re-traumatizes us. Thank you for your time. Again, I'm asking you to remove this from the omnibus and vote no on the expanded code of conduct for Uptown Station. Thank you.

Next speaker is Seth Wheeler.

Seth Wheeler, lifelong Normal resident, former Uptown business owner. Those who spoke before me in support of our house neighbors are fighting the good fight and deserve acclaim for their statements. However, I'm here to speak on a different topic. I'm here tonight to make the economic argument against Trail East and Trail West as currently envisioned as megastructures. We can plainly see that Uptown Normal thrives on independent owner operators occupying historic buildings. The Rock is locally owned and operated, employs many young people, and contributes plenty of sales tax revenue. Medici occupies a building modeled after its historic predecessor and creates jobs and sales tax revenue as well. The Coffee House is locally owned and operated, employs at least a half dozen baristas plus a couple of cooks, and it proudly embraces its mid-century digs with an entire wall of windows. D.P. Doe started in a postage stamp of real estate, grew to occupy and restore a historic building with a beautiful facade. Ryan Thial employs dozens of folks and clearly generates an abundance of revenue from his two locally owned and operated businesses in Uptown. Maggie Miley sits in one of the oldest buildings in Uptown, and like all businesses I have previously mentioned, contributes jobs and sales tax revenue. Windy City, Waiting Room, North Street Records, Stave, Theo's, Coffee House, Garlic Press are all in historic buildings, all create jobs and fill tax coffers. On the other end, we have modern developments. Commerce Bank sits dead and unoccupied for years. We demolished a Masonic Lodge to be left with a makeshift parking lot. Busey Bank, also dead and unoccupied. It's retaining while slowly failing, its brick corners crumbling, its metal fencing rusting to bits. We demolished a unique quirky shopping strip to be left with not even a parking lot. The CVS building has had for years now an unoccupied storefront that contributed no jobs, no tax revenue to uptown. One uptown place has either been a massive hole in the ground or an unoccupied, overpriced, empty storefront longer than it has been a restaurant. The ground floor of this very building has retail space available for lease, unoccupied, generating nothing. In 2008, the subprime mortgage bubble burst and set off a financial crisis that impacted nearly every person in every town. Uptown was not spared. Economists see a similar bubble about to burst again. Compound that with the ever-increasing costs of fuel and transportation, we have the perfect storm for delayed, maybe abandoned development. So please, normal, dig a couple more big new holes. I miss the frogs.

Uh, excuse me, uh, next speaker is Reverend Tara Tresker. Bless it.

Good evening. My name is Reverend Tara Trefsker-Blessant. I am a resident of Bloomington, an Illinois State University alumna, vice president of McLean County Reentry Council, and co-chair of the Bloomington Normal Chapter of Fully Free through the Illinois Coalition to End Permanent Punishments. Through these roles and my ministry work, I work closely with individuals impacted by incarceration, poverty, trauma, domestic violence, mental health challenges, substance use disorders, disabilities, and housing instability throughout McLean County. I appreciate the town of Normal's responsibility to maintain a safe and accessible public spaces. Public safety does matter. At the same time, housing status is a circumstance, not an identity. The individuals we are discussing tonight are our neighbors. My concerns are not with the standards of conducts themselves, but with the implementation and unintended consequences. I would like to ask my questions in a sequence that moves from transparency to accountability to equity and ultimately to solutions. Will there be written policies and procedures outlining how these rules will be enforced consistently? If so, will these policies be made public? What specific behaviors will result in warnings, exclusions, or bans? What services and supports will be offered prior to those warnings, exclusions, or bans? Uptown Station is a multimodal transportation center serving residents, commuters, students, workers, travelers, and visitors from throughout our region. Housing instability does not have a uniform appearance. What objective standards will the town of Normal use to ensure individuals are not presumed to be unhoused based upon their appearance, belongings, disability, or other perceived characteristics? What safeguards and trainings will be implemented to prevent this profiling? And finally, given that the only emergency shelters and many supportive services are located in the City of Bloomington, and recognizing that the Town of Normal and City of Bloomington function as twin communities, where are individuals expected to go if they're removed from Uptown Station? Has the Town of Normal considered whether any of these ordinances may unintentionally displace vulnerable individuals rather than address the root causes of housing instability? Housing instability does not stop at municipal boundaries. The town of Normal and city of Bloomington both share the challenges and responsibilities of responding thoughtfully, collaboratively and compassionately. Public safety and human dignity do not have to be competing values. We must be careful not to mistake displacement for resolution. Given the complexity of this issue and relatively small number of individuals impacted on any given evening, I respectfully ask for the town of Normal to consider delaying action on this ordinance to allow additional conversations.

Thank you. Next speaker, if she has made it in, is Ann Duback. We'll keep her on the list here. Michael Deon.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council. Thank you for allowing me to speak. My name is Michael Deon. I am 28 years old and I have been in normal for about four years now. I'm here tonight on this code of conduct update about Uptown Station. I have a proposal for the council. Instead of giving millions of dollars in tax breaks and public money to a developer to develop more expensive housing, we perhaps put that money to better use in finding a place for our currently unhoused. This code adjustment doesn't actually solve anything. It just pushes the homeless out of the way because apparently you don't want to see them. Well, they deserve to be seen and it appears that this community agrees that they should be seen and heard. Miss Reese, I don't come to Uptown much by personal choice, not because there's homeless in Uptown Station. The people who live in Uptown Station or are staying temporarily, those are people that you serve as well. They are citizens of normal. It's not just landed people who you are supposed to serve. Every time we come in here, At 7 o'clock, Mayor Coos calls the roll, and we stand up and we take a pledge to each other, to our community, and to our country that says the following. One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. This ordinance shows none of these things. This oath is an oath to all Americans, not just the ones who have a place to sleep. Between this and the severe lack of responsibility taken with the underpass project financing, I'm beginning to wonder if this council has forgotten who it is supposed to serve. Thank you.

Speaking in place of Alexandra Gray would be Kimmie Massey.

I first would like to say thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak in her place if she could not be here tonight. Alexandra Gray is one of my former clients from when I was running God's Mission Ministry. Some of you may remember that I was a former outreach ministry in Bloomington Normal, but I've currently closed due to my own health reasons. But I'm still here and want to advocate for them tonight. so alexandra gray has asked me to share what she planned to speak to you all tonight and that is quality of life for one of the most vulnerable groups in our society is far far more important than the impression uptown leaves on visitors there are no shelters organized in normal no community centers or something similar for individuals in these predicaments no allotted space for them to exit outside of the two shelters in bloomington that have ever growing waiting lists So where are folks experiencing homelessness supposed to go? Why do we keep displacing them with no end in sight beyond imprisonment? Normal in Bloomington keep pushing people and their families out of every crack and crevice that they have managed to find a speck of respite in. Any place that allows them to survive just a little longer. If this town truly cared, we would not be discussing an ordinance akin to the ugly laws. Laws that made it illegal to exist in a way that we're deeming unappealing and better and easier to hide. If this town truly cared, we'd be discussing places for people to go. We would not be having a discussion to consider burying people from visibility. You say this wouldn't be used to deny them access, but let's not lie to ourselves. Let's be honest and recognize that cops never need a reason to abuse their power but this ordinance. It will be used to justify discrimination as laws like this have historically been used to justify discrimination and abuse. How appealing do you think uptown will be when news circulates about our abuse tactics or someone gets hurt? How appealing will it be when people start organizing in protest to this inhumane ordinance? if you care say no to this ordinance and instead focus on formulating a plan that meets the needs of the homeless individuals say no to these ugly laws and say no to the ensure safe places to sleep and say yes to harm reduction and trauma-informed care say no to systematic oppression and say yes to community connection and accessibility let's be a community that puts a spotlight on what we need to fix and not one that criminalizes a community and tries to hide it we can all do better as a community thank you for allowing me to speak

Our next speaker is Tori Lomelino. Hope I got that right.

Good evening. My name is Tori Lomelino. I'm proud to call Normal home and I have the honor of serving our community as the assistant supervisor at Normal Township. My comments are my own and are not on behalf of the township. When I learned that the council was considering this amendment to the Uptown Station Code, I felt compelled to speak. As someone who works every day with residents in this town facing financial crises, I can tell you that homelessness is almost never the result of one bad decision. It is the result of the rising housing costs, disability, job loss, untreated mental illness, or gaps in our social safety net. The people I meet each day are doing their best to survive circumstances that even the toughest people in this room could not imagine. The public expects the town to connect people to the services they need the most, not criminalize their existence. This ordinance has the effect of making their presence in a public space, this very building, a crime. But we know that struggle is not a crime. That a fine, a ban order, or an arrest won't fix these problems, it will only make them worse. As the township's bookkeeper, I also spend my days thinking about how we use taxpayer dollars. Research consistently shows that repeated enforcement actions against people experience homelessness is very costly and it does little more than move people from one place to another. We need jobs, homes and health care. not fines, bans, or arrests. As someone who helps manage both public dollars and public assistance, I don't believe compassion and fiscal responsibility are competing values. In fact, I believe the most compassionate policies are often the most fiscally responsible because they solve problems instead of replacing them. I also find it troubling that this ordinance appears on the consent agenda. While presented as an amendment, it represents a significant policy change affecting some of our community's most vulnerable residents. I respectfully ask the council to remove this ordinance from the consent agenda, engage with service providers and organizations that work directly with people experiencing homelessness, and consider whether there are alternative ways to address genuine safety concerns without criminalizing poverty. The way a community treats its most vulnerable neighbors says a great deal about its values. I hope normal chooses compassion. Thank you.

Next speaker is Shirley Craig.

Thank you. My name is Shirley Craig. I'm a long time normal resident. I don't work for any social service agency or have any affiliation in that respect. I guess I didn't realize the homeless problem was as big as it is in Uptown Station. I've noticed problems when I go in and out with Amtrak and on other business, but I'm going to say something unpopular to this group. staff, I thought you did a good job in writing it. I thought it addressed things like we won't kick people out when we're a cooling center, we won't kick people out when we're a warming center. I thought it did a good job. It also has in there a two hour time limit where people can be here without being on the business in Uptown, which I thought that's plenty of time for a lot of things, but not perhaps the problem of the homeless. So I'm gonna drop the rest of those comments. What I really came here to say was normal Uptown East, Uptown West, once again, you're gonna destroy surface parking. Okay, the residents of the apartments are going to have their own parking spaces. I read that. I read that there's a study that says there's enough parking in uptown to handle things. I've also heard council members say, no, that's not the case. So if you are one of those who said that, please vote no on this. What a study says and what the perception of your residents feel is, is something else. The groups of ladies I go to lunch with, we don't consider coming to Uptown. It's too hard to park. When you're not disabled, so you don't have a permit to go in a handicapped spot, it can be difficult if you still have problems getting around. And those surface parking spaces are precious to us. I hate to see you destroy more. I have a feeling you will.

And our final speaker of the evening is Christopher Myers.

My name is Christopher Myers I live in normal. And i'm speaking in regards to the trail East building projects. These buildings are beautiful historic and architecturally unique to uptown and should continue to be used as they have been for more than 100 years. The town normal clearly needs to pay attention to what their citizens want not only on this issue, but clearly a lot of other issues. Nobody wants these beautiful historic buildings demolished and replaced with a massive high-rise building that is cold and stale and unwelcoming to Uptown and ruin its charm and uniqueness to its historic buildings that already exist. These buildings should be saved and continued to be utilized with small businesses inside. Just like the other gentleman had spoken to, there's several historic buildings in Uptown, formerly downtown Normal, that are continued to be utilized And that is part of the charm of Uptown. Small businesses, smaller unique historic buildings versus an ugly, stale, cold high rise that's like six or five stories high, in my opinion. The new proposed buildings can be built, if you want, alongside the historic buildings that's very easily to do so that both buildings can be in existence. These old buildings are what keeps downtown's heart and soul alive within Uptown. They add character and beauty to the community we live in. These buildings are not dilapidated and falling apart. They are perfectly good, strong buildings that should be saved and reused for small businesses. The mural building 104 East Buford is a landmark and staple in Uptown and deserves to stay that way. I advise you all to heavily reconsider this proposal and table the vote on the design plan until the redesign is made to preserve the building at 104 East Buford next to any new development. Yes, let me see here I just want you to think about how much history and beauty you would be destroying if this plan passes as is Please don't erase the charm in history of uptown normal.

Thank you And if and do back has made it in Apparently not that concludes our public comment for the evening I We move to the honor of this agenda items consider considered routine and would be handled with one vote unless council member would like to pull an item for discussion. Miss Smith.

Yes, I'd like to pull. Agenda item I. As in Ichabod. And also pull the item G referring to the sanitary sewer lining.

Motion for approval?

Move approval. Second.

Items considered under omnibus tonight are approval of the minutes of the regular council meeting of July 6, 2026, a report to receive and file town of normal expenditures for payment as of July 15, 2026. A resolution waiving the formal bidding, advertising, bidding, and auction process, and approve an intergovernmental vehicle exchange agreement with the Normal Public Library. A resolution to approve executive session minutes and retain confidentiality for certain executive session minutes. A resolution to accept bids and award a contract to Union Roofing Company Incorporated for the Linden Street Dungeon barrel roof overlay project. That's a word for the phrase for you, isn't it? at the South Linden Street Park maintenance facility and that's in the amount of forty two thousand two hundred and forty dollars a Resolution to accept bids and award a contract of row construction a division of United Contractors Midwest for the 2026 motor fuel tax street resurfacing project in the amount of $1,846,550.96. This is an annual motion that we take for our annual street resurfacing, not the only one, but one of the ones that we do. an ordinance amending section 17.3-2 and 17.9-3 of the Town Code regarding cannabis possession prohibitions and ordinance violation settlement fines. Please call the roll.

Mr. Preston?

Aye.

Ms. Lorenz? Aye. Mr. Byers? Aye. Mr. Roberge? Aye. Ms. Smith?

Aye.

Mr. McCarthy?

Aye.

Mayor Koos?

Aye. Those items are approved. Item G is a resolution authorizing a contract with Hare Construction Incorporated for the 2026 sanitary sewer lining phase one contract in the amount of $1,381,596.50. Ms. Smith? Move for approval. Second. Ms. Smith?

I pulled this item because this has been an ongoing project that the town is pursuing for this sewer lining. As the supporting documents point out, this methodology allows the town to provide reinforcement to our existing sewers without the messy job of digging up ground to access the sewers, and this has been ongoing for some time. Miss Reese, where do we stand as a percentage of completion in tackling all of the sewers that Normal has in service?

Still a drop in the bucket. We have lined about 12% of our sewer mains. This particular contract, I think, will involve lining another 28,000 lineal feet. Okay.

Thank you for that.

That's all I had. Further on this item?

Please call the roll.

Mrs. Lorenz? Aye. Mr. Byers? Aye. Mr. Roberge? Aye. Ms. Smith? Aye. Mr. McCarthy. Aye. Mr. Preston. Aye. Mayor Koos.

Aye. That resolution is approved. Item I is an ordinance amending section 17.6-5 of the town code having to do with Uptown Station Code of Conduct.

Move for approval.

Second. Ms. Smith.

I appreciate everyone who has come here tonight to give their comments about this, but I think it would be advisable if we started with some clarification as some of the things that have been stated are not necessarily accurate. It's my understanding that the town of Normal is working with Home Sweet Home Ministries and Salvation Army when someone who is homeless is in uptown and is taking that as their home where there's not really services to provide for that support. Ms. Reese, can you speak to that?

Sure, your comments are accurate. We have a good partnership with Salvation Army and Home Sweet Home Ministries. We have called them regularly and they've responded regularly in their outreach services. We use community development block grant funds to fund outreach services. We invest in We have a police officer dedicated to the summer to work with individuals downstairs. And so I think it's, I have felt like it's been a pretty good partnership and we see their outreach workers coming through pretty regularly. We've called them and they've responded.

So at no time has that relationship been suspended or ended, at least from the town of Normal's standpoint.

That is correct.

Okay, and another misperception from reading the online comments is that the mere act of someone being homeless would cause them to come under this ordinance. My understanding is that this addresses behaviors, not situations. And And so if someone is in Uptown and participating in a festival, getting something to eat, resting for some period of time, they will not be tapped on the shoulder and told, you do not belong here. So I just want to make clear that it is not a condition that is being challenged with this ordinance. It is a behavior. And I noticed an increasing number of homeless people when I was up here to celebrate after my daughter won some medals in Special Olympics. There were about four or five people congregating in front of the building. And I noticed some trash. I picked it up. I noticed some more. And I'm like, I don't want to do this while I'm going to go in and eat. But that was the first indication to me. And this was in June, mid-June, that individuals were opting to make the uptown space into a camping space, which had happened. outside Home Sweet Home Ministries and on the trail adjacent to the Home Sweet Home Ministries. And the response that Bloomington has was, you cannot block the trail and this is not acceptable. And this move was made even before the bridge was built. And when it comes to funding, the town of Normal has provided funding for mental health services. the county and so has the city of bloomington the county has in their coffers over nineteen million that has been accumulated from this funding to go towards this purposes we've been a little frustrated that there hasn't been a concerted action plan to how to spend those dollars. But in terms of asking us to coordinate, that mechanism, that umbrella, that organization and the money for it already exist. And I would ask you to be in touch with your representatives from Bloomington and the county and NORML to say, where are we with this? Where can we go with this? Because the bridge isn't working, not because it's a failed idea, but because it was intended to be a transition to low-income housing. But there's not low-income housing. With 19 million, you could do a lot. But there has to be a plan and a strategy to work this out. That's the collaboration and the insight that needs to be placed. But this ordinance is addressing what normal responsibility is. And to me, the ordinance is more along the lines of a zoning ordinance. And if you've ever been here, whenever we had developers wanting to put new housing anywhere in a subdivision, you know how passionately residents are about their neighborhoods. And the uptown area is a transportation center, it's a business center, it has residents in it, and with Trail East and West go forward, it'll have even more residents. And that's what we're looking to consider because many of those business owners have made substantial investments in their business. The town of Normal has made substantial investments in Uptown. And we are looking to make sure that those individuals and residents and travelers and businesses feel comfortable that they did not make a bad investment. And as far as transportation, let me just share a story about my experience traveling in England in the early 1990s. In the airport, there was an announcement over the intercom that they repeated multiple times. Do not leave your baggage unattended. If we find it, we will confiscate it and blow it up. That was in the 1990s, because they had had the Irish Republican Army bombing their places in England. We've had similar security modifications take place after 9-11. The train is the last bastion where you do not have to go through x-rays or worry about it. And people leaving unattended baggage in this day and age is something that is a concern for public safety. And as far as the police, assuming that the police are going to irrespectively pounce on someone and treat them badly, make them feel bad, we had a resonant right to us about something she witnessed, that a person leaving a place of business at night was, she thought, confronted by someone who was probably homeless, and it frightened them. Business owners stepped forward. Business owners stepped forward. Business owners stepped forward. All of you are fucking cowards. Business owners stepped forward.

Let's bring this back to some civility here.

Business owners stepped forward, asked if she was OK, offered to escort them to their car. The policeman came, talked to the purseman, spent some time talking to them. And when she saw the interaction, she was impressed with how caring that officer demonstrated with this individual. There was no shaming. Our officers are trained to deal with individuals who are different. I know because my daughter is developmentally delayed. My son had mental health issues. I registered both of them with the police to alert them what their situation was because that allows them to respond appropriately. So at the end of the day, this is not something where we're trying to do shame to anybody. What we're trying to recognize is that we do represent all of normal. And as such, we have to recognize that we have business owners and residents and travelers because this station here is the second busiest train station in Illinois. And we've recently had an additional train that runs between here and Kansas City. We're getting more trains. And that doesn't even speak to the long-distance buses and connect mobility or connect transit.

we have to consider the safety and the and how it is set up for everybody that uses it thank you i'm going to ask people these are tough issues and i realize that but please do not speak out and yell at the speaker whether you agree with them or not we just It's not productive to do that. People have a right to say what they want to say. You have the right to say what you want to say. But let's keep it in a more collegial environment. Other comments here? Mr. Byers.

Thanks, Mayor. First of all, I want to acknowledge the public commenters, the emailers, and have gotten a few phone calls. Appreciate the folks that have reached out. Also want to acknowledge that I think we've got quite a few individuals in the room tonight that are leaders or volunteers in social service organizations. So appreciate you being here. Appreciate the work you do for the community. I appreciate you for reaching out and wanting to be helpful and productive on this issue that we're discussing tonight. And certainly the ordinance that we are discussing tonight is one piece of a regulation into the uptown station code of conduct. Homelessness and the unhoused issue is a broad issue. There's a lot of things that our community needs to be doing on an issue. We're certainly not gonna touch on all those tonight. I do wanna keep most of my comments focused on the ordinance, but do wanna briefly just touch on some of the background as I view it. some of the efforts that our community normal county and city have have engaged in on some of the issues that have been brought to our attention in in recent days just for little contacts for folks some of this stuff happened before I got in the council in 2023 but back in 2016 there was an intergovernmental agreement and there was also a 1% sales tax that was passed and And so since then, the town and the city have been contributing millions of dollars into that fund that's managed by the BHCC with McLean County. So to share that as context, i've seen different comments on social media and things that say well what's what's normal what's bloomington what are folks doing on this issue i think there's a lot of conversation that needs to happen on what is happening with that fund and getting those funds released towards projects and helping people so i'm not here to say that is all going well and smooth i think if you've read the news you'll see that there's a lot of debate happening around that issue but what i would say is 10 years ago the intent was to have this agreement under which all three governmental bodies are contributing funds and of which funds are being spent to try to support mental and behavioral health issues. The bridge project that has been talked about tonight and that has gotten kicked off in the last few years here, as I recall, I think two-thirds of that was private funding and about a third of it was from the county mental health fund of which Normal and Bloomington are contributing. So I just I did just want to clarify that there's been questions I've seen raised. Hey, what's normal doing about this? I'm going to sit up here and say we can and should do more. But the plan that's been enacted for about 10 years on some of these issues has been mutual collaboration with our partners. And there's a whole other conversation needs to happen about that fund. And my colleague, she briefly touched on that. Turning to the ordinance, from my view, I view Uptown Station as a focal point of Uptown Normal. which itself is a focal point of our community. So I think it's reasonable to discuss, debate, and regulate conduct within the station, given its importance to the core of the community. And that's primarily how I'm viewing the ordinance tonight, as a measure that regulates conduct very narrowly within a central public facility where there have been issues, we have had concerns, and the conduct that we're focused on addressing is camping, sleeping, or living in Uptown Station. And I do want to just be clear from the scope, from my view in reading through the ordinance, because I do think that a lot of the concerns I've seen from the public have assumed a greater breadth of the ordinance than what I actually read in the ordinance. One, this is the Uptown Station Code of Conduct. This is not an all of Uptown Code of Conduct. This is specific to uptown station. That's one thing I've seen that I think maybe wasn't clear to folks in the public. And there's been some real concerns that have been raised. I've seen the folks that have said, hey, we don't want to make poverty a crime. We don't want to make homelessness illegal. And I agree with both those statements. I think where I differ is that I don't believe what's being attributed to this ordinance is reflective of what the ordinance says or what it will do. And pointing to the text specifically, the ordinance explicitly says in multiple sections that enforcement cannot be based solely on a person's housing status, appearance, condition of poverty, or disability. We're still preserving access to public services, public meetings, transit, ADA accommodations. There's been comments made about still preserving this as uptown station as a warming and cooling center so during extreme weather this is still going to be a place that folks can go for respite or individuals who you know aren't solely using it for transit or parking are allowed to be in the building so we are we are trying to build in specifically those protections, and that helps address, I think, a lot of the concerns that I've heard. We want to be compassionate on this issue. I appreciate the social service organizations that are doing really hard work to try to move the needle. And I think fundamentally for me, I think the concerns I've heard on the ordinance are less about what is actually in the ordinance and more so how it could be applied. And I think that that's where my colleagues and I in the council, our job is when we pass a policy is to ensure that it is implemented in a way of which it was intended. And so I think that's our job if this were to be approved to ensure that it is enforced appropriately. And so with all of that said, I do think the ordinance is a reasonable regulation of conduct at Uptown Station. I think staff has really tried to think this out. I think it's thought out and they've been deliberate. The language is specific, both in what it is trying to restrict and both in what it is trying not to restrict. And at a fundamental level, I don't think we can allow camping to take place in Uptown Station. So I think the ordinance makes sense and I will support it. Thanks.

Mr. McCarthy.

Thanks, Mayor. I want to start off. thanking everybody agencies citizens residents of the broader community for expressing your concerns fears this helps to educate us on what's out there and things that we may not know and I appreciate the partnerships of agencies here that are come to caution us and also as an offer of partnership with us. The town of Normal can't solve homelessness by ourselves and no ordinance or language in an ordinance is gonna do that up here. It's a very complex, very significant issue in our community and Mayor Mrakas, Whatever the outcome tonight. Mayor Mrakas, I know the time will continue and I personally as part of the behavioral health coordination Council will continue to. to work with agencies like Home Sweet Home and others that are materially involved there. I appreciate my colleagues bringing up, I know there's been either misconstrued or misunderstandings, but the town has been proactively investing in these topics, these issues, these challenges in our communities for over a decade. It's literally been tens of millions of dollars. And as has been pointed out, the bridge is an excellent example of progress that's being made when an agency has an idea and comes forward and asks for funding. And that bucket of money is there for, very pointedly for projects just like this and many other in mental health and housing related, or mental health related housing challenges. And so the town has been working collaboratively with our partners, our government partners, when we created the Mental Health and Public Safety Fund. And so just to make sure that everybody's aware, we have been at that for a while. More progress needs to be made. Is it enough? No. Is there enough shelters? No. Do we have all the answers and solutions? No. Will we continue to? I hope so. Related to the ordinance specifically, like my colleague just stated, I look at this as part, a piece. We've heard about housing affordability, we've heard about housing supply, we've heard about a lot of very important and challenge is that the town of Normal isn't unique across the nation. Many, many communities are facing the same things that we are. This ordinance doesn't address those and all of those that commented that it doesn't, I agree with you. This ordinance does not. And it can't possibly do all of those things. But I do think it is right and it is our responsibility when we have concerns about access and safety in a town on property, it is our responsibility to act to do something to try to help. And my reading of this is that is the intention. I appreciate my colleague reading some of the language. I've talked to a number of people since this agenda item came out, and to the letter, every single person that was expressing concern and thanked them for reaching out to talk to me about it, but not one had actually read the language of the ordinance. And so I appreciate that. And if you haven't, I encourage you to do so. It is not perfect, of course. It does not solve all the problems in any way. But it does provide options. If somebody is there and it's in the station and it's deemed to be not an appropriate use, it's not that they're getting immediately carted off to jail. There are escalations. a variety of response measures that are listed in the ordinance. And so I just want to kind of allay those concerns, which a lot of people seem to have. The intent is solely to ensure proper use of the station. That is what this is solely focused, and that is my reading of it. Certainly Uptown Station can't solve the very complex and the very significant issue of homelessness or shelter scarcity. It just can't. It wasn't designed or built to do that. I, again, am committed to working with our local agencies. But also, I think there's been some very good points brought up tonight about implementation and about process. And I think we're very well served to listen to those. And if this proposal moves forward tonight and as implementation commences, I urge all all of our staff and our police officers to work with our agencies on warm handshakes to services. if they're available and identifying what those services could and might be if we need to be able to refer those out. And that certainly this is about behavior rather than status. And so that we are definitely focusing on behaviors that are deemed to be unsafe or preventing accessibility to the station. Thank you.

Ms. Lawrence? First, I want to make sure it's okay that I make some comments. I do work for a social service agency that services the unhoused, and that is Home Sweet Home Ministries. I do plan on abstaining from the vote tonight for that reason. However, I'm wondering if it's okay that I provide some clarification based on my knowledge.

Ms. Lorenz, I had a brief conversation about that with legal staff, and they don't see any conflict of interest. You can vote on it if you want or not, and certainly feel free to say whatever you wish.

Okay, very good. Thank you for that permission. I want to clarify a couple of things that were said moments ago. The bridge shelter village concept that's been open now for about six months is working. It is working very well. Unfortunately, there's just not enough of it. It's about additional 50 spaces for people to get shelter. If we are seeing still prevalence of the unhoused in public spaces, it's because we do need not only more shelter, but especially more housing that is affordable for folks to transition out of shelter and into an apartment or permanent living. So the bridge is working, I wanna clarify that. I also wanna clarify that, in fact, we do have a good relationship with both the town and the city. Obviously because we are in the city of Bloomington, but also with the town, with tools like CDBG funding, with connections and relationships with our street outreach and connection specialists. And it's on that point that I really want to make this point. I think because we have had demonstrated some productive relationships, which is a value at Home Sweet Home Ministries, building good relationships, I think what I'm hearing tonight is that People were caught off guard. People who work in this arena every day, whether it be at Homesuit Home or individual grassroots efforts or Salvation Army or your own lived experience, they were caught off guard that that relationship wasn't leveraged to have more time to talk through the language and nuance it perhaps if needed. Because what those of us who work in this space know, there's a concept called when helping hurts. And so as much of a help that this language could be, in one aspect for better compliance, for public safety, whatever angle you want to put on it, all of them have some merit. But there's an element of this alone that can hurt the things we've been hearing about. Well, where will they go? And will this retraumatize a person when they are banned or moved along? And so my point tonight is, I think, like we've heard, let's not make this something that unintentionally hurts. Let's pause. Let's come together in the relationship that we have. and let's make this better. And we do have at our disposal here an opportunity and a mechanism by which we can table something. We've done it before on similarly controversial or high stakes ordinances. And I think this would be a perfect example and a perfect opportunity to pause and have a conversation. Maybe that's all it takes or a couple of conversations to make sure that we get it right. I would like to, if I can, if the moment is appropriate, to make a motion to table this another time and help me with the legalities of that I think I have to say a certain amount of time so probably like the next meeting if that seems agreeable so my motion would be to table this for two weeks to allow time for the parties to come together and have the conversation that has been asked for research on

Robert's Rules of Order son. Definitely make that motion, but I would ask that you do it after everyone set it up.

Certainly I'll hold that thought so I'll yield my time.

Thank you. Robert's Rules of Order state. If there's a motion to table, it stops all discussion.

Oh, that's right.

I should know that OK. Come back to me perfect. Mr Preston.

Thanks. Yeah. Thank you to everybody who came and spoke this evening. Um, there are some issues that draw out larger crowds, uh, both here in the council chambers and presumably online, uh, than others. And I, uh, no matter what the issue is, uh, this one before us tonight being, um, about, uh, uptown station, I appreciate you guys taking an interest in making your voices heard, uh, with your local, uh, with your local government this evening. So, um, off the top, I fully agree with the notion that we should not make it illegal to be unhoused or to be homeless in this community. And I know that is a theme that has come up a number of times, and I don't believe that this ordinance that is in front of us tonight does that. There are some people who perceive it differently, but on the principle of it, I would certainly agree that That is not something that I think we should ever consider even for a split second. I do want to, since there's been discussion about the activity and that this being about behaviors, this ordinance tonight, I do want to, if you would appease me, run through just a couple items actually in the ordinance language itself to kind of level set exactly what we are talking about in the code of conduct that is being presented. So it's unlawful for any person while in or upon uptown station to commit any of the following, one, Interfere with the lawful operation or movement of transportation, vehicles, train, bikes, and the like. Number two, obstruct entrances, exits, ADA routes, sidewalks, and emergency access. Number three, camp in or upon Uptown Station. Number four is sleep. or lie down in Uptown Station except when you're a transit user and sitting in just one of the seats in the waiting area. Number five, store or leave personal property in a manner that obstructs or interferes with other people's access, movement, transit operations in the facility. Number six, Leave your personal property unattended except in areas and under conditions especially authorized. Refuse to move your personal property when directed to do so by authorized facility personnel. Spit, urinate, defecate, or bathe except for in designated restroom areas and for their intended purpose. Discard of rubbish, trash, food waste except for in garbages. consume alcohol except in lawfully licensed premises, same with illicit drugs or controlled substances, illegal possession of firearm, activate an emergency alarm, mutilate, deface, mark any part of the fixture of the facility, Attach signs, notices, the like, to the facility. Use a sound amplification device in a way that interferes with other people's reasonable use. And then commercial activity, such as vending, distributing of goods, and the like. Engage in fighting, threatening conduct, harassment. Run, yell, curse in a disruptive way that hinders other people's use. and then access employee-only mechanical or maintenance areas. It's pretty much it, and then it's refusal to leave when directed to do so by authorized personnel. So that, and I apologize, that was kind of long and dry, but that's what we're talking about here tonight. And so that is the substance and almost verbatim, and obviously it doesn't cover the entirety of it, 100% of it, but that is the bulk of what's being discussed this evening. And so the question that I have and the piece that I keep coming back to Those behaviors that we just went through, I agree that those are ones that should not be permitted in Uptown Station. Then we get to the issue of what next. In here, in the ordinance, it's proposed as enforcement. We heard from individuals from our social service agencies during public comment, Home Sweet Home, Salvation Army, And certainly a number of others and so I guess the the question in my mind is okay if you have individuals who Have been found to be conducting these behaviors Authorized personnel, you know here staff downstairs has asked them to stop or ask them to leave the facility at that time because they're conducting these behaviors and Then what? And what role can, should, how do we partner with social service agencies to make sure the individuals who need services who are unhoused that we're able to, you know, one, understand, you know, what services exist that can meet their needs and have the capacity. Two, how do we continue to partner with those to provide the help, assuming that the individuals at Uptown Station would want to utilize the help and take advantage of that. And how does that, I guess, in practicality compare with what's been proposed tonight for enforcement? And I do not want to see individuals be arrested for these behaviors, certainly, and there are a number of steps between initial enforcement and that. But I do think that the piece of working with our social service agencies is an important one and a balance that I hope that staff will strike and will continue to be a priority as the first line of defense should this ordinance pass tonight. In terms of how this is how this is addressed in the specific instances when these Measures of conduct situations do arise.

Thanks Excuse me, mr. Robert

Thank you, Mayor. I've been listening to my colleagues' discussion here and appreciate your views on this. Like many of the crowd, this was brought to my attention when this came on the agenda last week, so I have not had a whole lot of time to consider it. When I've looked at this, the concern I have is, the biggest concern I have is, well, what happens then? What do you do when somebody who is in a situation where they had a little bit of certainty, a little bit of predictability, is now thrust into a situation that is totally out of their control? You have people who are, as a last resort, find themselves seeking shelter a place they probably never imagined they'd be. Nobody's there voluntarily. They've exhausted their other options. It is very clear to me that this ordinance, if this is the first step that we take, it can't be the last. It has to be a continuing situation of care. to agree with my colleague on the other side of the dais. This has gone pretty quickly. I think that there is value in hearing from experts in fields that we are not experts in ourselves. And I hope I'm one of the first people who will speak up and say that when I don't know everything that I need to know about a particular topic before chiming in on it. So I think that there is certainly value in talking with our community partners and getting more input on this ordinance to make sure that it is applied only in the manner that we are intending it. It is not taken to go beyond what we are prescribing here. And ultimately, long term, there needs to be a lot more work done by us, by the city, and by the county particularly leveraging, as we've already mentioned several times tonight, the money that has been set aside for purposes just like these. Thank you for listening to me a little bit, and I'll be on my time back.

I'm going to talk about some things. I think this has been a very healthy discussion tonight, a very good discussion. And the strongest takeaway, I think there are two strongest takeaways, is that we need to work with you in a more collaborative manner to address this issue and what we're trying to accomplish with this. If this ordinance passes tonight, that doesn't mean this is a discussion and those of you who are working for these agencies Reach out to us have this conversation if we need to amend it. We will amend it We amend ordinances all the time To make sure that they're they're appropriate to the community as a whole So I'm going to make a couple of points here with some anecdotes. And I'm not a fan of anecdotes, but I think they make good points. I was witnessed to an event outside Uptown Station where two or three people were behaving very badly. They were disrupting people that were walking down the street. and the police had to come and deal with that issue. I think what was different, I would certainly not identify them as homeless people. I would identify them as over-served college students. So the point I'm trying to make here is this is not about the person or the condition. This is about the behavior, and that's what we're trying to address here. There are people that find themselves in situations they don't want to be in, and we have to address that situation. One other anecdote I'm going to talk about I think is a reference that was made that I take exception to My business on Linden Street, I didn't realize this my employees realized it but for Better part of a winter last year. There was a homeless person tucked back in the bushes on the side of a building that was pretty nondescript and and was living there and I wasn't aware of it. I started paying attention to it and somebody was helping him out. Two or three times a week would bring a hot sandwich to the gentleman in that cardboard shelter that he built and hid pretty well. I'll give him credit for that. The person that was doing that was a normal police officer. And so I think that story I'm telling to show and demonstrate the professionalism and the care that our normal police have. And I will stand by that and make that argument with anybody. They are not here to be punitive. They are here primarily, their first effort is to help and diffuse the situation. And I've seen it time and time again where they do that, and that's their priority. Our police are very professional. They are not going to be vindictive or punitive in an environment like that. So I had a very good discussion this afternoon with the executive director of the ACLU, and he referenced some concerns that they have on that. His attorneys will be talking to our attorneys to further delve into that issue, and if it proves that what we're suggesting is not constitutional, Is not legally appropriate. We will fix that I Think my takeaway and my suggestion is we all have a common interest here tonight It's how we get to that point. That's going to make the difference. So let's have those discussions We're welcome and open to them and I think that's what's going to make a difference in the long term. I Again, we're not punishing people for status, for their condition. We're trying to make sure that there are behaviors that are not appropriate are addressed. And that's what we're trying to do here tonight.

I would like to make a motion. based on my comments earlier that we perhaps haven't dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's with respect to reaching out to community partners and to hear further that perhaps there are some additional legal i's and tease to dot and cross with respect to the view of aclu that indeed the most prudent action tonight and my motion is to table this for two weeks to allow those steps to happen and bring this back for review and vote at our next meeting second thank you again there's no discussion on this simple majority one way or another will

Decide the outcome of that table motion. So would you call the roll?

Mr. Byers, no, mr. Roberge. Aye miss Smith. No, mr. McCarthy. No, mr. Preston. Aye Mrs. Lorenz.

Aye mayor Coos No The motion to table fails Do we have further discussion on this item? And please do not take the motion failing as a message that this issue is over with. It is not over with. And we will work with you to get this right if it doesn't seem right. We move to general, oh, no, we got to have a vote on the.

Thanks, Mayor. In service of all of this, a yes and instead of an either or tonight, I just asked staff that we facilitate a conversation in short order to gather input and to talk to the agencies that are here and any others.

Please call the roll. Mr. Roberge?

No.

Ms. Smith?

Aye.

Mr. McCarthy? Aye. Mr. Preston? Aye. Mrs. Lorenz? No. Mr. Byers? Aye. Mayor Koos?

Aye. That motion is approved. We move to general orders tonight. We have an ordinance amending the fiscal year 2025-26 operating and capital investment budget.

Move for approval.

Second. Thank you, Mayor and Council. This action item is your annual review and approval of all the budget amendments that happened last fiscal year. It's the wrapping up our fiscal year 25-26. Mr. Huynh has written a thorough report to explain how each of the funds, have ended the fiscal year and while we haven't completely closed the books, we are looking at ending fiscal year 25-26 with a surplus position and when we move into fiscal year 27-28 budget preparation, we'll come to council with recommendation of how to allocate those surplus funds. But we didn't really have a presentation tonight, This is, again, an annual action, and it's just to finalize 25-26 fiscal year, and then what you'll hear from Mr. Huon in one of the upcoming, I think in August, is an August meeting when we'll get the auditor's report. sorry September meeting we'll get the auditor's final report in the annual comprehensive report. So we don't really have a formal presentation but happy to answer questions.

I had asked you to clarify that for the most part a lot of this was timing issue of funds moving into another fiscal year or not because they weren't spent this year and there was some increase in revenue, but you referenced a mid-year adjustment related to the Axon contract executed by the police department. What specific is the Axon contract and why was that impacting this?

We came to council during the fiscal year with an unbudgeted and unplanned technology acquisition. Axon is a new records management system for the police department. And so that expense came to council and you approved that, so that was one of the expenses that were over budget for fiscal year 25-26. In regard to timing issues, most of the timing when the fiscal year ends in a better position than we planned, Many times it pertains to capital because our capital projects have not expended dollars as quickly as we had budgeted, so those often can get carried into the next fiscal year.

That's all I had, thank you. Ms. Lawrence?

Yeah, and I always have a question of clarification on this too. So you were touching on this, in this case, the surplus that we're ending with is $1.8 million, is that right?

No. Oh, you're talking about town-wide, yes, that would be, and you're looking at that number on seven dash two page? That is for town-wide, so that's all of our funds combined. Capital, enterprise funds, and general fund ended a fiscal year with $1.8 million better position than we had planned. The surplus I mentioned pertained to just general fund only. Okay, and that was where? The last paragraph of the report, fiscal year 25-26 general fund results. Page, packet page seven dash three.

So 23.6 million?

Yeah, that was the budget, that was the budget Let's see, that was the beginning fund balance for the general fund of 23.6, and we ended at 28.

So the difference being five. Yeah, just under five, I think.

So in past years, we've talked about dedicating surplus to pension and pavement. You might recall that little phrase we've used in recent years. We are not prepared to make a recommendation tonight on what to do with those surplus dollars, but we will be having conversations as we get into the next fiscal year. Okay, so $5 million surplus.

Okay, thank you for helping me with that.

Further on this item.

Please call the roll.

Ms. Smith? Aye. Mr. McCarthy? Aye. Mr. Preston? Aye. Mrs. Lorenz? Aye. Mr. Byers? Aye. Mr. Roberge?

Aye.

Mayor Koos?

Aye. That ordinance is approved. We have three items of new business, all related to Uptown Redevelopment. The first is an ordinance authorizing a redevelopment agreement with Carlson Brothers Incorporated for construction of mixed-use buildings on the Trail East and Trail West sites in Uptown North.

Move approval.

Second.

Yes. Thank you, Mayor and Council. As Mayor mentioned, all the next three items under new business are related. And this first item pertains to the redevelopment agreement with Carlson Brothers for construction of Trail East and Trail West. It's been a while that we have been talking with council about developing the Trail East and Trail West sites. In fact, as mentioned in this council report, the initial RFP that we sent out to get these sites developed was issued in 2017. So I guess in this time we can say all in good time. We finally get to a redevelopment agreement that we're very proud of to present to you. I'm going to ask Economic Development Director Mr. Duffel to come forward. He's gonna share highlights of this. And Mr. Carlson from Carlson is prepared to share some thoughts with you about their investment in this project. Mr. Duffel.

Thank you. I don't have too much to add. Ms. Reese covered the gist of it. This has been a project for Uptown Normal. It's been really important in its history and redevelopment throughout the beginning of it, I think nearly 25, 30 years ago. So we are excited to have Carlson Brothers Construction and Mark Carlson and Jeremy Richmond here today to walk us through their proposal for Trail East and Trail West. And I will turn it over to them to let them begin their presentation.

Fantastic. Mr. Mayor, Council, thank you for the opportunity to address you tonight in the development agreement in the project that we're extremely excited about. What you see on the screen are some numbers, 40.50973 and negative 88.98544. Those are numbers to a lot of people. And to some people, some engineering types, they probably mean a little bit more than others. To me, they're very special numbers. They're GPS coordinates for a specific spot in Trail West. And... We'll get back to that. And I keep that, what you see on the screen there sits on my desk. I look at it every single day. And it's really important to me because Trail East and West is something we've been, while we've been involved with the town for a long time with it, I've been involved personally with it for an even longer time, substantially longer time than that. As we've moved to, Nick, if you want to change the screen. There's a rendering of Trail East and Trail West. And don't be alarmed, we didn't cut down the trees out there. However, when the trees are there, you really can't see the buildings a whole lot. So for sake of presentation purposes, we've removed the trees. We've spent, it was funny earlier today when I was preparing some comments for tonight, I was looking back at just how long we've been kind of re-engaged talking to Nick about this, and it goes back into the fall of 24. which is uh... you know it's it's hard to believe it's almost been been two years that uh... we've been fully engaged and uh... we started uh... meeting uh... on every friday at eleven o'clock if you've got nothing else to do it's a it's a it's a lively conversation uh... at uh... eleven o'clock we have a call that we take and do and uh... going back to when uh... the deal just didn't work and in january of twenty five Nick and Andrew called and said, hey, we think we've got a proposal for you that we think we can make this work because one of the components that has handcuffed the project was the length of time the tip that it burned off. And as you folks have taken and graciously approved, removing those parcels out of the TIF and reengaging a new TIF, which becomes a financial vehicle that actually makes the numbers work to put the kind of investment that has to go in to make a development like this work in Uptown. I think at some point, you know, as much as I think Andrew loved talking about the spreadsheets that we'd share with him, I think he even ran out of gas talking about them over time. So we're pretty excited to be finally moving forward. So what we can do in advance. Next slide.

So one of the, or actually you can go on to the next one right after that.

So some of the things that have been going on behind the scenes for the last year or so that planning and engineering have really been It's been working through all the different as you can imagine in a site like this. It's been hanging around for a long time There's power poles that run that crisscross the site. There's utilities in the alleys. There's stormwater challenges There's the if you've ever been into the parking lots currently there's there's dumpsters that just kind of sit randomly wherever and And so in the planning of this, we've been taking and working with Ameren and building out plans for new utilities that will service all the business up and down Beaufort Street and up and down North Street that we'll be putting in that will take in the utilities and putting them underground. we've been working through how to make the alley accessible for both the alleys accessible for all the existing businesses as well as the needs for these buildings that are before you tonight to try to find solid waste appropriate ways for that to find find ways for stormwater because there's some massive stormwater issues and I think that many of you folks are probably aware of to take and redress them we just the the effort energy that Zach and Ryan have put into working with us on this to take and solve not just problems on these sites, but to take in the larger uptown area in general. So we're truly grateful for all those things that have been going on and just what that benefit will take to do that. And one of the things we struggled with was how do we stay in compliance with the uptown design ordinance that was developed 20-some years ago and put into place, and how do we fit that into a building in 2026, 2027 designs? And one of the key components that we decided to go to, if you want to flip the next slide, is how do we develop, you know, one of the things we've heard staff, you can go to one more, actually. was how do we take in and build out a full-service high-end restaurant to to anchor be the anchor point for one of the spaces and one of the After one of the many meetings we had, we walked away with that we'd really like to see a two-story restaurant component right on the circle. And we started thinking and started thinking and started thinking. And ironically enough, with Jeremy here at Richmond, I haven't introduced him, has been managing the design for our firm. and managing the architects, managing the engineers. And the picture you see on the left there is the actual sketch that he came away with after this meeting, how we came away with how do we recognize the circle, how do we take and take a second floor, an outdoor space and put it up on that second floor as a terrace overlooking the circle, but then also have space that can serve behind there to activate that building not only for a dinner but also be able to activate it for later into the evening activities with a bar up there that would have a really neat terrace overlooking the the uh... the circle and so we're pretty excited about that and it became a real transition point in this project it was one of those aha moments you think wow then that whole building began to take shape in fact i remember sending that sketch to uh... to nick and say nick i think we figured this out and then the ideas just started taking flowing if you turn to the next screen then we started tackling trail west and trying to figure out how do we complement the retail in trail east and this again is one of the original first sketch on your left and without boring everybody with a history lesson it really started to change the dynamic about how do we take and create more public space there how do we take and bring that designate that retail to fit in and respect the going down north street the architecture and The sketch on the right is literally the first iteration of when we came to this and transitioned down. And this is how we came up with the architecture that, trying to stay within the guidelines, the Uptown Design Commission, but also to take and to fit in within the neighbors that have been here for decades. And I'm trying to apologize and lose my trust a little bit. So we took and came up with these designs, and then they just became an evolution. And every week we had, I will tell you, your planners have done an excellent job pushing us and pushing us and pushing us to create something that's really special. And this is the result of it. The reason is this morning through some additional comments that came out of the Uptown Design Commission, week ago today and we are just we were trying to there and here it is you can see the buildings with the you know fit in right right along North Street that maybe you've seen them before this this puts lays out all the other buildings in front of them and if you go to the next step so what we've tried to do with the retail is is to have something that activates uptown on the circle all throughout the day. In Trail West, we've got a primary, a coffee type use. We've got a casual dining use that's in there that we'll take and we believe will facilitate a lot of activity with the children's museum across the street to provide that outdoor area that the people can come and gather and use there and then moving over to the full-service restaurant and you know a bar and a terrace up on the second floor that'll take and activate that into the meeting so we tried to into the evening that is So we've tried to take and activate this space so it's a full-time, bringing people there, and it goes from morning into the evening for the activation of all that space, and think that all of these tenants will be complementary to one another. They're supposed to be in a competition with one another, and that's what we've been, Working through developing these plans, we've done our best to take and do that. So we can go on to, so there's definitely one thing in this that we have been doing and I just feel it definitely needs to be recognized is Nick who stayed the course through this entire project and has never given up. And he showed up at our office a couple years ago and he said, What do you think? And he was on his way to Chicago to attend a conference, and it started the conversation, and we are just really grateful for every single call where he's been the ultimate mediator, quite frankly, as far as pushing between staff and us and what our economic barriers are and what the town is doing. has been looking for. He's just done a great job, an amazing job, quite frankly, in mediating that and always finding a solution. So we're truly grateful for that. And so one last thought I think you maybe do want to share with the council as far as because it's easy to think, well, what makes this site so special, and why do you care? And the reason is because I think I probably care a little bit more because I met my wife in this parking lot. We went there on our first date and she bought that plaque for me that sits on my desk recognizing that, bought that long before we'd ever come into knowledge of the site. And so it's pretty special to us, pretty special to our team. And we're just looking forward to building something that will be appreciated and normal for generations.

Thank you. Thank you for that.

Yeah, so we're happy to talk about this and answer any questions you have.

I'll be kind.

You're going to let me start?

Yeah, go ahead.

There have been some questions raised about the parking. Now, as background, there's the surface parking behind the buildings where Twirrell East will be constructed, and some of that space will be lost to parking spaces dedicated to the residents, correct? Correct. Of your buildings.

Correct. All the parking will be for residents in the building and the structured parking.

And this might be for Nick and for the city manager, but there's not a ratio for each apartment. There's a dedicated parking space. Will the parking be assigned to an apartment or is it a hunting license to go in and try to find one? you you will lease your parking space independently of the apartment okay and um so the plan for the people who who won't be have a space to lease because there's not a one-to-one relationship between the building the apartments and the parking space what are their options for parking go ahead they can utilize the college avenue parking deck Okay, and.

If I could jump in, Ms. Smith, that is typical. We have a number of apartment buildings here in Uptown that don't provide adequate parking for their tenants, such as 138 East Beaufort, which is right on the corner of Beaufort and Linden, Uptown North, which is the apartments attached to the parking, College Avenue parking deck. We worked our parking there. even the building across the street at 1 Uptown Circle. So each of the developments have worked with us about access to parking in our parking decks.

And we are in the process of

fixing or renovating the downstairs street level space in the college avenue parking deck to make it usable for parking instead of simply storage correct that is correct council approved that contract probably two months ago and that contractor will be building out the current unfinished portion of the college avenue parking deck

And how many spaces will we think that will add? I think it was around 30.

30?

I think. And as well as some thought given to spaces adjacent to the water department building, does anything need to be done to make those spaces available or simply opening it up to surface level parking?

The parking lot that you're referencing, we call the water department lot, is... It's along Constitution Boulevard and you can access it from the north off of Mulberry. That parking lot is currently signed for construction or municipal vehicles. We will change the signage and make that available for public parking when this development gets underway.

And in addition, the plans for Uptown South call for another parking garage, correct?

Oh, well, yeah, that is in the master plan.

That's in the master plan.

The area south of the tracks, yes.

So should additional housing be added, there would also be, on south of the tracks, there's plans for additional parking spaces to be provided for those residents.

Yes, but that would be addressed.

And in terms of looking at this and I just want to address the one speaker who was in favor of using the historic spaces just for some historical context uptown normal basically had three blocks of business district before the renovation took place because for the longest time most of Normal's residents were college students and most of the property within Normal was non-taxable campus property. And so we've never had the historical inventory that Bloomington has had to develop into functioning new businesses by simply renovating it. And the buildings that we're talking about demolishing for this, are they in any condition to be preserved?

The Historic Preservation Commission has already addressed that matter, so that's their decision to make. They did approve demolition of 102 and 104 North Street. They did deny the demolition permit for 104 East Beaufort, and the only way to preserve that building would be someone on this body would propose and make a motion to nominate that building for historic status.

But it's thousands of dollars to make it able to stand.

Hundreds of thousands.

Hundreds of thousands. Okay. In terms of making it usable space, yes, it would be a significant investment.

Okay. That's all the questions I had. Thank you.

Mr. McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor, and thank you for the presentation and your interest in investing in Uptown. We think it's a good bet. I had just a couple people ask me about this project and it was mostly about the incentives and I think in one of our last topics, incentives were brought up as well. I just want to clarify and have the public comment. My understanding is all money, incentive money is coming from TIF dollars and or sales tax dollars related to this. Did I understand that?

That is. What we don't usually often talk about is the dedication of the property, the transfer of land. So that excluded, yes, the incentives would be, as you mentioned, current TIF, future TIF, and food and beverage or sales tax rebate that's generated from the site.

So the property and its activities are generating revenue and then we share them back to help with the financing and make the deal work. Okay. So the town is not writing checks out of our so to speak, general fund, or out of our budget, sorry, is what I meant to say.

Not for this development. We have for other developments in the past, but not this one. Of which I'm aware, yes. To get some projects to fix the hole in the ground, for example, that we dealt with for a number of years.

Thank you for clarification. I just wanted to get that out of the conversation because I did get a few questions about that. Thanks.

Mr. Byers.

Thanks, Mayor. And yeah, thanks to the Carlson group for the presentation. So the driving reason that we're here tonight is because the town of Normal is not a housing developer. In order to increase our housing supply, we have to partner with developers like Carlson in order to expand our housing supply. I've been on council for three years, was on planning commission for a couple of years before that. So I'm guessing, but I think I've probably been part of either on planning commission or on council, probably close to 10 or so different housing projects. Some of them were criticized as being too luxury of housing. Others were criticized for not being luxury enough. I've been in this room where there was a crowd full of people upset that we were passing luxury housing, and I've been in the room when we've had a crowd full of people saying, these aren't nice enough, we don't like them. I share that to say that growing our housing supply requires political will. I'm proud that this body has had that will each and every time a project has come before us wherever it falls on the luxury housing spectrum. Regarding the development before us tonight and developing Uptown, we've got to look at the best and highest use of land in Uptown. Parking lots are not the best and highest use of this land. I do agree with the concerned race earlier that I think we do need to monitor The parking problem or the parking perception problem certainly want folks to continue to feel like they can drive to uptown and park there. So just something that I think we need to keep an eye on. My opinion, I think tonight's a pretty historic event. investment in Uptown, if I'm correct. This is a proposed $66 million investment. What's not just notable about that is not just that Carlson, the developer, believes in us. It also means their lending institutions looked at this deal and said, hey, this makes sense. We're willing to finance this. And to me, that's a very compelling story about the economic state of normal. And so that gets me very excited. I'm proud of the work that both the town and Carlson teams did to get here. Thanks, Nick Duffel, for all the extra hustle there. I appreciate this, and to Ms. Reese's point, I know this is many years coming, so thanks, Carlson, for believing in normal. Also, we've got some more opportunities coming south of the tracks if you're interested. Thanks.

I think that was a nod for one at a time. Ms. Lorenz.

Thank you. So I want to start with just a short preamble of context. I thought a lot about this vote tonight. And You know, as Ms. Reese alluded to earlier, this has been an objective for some time now for this council and several previous councils over the last decade. And so we are bringing it to a vote tonight. And that's an accomplishment in and of itself that should not be overlooked. I want to recognize and I don't know if they're still in the room because we've lost quite a bit of our audience but you know we did have a few speakers tonight speak about the merits or demerits of moving forward with what we now know as Trailside East and West I don't know if you're gonna be calling it that but that's how we've referred to it and the final two pieces if you will of the original uptown plan that's probably 20 years old ish um so you know as i thought about what our votes are about tonight um it's they're not really about the goodness or badness of finishing our uptown plan because that's been an objective is to finish this uptown plan And so while I don't want the folks to not feel heard, I think those are sentiments about things about preserving buildings, things about charm and quaintness and preservation of surface parking or access to surface parking. I don't know if it came up, but one that's probably out there is access to affordable housing, more affordable. Maybe that's little A or maybe that's big A housing, affordable housing. Those are all concerns that come up when we see something like this. But tonight's vote and this particular development, the objective was to bring market rate housing, was it not? Yeah. So the concerns of those who have reached out to us tonight and over email, maybe in informal conversations, Your concerns are real. We have more housing stock that we need to build. And so let's make sure that we take those issues into consideration. But for tonight's vote, we need to make sure that we have the best development agreement possible because I think that's actually what we're voting on tonight, the development agreement. So to that end, as I said to you prior to the meeting, I am not a real estate developer, nor am I a lawyer. So reading such a document is a bit of a challenge. I did my best, but I do have some questions. And can I go down that path of particular questions of the development agreement? Okay, thank you. So first of all, I guess in light of the conversation earlier, was there any discussion at any point to make any of this housing income restricted? And by that I mean 10%, 15%, some of the tools and mechanisms that can be used to make it more affordable.

I'll start, and then I'll let everyone else jump in. I think the original plan is to have mixed-use buildings on Trail East and Trail West. That's been part of the original uptown plan. What we've run into... for many, many years is income qualified. And I do wanna say the community needs housing at all levels. All levels of affordability. Income qualified all the way up to market rate and beyond. So in terms of all levels of affordability. So what we've run into as we have encountered developers and talked to them about the potential of building income qualified housing, it's, financing challenge and it's a tax credit challenge that few developers have been able to overcome so with that I will turn it over to the developers who do it and mr. duffel who's worked with them sure we

We very lightly explored the idea of a certain component of this being income restricted with utilizing tax credits. It's a business line that we do quite a bit of, quite frankly. And the model just does not work for a building like this. The costs are just far too high. And the rents that would come in with those income restrictions just would never satisfy what would need to be rented for to... to meet that requirement.

I figured as much but I wanted to ask. Another question I have is I know we're not writing a check per se as has already been clarified but did I miss it or is there a in the report that can be pointed out is there a total estimated dollar value of the incentives? I know that there was reference to some Infrastructure being done that we would we would bear that responsibility Obviously the food and beverage food and beverage or sales tax one of the one of the taxes abatements and Obviously the TIF and obviously the conveyance of the land for a dollar So, you know, do we know what the value of the land is? We know an estimated value of all those other components

Mr. Duffel I think has much of that information in terms of the value of the incentive package.

Yeah I mentioned it at the bottom of the report or the last page of the report I'm just looking to my report now to pull it up. I believe the value initially was around 19 million and as a net present value over the life of the TIF give it back to the developer.

of the 66?

Correct. Which came out to approximately 29%. 29% of the overall project cost. Oh yes, that is on packet page 8-4. Thank you.

So, okay. I guess then the final question I have, if I may, is one that maybe at least a good majority of us here have a few development agreement wounds from past projects that I think bear Addressing and and how how we can go in with our eyes wide or open on this one and make sure we ask those questions So several of us here remember how hard it was to find a redevelop a development agreement When we had a hole in the ground when we started a project that predates at least me maybe a few of you were here and the the developer pulled out for whatever reasons I don't remember it went out of business and bad bad economic timing so we were left with a hole in the ground and it was very very difficult to get that hole filled and so that's the structure that's across the street what in this development agreement protects us or the remedies that would be available to us should that happen not wishing any ill will on you mr. Carlson but I just have to ask the question

I believe with that concern in mind, Mr. Day might be in a position to answer it because we lived it. We know what council's concerns are, and so I think we tried to work with the developer to incorporate some language. The developer obviously is taking on a big risk with this kind of investment in a project, so we acknowledge that, but we also know what the risk can be if the project gets partially complete. So Mr. Day?

Yes. In Article 17 of the redevelopment agreement, it runs through a number of different scenarios where there might be a breach and what the remedies for those breaches are. And the remedy is going to depend on where the breach occurs. So if there's a breach before the project's Well, if it's before closing, so we haven't even transferred the property. Our big concern is always transferring the property. What do we do after that if the project doesn't succeed? But obviously, if it's closed, if it's prior to the property, we would get back much of the money that was given up front for utility purposes. We keep the utility money, or let them keep the utility money, because that was for the benefit of the town. But any other excess grant money would come back to us. If it's occurred after, then what it is is we would agree to find what we call a successor developer, which would work then with Carlson to find the new developer, work in transferring the property, transferring all of the incentives and benefits that go along with this. If that doesn't work, then that's just gonna have to be a litigation after that if we can't find the successor developer.

Okay.

Yeah, that's probably the overview. Article 7 walks through all, or 17 walks through a number of the different.

Okay, and this is part of my last question, kind of that first part was point A, point B. The other wound that we have is when that building did get built, we spent a longer than expected amount of time watching that 6,000 square feet, I think it was, of restaurant space along the circle sit empty. And that was an eyesore. It was a point of complaint. And I remember us, as we complained about it, as council members, we were told we really didn't have any leg to stand on. So what do you have to say about how you're how, well, maybe the question is this. Do you have some pre-leases already and what is your anticipation for the time that will take to rent the spaces for commercial?

Well, we certainly don't have a crystal ball of any kind as far as knowing what that will be as far as the tenant goes. We've had soft conversations up until this point. We have been working very diligently off basically a memorandum of understanding. And without a firm development agreement dialed in, we haven't wanted to go in advance any of those conversations beyond that. We don't, you know, unfortunately we don't have specific named tenants that we can present to you tonight, but we've had a number of conversations, a number of interests in the site, and I think especially the Trail East site, because it will be a very special, very unique site, and what we're proposing to, as part of that, for the tenant would be very attractive for them, for a full-service restaurant to take and come there.

Okay, so is there anything, maybe this is a Mr. Day question, is there anything in the provisions that set a timeframe for them, for the spaces to be leased?

No, we had talked about that through negotiate, just that wouldn't work, they couldn't get financing, that would interfere with their ability to get financing if there was a, we pull the rug out from the incentives after the fact, if they didn't meet those benchmarks. What we've done instead is, The way that the deal is structured, there's more of an incentive in this situation than there was the one across the street, just because the rebates are such a bigger part of their financing stack than it was across the street. Where we ran into trouble across the street is they had the empty restaurant, but were making significant money off the office leases that they didn't need. They weren't in a hurry to fill the restaurant. In this case, it's such a bigger portion of the deal that there's much more incentive for them to fill the space.

Okay, so we're not replicating that situation is what you're telling me. All right, very good. That is the end of my questions. Thank you very much.

I'll make a couple of comments. One, in terms of the housing, I'm sure Mr. Smith or Mr. Duffel will be able to track down this study that was done in Minneapolis in terms of housing build out at the higher end and the medium high end and what that did to the overall market. And it was very positive, is what it did. It increased the housing stock, which opened up. Maybe somebody was looking to move into a property like Trailside East, and it didn't exist. Well, now they have the opportunity to do that, and that freed up the next tier of housing. And when that tier filled, it filled up the lower tier of housing. So increasing the entire housing market is what's really going to help us a lot in the low-income area or affordable. This is a documented study, and I'll get that study for the council members to do that. Actually, I won't. Mr. Duffel or Mr. Smith will get that study for you. But it was very compelling. It was presented at the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and it was a very compelling story on what overall housing development did to help free of housing for low income. And there was another one, but I forget what it is. Mr. Byers.

Thanks, Mayor. Just one quick anecdote on affordability. I like to go on Zillow because I'm just a nerd for looking at what's for rent, what's for sale, and just kind of keeping track of things. So if you go on Zillow, what's available for rent? studios or one bedrooms, you'll find something in the range probably of 850 to 1200, give or take for studios and one beds. That's, you know, listed available. There's some a little bit lower, some a little bit higher, but I would say that that's kind of the median range of just what's on there right now. And again, that's an anecdote. And what I found was interesting in looking at their proposal is that they've got i know this is an estimate but they're estimating they'll have 29 studios that are in the 1276 month range like in this environment with the increase of cost of billing that's taken place in the last 10 years and like the lending environment with interest rates i mean to be able to get that i mean i would guess that's about as low as you could get for a new build project at uptown normal which i think shows they're they're being very thoughtful and um you know i think that that is that's very good if you're looking for affordability just relatively speaking for what i think new development is going to produce ms smith

I just wanted to share some of the information I received in response to some queries to Ms. Reese on this agenda item and that while we're not writing a check to the developer, the combination of the TIF funding and the sales tax rebates equates to 29% support from the town, which is roughly equivalent to what was done already for the Marriott. So it's on par with one of the earliest developments in town and the dollar sale of the property is also something that there's historical reference for that because that is how the Marriott, how much they paid for the land they used and how much the Hyatt paid. So there's precedent for this in our uptown development and I just wanted to get that on the record.

Further discussion on this? Please call the roll.

Mr. McCarthy.

Aye.

Mr. Preston. Aye. Mrs. Lorenz. Aye. Mr. Byers. Aye. Mr. Roberge. Aye. Ms. Smith. Aye. Mayor Koos.

Aye. That ordinance is approved. We're looking forward to working with Carlson Brothers on an exciting project and a much needed project. Looks like it's going to get happened before I drop dead. Sorry, I had to throw that in there. The next two items are also having to do with this project. The first is a resolution conditionally approving waivers from Uptown Design Review Code and Supplemental Roundabout Guidelines dealing with Chapter 15, Division 17. Move approval.

Second.

Discussion? Questions?

Please call the roll.

Mr. Preston? Aye. Mrs. Lorenz? Aye. Mr. Byers? Aye. Mr. Roberge? Aye. Ms. Smith? Aye. Mr. McCarthy? Aye. Mayor Koos?

Aye. That resolution is approved. Item 10 is a similar resolution, conditionally approving waivers for uptown design review code and supplemental roundabouts having to do with Trailside West.

Move approval.

Second.

Discussion or questions? Please call the roll.

Mrs. Lorenz? Aye. Mr. Byers? Aye. Mr. Roberge? Aye. Ms. Smith? Aye. Mr. McCarthy? Aye. Mr. Preston? Aye. Mayor Koos?

Aye. That resolution is approved. That concludes our business here tonight. Before taking a motion for adjournment, are there council comments? I'm going to start with Mr. Roberge. Sorry, Ms. Smith.

So I just wanted to put in a plug since we had a lot of discussion regarding our unhoused community. There is a McLean County Housing Coalition Community Forum. That's going to be at 530 on Thursday, July 23rd. That's this Thursday at St. John's Lutheran Church in Bloomington. Some of the speakers who spoke tonight will be included in the people who are the panelists on that forum. So I'm planning on attending. I hope to see some of you there as well.

CHRIS RODGERS- Mr. Smith? And on a different housing front, some parents of developmentally delayed individuals are looking for alternative housing ideas to give them options outside of a CILA facility for long-term placement for their child. And that is scheduled for July 28th at the Bloomington Library. And I also wanted to alert anyone that might have a child with special needs of any age that the SOAR recreational catalog is out and sign up will be in August. And they do tend to fill up fast.

Excuse me, Ms. Lorenz.

Just since we're offering ideas and things to read and brush up on, I'll give you my reading recommendation in light of tonight's conversation about housing. A profound book called Evicted by Matthew Desmond. It's about a 10-year-old. I think published in about 2016. Very relevant still today and a very powerful eyewitness of what it's like in our communities with people who live on the edge or do get evicted. Would be very relevant after tonight's conversation. So evicted to your reading list. Mr. Byers.

Thanks, Mayor. Yeah, I just want to say recognize that we talked and tackled some sensitive topics tonight and sincere appreciation for the leadership and volunteers of some of our social service agencies that have reached out, attended tonight's meeting, but also for all the work they're doing and would put a call to action for all of us individually as elected officials, but also just organizationally to do some check-ins on our social service agencies in the coming weeks and see what we can do to continue helping them.

Just one quick thing. I want to take a moment to publicly introduce our newest addition to the Normal Fire Department. New Assistant Chief Nate Rice is back there, kind of holding his hand down, so he's back there. And if Council has an opportunity after the meeting, we'd love for you to meet Nate. Super happy to have him on the team. He's sitting in the same row as Assistant Chief Morrison and Chief Humer. So welcome to Nate and wanted to make sure council was aware that he was here. Thanks.

Do we have a motion for adjournment? We don't.

Move for adjournment.

Thank you.

Second.

Please call the roll.

Mr. Byers? Aye. Mr. Roberge? Aye. Ms. Smith? Aye. Mr. McCarthy? Aye. Mr. Preston? Aye. Mrs. Lorenz? Aye. Mayor Koos? Aye. Aye.

We are adjourned. Thank you. Mr. Myers? Can we chat?