City Council - Regular Meeting

Aye.

And Barnes.

Aye. Item six.

We have to go back to the original motion.

Excuse me, excuse me, excuse me. So we're back?

Back to voting to approve the agenda. All right.

First and second, or just, okay. Roll call, please.

Alder Prison Swanson. Aye. Parker.

Aye.

Kulis. Aye. Healy.

Aye.

Evans.

Yes.

Hurt.

Aye.

And Barnes. Aye.

AGENDA ITEM 6, PLEASE.

A, U.S. 67 CENTENNIAL BRIDGE PROJECT UPDATE.

Good afternoon. My name is Michael Keene. I'm program development engineer for Illinois Department of Transportation District 2. Today we have with us Hector Torres-Cacho from the Iowa Department of Transportation, Tony Pikeltis with our consultant, Parsons, and Tyler Keefer with Parsons. We'll be presenting the Centennial Bridge project. Tony's going to be going through the presentation and then I'll be here for questions. So with that, I'll lead it to Tony.

Yeah, I think we had a presentation for viewing. I don't know if that is available. Okay. I can get started. Okay. Okay. Am I able to advance the slides with this? OK. I'll get started then. I think I can make some introductory remarks here. I know we want to keep it relatively brief. We want to give a high level overview of where we are with the project. So thanks for having us here. The centennial, here it is. Great. I would like to advance that slide. Okay, go ahead and advance that slide. This is a project that we've been working on for a couple of years now. We were actually here for a presentation in March of 2025 when the project was just getting going. The project's to look at the Centennial Bridge, as well as the approach roadways in Iowa and in Illinois. Just a couple of quick facts about that bridge. It handles 22,000 vehicles per day. It's four lanes, two lanes in each direction. Total bridge length is about 3,850 feet. We developed a wide study area that you see on the slide there because we knew we'd be looking at some alternative alignments. Next slide, please. So the next slide will show an aerial view of the Centennial Bridge. Note some of the constraints that are present on either side of the river, including trails on both sides, railroads, and roadways that are crossed. as well, and there's a timeline at the bottom showing the original construction of the bridge in 1940. IDOT took over ownership of the bridge in the early 2000 and has performed a number of repairs recently to keep the bridge in fair condition. next slide please so at the beginning of our project we identified uh... you know what some of the needs were in the project area to develop a purpose in the uh... for the overall project and we use that uh... to ultimately evaluate different alternatives to see how well those alternatives address the purpose and need for the project. We can go on to the next slide. And so some of those needs included issues with the bridge. It's an old bridge reaching the end of its useful life. It's a bridge type that requires frequent and costly repairs. There's a number of roadway and bridge deficiencies also in the project area that create an issue with safety, and there's a load capacity issue as well. And all that was used to develop our project purpose which is on the next slide, which is to sustain for the long term a bridge across the Mississippi River connecting the downtowns. We want to eliminate or reduce those poor bridge design elements that are out there. We want to eliminate or reduce roadway deficiencies to improve safety, and we want to improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity across the river. So on the next slide shows the range of alternatives that we looked at to try to address that purpose and need. uh... one is the no-build alternative is the no-build alternative or do nothing we have that alternative all these types of projects just in case we can't find a feasible option then we have alternative b which is bridge rehabilitation so improve the bridge best you can uh... but leave that existing bridge in place alternative c was to rehab the existing bridge and also build a new bridge next to it in each of those bridges would handle one direction of travel Alternative D was bridge reconstruction. That's where you replace everything above the piers with a new roadway and structure system on top. And then finally, alternative E is bridge replacement. So that's removal of the existing bridge with a new bridge put in its place. And ultimately, we did look at nine different alignments with that bridge replacement alternative. And over time, we narrowed it down which we'll talk about here in a little bit. So on the next slide is an exhibit that we had at our May public meeting regarding the project. At that meeting, we identified our intention to eliminate a couple of alternatives. B, the rehabilitation. C, the rehabilitation with new twin structure. And D, bridge reconstruction. And that left three alternatives. One is no build, which we maintain throughout the study. And then two bridge replacement alternatives, E2 and E7. And then our next two slides will show those bridge replacement locations. So E2 shifts the bridge slightly to the west of the existing bridge and ties back in close to where the existing bridge does now. and then E7 would be a bridge replacement connecting 11th Street in Rock Island to Marquette Street in Davenport. With both of these alternatives, the existing bridge would be removed. So again, that was what we presented in May, that we were retaining those two alternatives and we were gonna evaluate them further before we made a selection of a preferred alternative. On the next slide, it will show feedback that we received at and following that public meeting. Yeah, we can roll it a little bit here to the table. And it shows a summary of the responses we received. So we received 170 comments that indicated an opinion on an alternative. E2, the bridge replacement, received 39% support. A bridge rehab, which we had identified for elimination, received 19% support. E7, that new alignment there, 11th to Marquette, received both some support, 15% support, but also opposition, 16% opposed. 8% support, just a bridge replacement alternative with no specific alignment identified. And then 2% supported the no-build alternative. So from that time forward, we refined our designs and took a deeper look at the alternatives. And I want to summarize where we are with that today. Ultimately, we're looking to move forward with a preferred alternative selection here, maybe coming out with that announcement in October with a public meeting. So this slide shows a side-by-side comparison of the potential environmental impacts. And generally, the E7, the 11th Street to Marquette alignment has greater impacts than E2, the one where we would shift the bridge just slightly to the west. And there's more property impacts, and there's greater impacts to the parks in Davenport as well. On the next slide, I can highlight some of those differences in the impacts. So with E2, some of those, both bridges removed the historic bridge, so that's an impact, the loss of that resource. Then with E2 in Rock Island, where we shift the alignment to the west, you can see which is the blue alignment on the slide and the one to the top of the image. We would displace a railroad building there just on the Illinois side, and there's some potential impacts to the Courthouse Square area. Then on E7, there's more displacements. As you can see here, we would impact the electric substation. There's a vacant commercial building there near the railroad tracks that would be displaced. And then along 11th Street, around 3rd, there is a number of residential displacements, including displacements to nine low-income townhomes in that area. And there also would be the displacement of a historic home as well. Lost my slides on the screen, but I just want to continue on with our Evaluation we can move on to the next slide again furthering that comparison of alternatives on the next slide Both alternatives would meet the purpose and need provide a long service life you know and correct those roadway and geometric deficiencies that are present in the project area and uh... one difference between the alternatives related to traffic is that the seven alignment which if traffic uh... out of the downtown into the eleven street corridor in terms of that river on the next slide on terms of river navigation uh... both alternatives you know would meet Coast Guard requirements for river navigation the e7 alignment would quite require a longer span when you shift that bridge farther to the west and then as previously noted there's greater impacts with e7 related to land acquisition displacements and parks in terms of the construction i mean construction would be occurring for a while with either of these alternatives uh... it's currently estimated it would take three to four years to complete this project With E2, with that alignment that shifts traffic to the west, just slightly to the west, there'll be some impacts there near the bridge, but the intent would be to maintain traffic across the river on the Centennial Bridge throughout construction. But there could be some periods where traffic is reduced to one lane in each direction. With E7, where you're shifting to 11th Street, the bridge can remain fully open while that new bridge were constructed, but there'd be impacts to Centennial Expressway, 11th Street, and Marquette, obviously, while those improvements are being made. And then finally, based on our preliminary construction cost estimates, E7 costs about 58 million more than E2 would. So my final slide before we would open it up to any questions here is just that final comparison between those two bridge replacement alternatives. Both meet the purpose and need, but E2 has less land acquisition and environmental impacts. uh... e two would maintain existing traffic patterns where he seven would uh... shift those uh... shift that traffic uh... from the downtown to the eleven street corridor uh... in terms of impacts to traffic there would be someone more a little more on the bridge if you if we go with you too because you've got a have some periods where you're reducing lanes but with the seven years greater impacts on centennial expressway and eleven street And then finally, as noted, E7 costs about $58 million more than E2 would. So that's where we're at currently with our evaluation. We are hoping to, again, as I mentioned, come out with a preferred alternative in October, but we wanted to update the city councils. We were in Davenport last week and Rock Island tonight. So with that, open up to any questions, and I think Mike will field them initially, and I'll help as needed.

so i guess with that you know again uh... east to does have quite a few less impacts uh... certainly has less residential impacts uh... compared to the seven on it and i guess you know that's where we're at right now we are looking here you know answer questions today in the longer term we are looking to do a community advisory group and technical advisory group meeting October 1st and then come October 21st go to public meeting and announce our preferred alternative on it but as you can kind of see we've got a lot of input so far this is kind of where we're at and and you know kind of the direction we're going right now. So with that, what questions might you have?

Yes, sir, I have one question. Yes. Looking at the slide with the public opinion, I was curious to know how the people that opposed the alternative, how would that be in the same 100% as all the other options?

So with that, as noted, we got about 170 comments. We ended up having, with E7, it was roughly about 30 comments in favor of E7. Likewise, we had about the same, I think it was one or two, what was it, one more or one less comments in opposition on it. And the opposition that was noted talked on a variety of different things. Obviously, the impacts to homes in the area, there was concerns about increased traffic. There was a variety of different concerns. I know there were some concerns that were also brought up in a meeting we had that was set up at the Martin Luther King Center on June 2nd that also noted about school crossings and the increase of traffic with that, and a variety of different items, including concerns about impacting the community again. It was noted that when Centennial Expressway was put in, it really impacted that neighborhood, and there was great concerns that we would be doing the same again with this. That's what we saw in some of these comments, so we certainly take that very seriously.

I have one more for you, sir. Yeah. You know, just so you can explain to the public the process for the decision making.

Sure.

You know, a realistic timeline, who the decision is actually up to. And also, speaking of percentages, the percentage of public opinion that's weighed in on the actual decision that IDOT would make.

So with any project that we have that has federal funds, we have to follow the NEPA process, which is the National Environmental Policy Act. With that, we have to look at the natural environment adjacent to the project and make sure we're not trying to minimize impacts to it. And that natural environment includes adjacent human occupation, so businesses, homes. So that takes into consideration as well. medipa process also uh... you know dictates we we need to get input from the community we need to address community concerns uh... so realistically all that is put together on it isn't just one thing it isn't just of all on input but that input has a very important part to be had in it likewise that the uh... the impacts that we're showing, both the historic aspects of it, the archeological, the threatened and endangered species, and the impacts to people's homes and businesses are also put into it. So it's a wide variety in it. Realistically, we want this to be a collaborative aspect. We want buy-in from everybody on it. But at the end of the day, following that process, that's how we make that decision. Again, you're kind of seeing some of the trends toward this, which will lead us to what that final decision will be.

All right. And so the decision-making, is that a panel? Is that a person? Is it a committee?

It is a group of things. Realistically, both Iowa and Illinois are coming together, looking at all this data with what our consultant team has come up. And really, that's what's leading us to the decision on it. Uh, aside from, you know, all the public input, you know, uh, that we received in meetings one, two, and three, uh, we're reaching out to you right now on this. And we reached out to Davenport. We do have those CAG meetings, those community advisory group meetings. So, uh, technical advisory group meetings and trying to get input from that. Um, we've also, since the Davenport, uh, uh, public meet or the council meeting we had last Monday or Wednesday, uh, Thursday, we had, um, NEPA 404 merger meeting, which is a meeting with all the regulatory agencies that are affected by this as well. Uh, federal highway administration, uh, us coast guard, uh, army corps of engineers, EPA, uh, the state historical preservation organizations, uh, They're all invited to attend, and we talked over this project as well. What we're feeling would be a preferred alternative and getting some consensus on that as well. So it's trying to build consensus for all of it. At the end of the day, we seem to be getting consensus, and we'll be announcing that officially on October 21st. But the goal is to try and get consensus where most people are in agreement on this.

Okay. Now, the 170 people that were interviewed, that were questioned, is that just Illinois or Illinois and Iowa?

That's Illinois and Iowa. Illinois and Iowa. Yes, yes. So, you know, when we had meeting three, we had, you know, the flyers out there for people to submit in. And then we also have online where people could submit in. And then any input we also received from that meeting on the second, there was a bunch of input from that as well. So that's really... Everything we received in that period is what that 170 comments consisted of. Now, again, in meetings two and meeting one, we got input from those as well. That 170 is just exclusively post-meeting three when we asked E2 versus E7. And again, there were some people that noted they still wanted rehabilitation, even though we said... We're leaning toward that reconstruction. But, you know, that's what we received in that period. Now, we still take comments. We'll continue to take comments as we progress along. But that's just with that window that we had. I believe it was about a two-and-a-half-week window that we had is when we received those 170 comments. Okay. Okay.

And, sir, is the ‑‑ is ‑‑ I'll come back to it. Yeah, are the exit routes included in this evaluation?

the exit routes.

I remember the last meeting that we had, it didn't include the exit routes or the...

So the intersections at the tie-in points? Yes, yes, they do. And that's why you're seeing more impact with E7 partly, is the touchdown points do land more in that residential area. With E2, the alignment right next to the existing bridge, we can touch down basically where it's touching down right now. So that's where you see a lot of less impacts on it, a lot less impacts with the adjacent historic properties as well.

And that has been updated in the potential environmental impacts?

Correct.

Okay, understood, understood.

Appreciate you being here this evening. Can you speak on the impact of formal action from the municipal government here? Obviously, you are aware that our preservation commission took formal action. advocating for the preservation of the existing structure. The city council has not taken any sort of formal action, resolution, anything like that. And frankly, I hear a lot of cynicism from our community that, well, the state's just gonna make the decision that the state wants to make. As you're speaking about the process here,

how influential is an action by the city of rock island one preferred alternative over the other so were asking for input we we certainly want to know what that input is you know we that's part of the reason why we have that technical advisory group the k or uh... community advisory group to get those in addition to those public meetings so we've been trying to coax that from everybody throughout the process here again you know it We are asking, what are you looking for on this? With the State Historical Preservation Board, their desire is rehabilitation. Now, the big thing that we have in conflict with that is the fact that meetings one and two, we ask the community, what are you looking for? And again, the tags as well. What are you guys looking for in this bridge structure? The reason that the rehabilitation was eliminated was because it didn't meet those concerns and desires on it. It didn't have the bike and ped accommodations that were desired for the bridge. It didn't have the ability to accommodate the safety that we can do with the new bridge. There was a variety of different aspects it didn't mesh with, and that's why that was eliminated on it. Now, with that said, you know, we... That's why we do this process, is to find out what people are looking for, make sure we're adhering to it, but also, again, we have to eliminate something. We're not going to be able to put everything into every category. The one thing we are going to be doing is working diligently. We recognize it's an iconic structure. Centennial's been here since the 1940s. you look at letterheads uh... uh... the every restaurant down here has a picture of the centennial bridge so we have to pay homage to that bridge uh... we have to figure out ways to again, pay homage to the bridge structure. We're open to different alternatives on how to do this. Do you try and put different characteristics in the new bridge to accommodate it? Is it keeping portions of the existing structure? One person brought up at the last public meeting, can you put one of the arches in the park? We can look at that type of opportunity. But we need that sort of input as we progress along. You know, just because we're saying the rehabilitation doesn't meet purpose and need doesn't mean that we can't do something to make the new bridge in that to pay homage to it. And then also, uh, to have something there of the old bridge to carry through in the future. So that's where, you know, with respect to the historic aspect of it and, and trying to comply with, with that and, and get some, uh, uh, uh, coalescence around it. You know, those are some of the things we can work with on.

Okay. Appreciate the answer. I'll be speaking with my colleagues about us taking a formal action on it. Sure. Thanks.

And I think since you asked for input, one of my biggest concerns is when I look at the potential environmental impact, is it is impacting 11 residential relocations?

That would be the E7 alternative? The E7. Yes.

And that, I mean, to me... that should be a disqualification of E7. I mean, people make up the city. People pay their state tax dollars, which is going to help fund this. The E2 is more cognizant of those tax dollars. It's the lower option. But for me, the biggest thing as a Rock Island resident and alderman is that residential relocation. I think, to me, that's a huge disqualifier for E7. I think that's just wrong to do that.

Yeah.

And also, sir, you know, let's speak on the big, beautiful bridge I set before, Bettendorf. That bridge, somebody helped me out. It cost over a billion dollars. over a billion, how much did that cost? How much was budgeted for the Eisenhower Bridge?

I think when they, I think you're in the, yeah, with the multiple projects approaching 75, it was probably in the billion range, if I remember correctly.

So my question is, for that had to been built many years ago, With the price of inflation, with the price of material, when we look at our options for a Centennial Bridge here in Rock Island, how are we getting that for a third of the price? Are we sacrificing anything? Are we using different material? How is it so much cheaper than a billion dollars that was put into the I-74?

Sure. And again, 74 is a little bit different structure on it. We're actually looking at different alternatives for the bridge. Again, we want to look at something that will pay homage, so one of the alternatives is probably going to have an arch in it. I don't know if we can pull up.

Would that be covered by the state or? The additional arch, is that like something special that we would have to pay for this?

No, no, no. So if you look at the main waterway throughout there, we have to have, I believe, just under 600 feet for the main waterway for the barge traffic. That would not allow for just your typical plate girder type beams, you know, where you wouldn't have some sort of superstructure on it. So we're going to have some sort of superstructure up there. Again, it may not be like 74, but it would lend towards something like an arch in the middle for a superstructure. Mm-hmm. There's probably going to be a couple other alternatives we'll throw out there at that October 21st meeting, just to gauge some imagination and some conversation on it. But, again, we need at least that one arch to cover that 600-foot span because your typical plate girder would be hard-pressed to do that. Beyond that, we can use your typical plate girder type. type structure where you wouldn't have additional arches on it because technology has evolved since 1940 where it can stretch that type of length. One thing my counterpart on the Iowa side had noted that an arch would be maybe one community versus five individual arches. We keep trying to float that one out. It hasn't quite taken yet.

I like the... The idea that it's five homes representing our five communities here in Quad Cities, which is a popular sentiment among the public, right? Yes. I mean, I don't think it's a fair comparison to have one mega arch like they have in I-74 compared to, if we're talking about retaining historical qualities, that doesn't sound like retaining.

Now, one thing we did look at pretty extensively on here, and we've asked our design team, what would it take to put five arches out there? With respect to that, it was roughly in the $100 million just for aesthetics alone. It wouldn't be a structural aspect. It would be totally for aesthetics only. So that's where we haven't really pursued that yet. We are going to note that in the public meeting that that would be an expensive addition, especially when it's in the $250 million range. To add another $100 million just for the aesthetics, that might be a little more aesthetics than what the states would be able to justify on it.

My feedback would be there's already five arches. We don't need to be spending $100 million to replace five arches with five arches.

Sure. I'm just curious. You're talking about maybe possibly keeping the other bridge and making it one way on each side, or is that what you, is that what I heard you say?

No, we, it would be replacing the bridge.

It would completely come down the other bridge. Correct. Okay, thank you.

And sir, I know that you know myself concerns about where no matter where the bridge is going to go it's going to need workers it's going to be people yet in the job and our concern is for our local contractors are local are locals around here. We want to see the majority of them with those jobs. We just don't want people coming in from out of state, out of town, spending money while they're here. We want people to live here to spend money right here where they live. How much control or how much say would the municipality have in even even who gets the jobs, even who gets those contracts to build the bridge, because that's very important to us.

So with any state-funded project or federally-funded project, it is a low-bid contract on it. We put it out to letting whoever gives the low bid that meets the qualifications is who gives it. Now, I know in the state of Illinois we do have project labor agreements with unions to ensure that that's being covered on it. We do have DBE requirements for enterprises to also make sure that they're getting fair amount of work for the project as well so that's typically what we do at the state level on on it um as far as you know who's bidding on it that's up to the contractors on it you know who who's qualified to be able to to build a mississippi bridge and then also you know what what firms are they working with to to finish that work you know whether it's roadway work the the concrete work or what have you so um you know one thing we've been keeping an eye out you know we're also going to be doing the i-80 mississippi river bridge you know that one is uh slated to start in 2028 we're trying to be cognizant on that that we're not overlapping okay with those so you know we we have the opportunity to use local forces out there and we're not uh totally short shorting the local workforce that we have them spread to many places. Right now, we have I-74 and Illinois 5, that diverging diamond interchange, that's starting next spring. They're going to be working on that the next two years. And then, again, in 28, they're going to start working the IE Mississippi River Bridge. this centennial bridge would fall after that so again we're trying to be cognizant on that while trying to get a lot of work done in the quad cities area on the illinois side in rock island county alone we have about a billion dollars worth of work that we're looking to do in the next approximately five to six years. So we've got a lot of work out there that we're trying to get out. And, again, still not trying to overtax the local workforce.

Can I just add to that? Go ahead. understand how you just stated a lot of that but one of the concerns that we have especially me myself who is a union member who's carried a union car for years is making sure that people of color women and other ethnic groups are being seen on these projects we continually have throughout the state where there's none of those people that are at table we've got projects going on right now they're not there And people are at a place they're tired of seeing that, not saying that we just want benefits, but we want it to match the community. And it steadily seems like that goes untouched. So is there anything we can do as far as in that contract to address that? I have nothing against the PLA, but also I want to make sure that the people that also drive back and forth across that bridge, that aren't just one-sided, also get to see themselves

out there and that's not been happening around here for a long time and we'll definitely look at alternate or options on it again at the state level i hate to say that slightly above my pay grade but but that's a little higher than me but we'll certainly be expressing those concerns you know with with our executive staff on it and look at what

options we have available for that i appreciate that also when you look at the state senator now talking about the apprenticeship programs and that we want to make sure that there are people that actually are going through those programs that are getting the abilities to actually earn the same living and with those projects there are people that can complete their apprenticeship during this project sure We've had the bridge out there, I-74. I just want to make sure that that and other projects around here start representing the people in this community.

Thank you. No, you bet.

Does the state anticipate using a project labor agreement for the Centennial Bridge?

Yes, we do that on all our projects on the Illinois side.

All right. I appreciate that. If you want feedback, the city of Rock Island routinely uses project labor agreements on many the majority of our construction projects. So consider that some feedback. Thank you.

Thank you.

One last question, sir. You spoke on the construction of another bridge before we get to our bridge here. Will that timeline with that project is is that independent from ours or can that affect our timeline?

so right at this point in time you know it this is still a multi-year process on the centennial the way it's looking it's probably going to land where we're going to be finishing i eighty mississippi river bridge about the same time this one would potentially come in line Before construction again, you know, we're we're to the in this next meeting doing the preferred alternative out there So once we select preferred alternative, we still have to pick bridge type, you know work through that We are going to have an aesthetics group that we're going to be putting together again to help address the the making sure this bridge fits in the community pays homage to the the existing Centennial Bridge We're gonna be asking the city who do you want on that group so we can get that input from both cities, Davenport and Rock Island. But that's going to take time to work through that as well. Once we get through that portion, we're going to have another public meeting where we'll show here are the final impacts based on everything we've refined and show this is what it's going to look like. After that, we finish up our environmental assessments and that's when we start designing and doing any land acquisition and any kind of muscle relocation before we start constructing that. So it's still a multi-year process before we get out there. So it is falling in line roughly with when I-80 would be completed. Again, we're having to work that out. Depending on how this all works out, things can happen where something gets delayed, but right now it seems to be in line with that.

One more, sir. Once again, looking at the potential environmental impact, looking at the numbers between E2 and E7, is this just the impact on the Illinois side, or is this combined? Both sides. Both sides.

Now, a lot of the residential impacts are on the Illinois side. That's where most of the residential impacts are with E7. Again, E2, it's noted that there are several minor impacts. The bridge... removal has two business impacts on the Iowa side regardless of what we do. Because when we remove that bridge, there are businesses right there that are gonna be impacted. So that is one impact that regardless of which option we go, they're gonna be impacted on it. But E2 does have quite a few viewer impacts than E7.

i do have a comment i just wanted to applaud you all for the community engagement that you all have done i've been a member of the community advisory group since before i was elected so i'm thinking 2024 might have been our first meeting yep and so i just want to say thanks for how you engage the community you know going out into those community west end and other places

you know to have those discussions so thank you well thank you for for coming to all the keg meetings greatly appreciate it anything else council thank you for your time sir thank you moving right along agenda item seven a proclamation declaring september 2026 to be a big brother's big sister's month

Proclamation. Whereas Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Mississippi Valley has served children and family throughout the Quad Cities region since 1987. And whereas Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Mississippi Valley's mission is to enrich the lives of children by providing positive adult role models in one-on-one mentoring relationships that promote self-confidence and achievement with the vision that all youth achieves their full potential. And, whereas, Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Mississippi Valley serves youth throughout the Rock Island County and the greater Quad City region and maintains a waiting list of more than 150 children who are hoping to be matched with caring adult mentors. And, whereas, research consistently shows that youth who participate in quality mentoring relationships demonstrate improved academic performance, stronger emotional and social skills, and healthier decision making. benefiting not only the child served, but the long-term strength and safety of our community. And whereas the success of Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Mississippi Valley depends on the generosity of local volunteers, donors, and community partners throughout Rock Island and the Quad Cities who give their time and resources to ensure every child has the support of a caring mentor. And, whereas, the City of Rock Island takes pride in joining with neighboring Quad City communities to recognize the vital role mentoring plays in building a brighter future for our area youth. And, whereas, friends, family, and fans of Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Mississippi Valley will gather to walk the Interstate 74 Bridge on Sunday, September 27, 2026, at 6.45 p.m. in celebration of the power of mentorship throughout the Quad Cities. And now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Mayor Ashley Harris, proclaim September 2026 as Big Brothers Big Sisters Month in the city of Rock Island and encourage all residents to recognize the impact of mentoring to support Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Mississippi Valley and to consider becoming a mentor to a child in our community, dated this 14th day of September 2026. Thank you.

Proclamation declaring September 15th to October 15th to be Hispanic Heritage Month.

Proclamation. Whereas, the Quad Cities Hispanic Chamber of Commerce strives to support, promote, and enhance the growth and success of local businesses and leverage the assets, contributions, and unique Hispanic culture identity to generate new business. And whereas, the diverse Hispanic community has continued to build viable partners within the Quad Cities to build relationships with Hispanic entrepreneurs who are willing to take a chance. just as it's been part of our rich American history of the United States with immigrants from previous generations. And whereas, during National Hispanic Heritage Month, the city of Rock Island recognizes the contributions made by and the importance of the presence of Hispanic and Latino Americans to the United States. And whereas the city of Rock Island does recognize, honor, and thank the courage of those who went from Hispanic immigrant to defender of this great country of ours, and to those who were killed, missing in action, prisoners of war, and to those who were emotionally, mentally, and physically scarred, and those who were able to return home safely, And whereas, today over 60 million people in America are of Hispanic or Latino origin. We in the city of Rock Island would like to celebrate the Hispanic culture in Rock Island. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Ashley Harris, Be it resolved that I, Mayor Ashley Harris, proclaim that the 15th day of September through the 15th day of October 2026 be recognized as Hispanic Heritage Month in the city of Rock Island dated this 14th day of September 2026. Thank you.

thank you everyone I just wanted to as on behalf of the greater Quad Cities Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and say thank you for recognizing the contributions that we have given to this United States the state and this city we will continue to do much more and we're happy to serve and help thank you

One last proclamation for tonight, a proclamation declaring September 14th through September 20th, 2026 to be National Diaper Need Awareness Week.

Proclamation. Whereas, diaper need, the condition of not having a sufficient supply of clean diapers to keep babies and toddlers clean, dry and healthy, can adversely affect the health and well-being of children and their families. And whereas, national surveys and research studies report that nearly one in two families struggle with diaper needs. And 48% of families delay changing a diaper to extend the available supply. And whereas a daily or weekly supply of diapers is generally an eligibility requirement for babies and toddlers to participate in child care programs and quality early education programs that enable child to thrive and parents to work. And whereas, without enough diapers, babies and toddlers risk infection and health problems that may require medical attention, resulting in medical costs, and parents may be prevented from accessing childcare needed to go to work or school, thereby destabilizing the family's economic prospects and well-being. And whereas the people of Rock Island recognize that diaper need is a public health issue and addressing diaper need can lead to economic opportunity for the state's families and communities and improve health for children, excuse me, thus ensuring all children and family have access to the basic necessities required to thrive and reach their full potential. And whereas, Rock Island is proud to be a home to trusted community-based organizations including the YWCA Quad Cities that recognize the importance of diapers in ensuring health and providing economic stability for families and thus distribute diapers to families throughout the various channels. And whereas through their important work of addressing diaper need, diaper banks play a critical role in supporting families, improving infant health and well-being and advancing our local and state economic growth. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Mayor Ashley Harris, proclaim September 14th through September 20th, 2026 as National Diaper Need Awareness Week. in the city of Rock Island and encourage the citizens of Rock Island to donate generously to diaper banks, diaper drives, and those organizations that collect and distribute diapers to those struggling with diaper need so that all of Rock Island's children and families can thrive and reach their full potential. Dated this 14th day of September, 2026. Thank you.

Recognition of Mike Krieger first 34 years of service on the Planning and Zoning Commission Okay, good evening mayor and City Council, thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight I'd like to take this moment to recognize Mike Krieger for an incredible 34 years of service on the city's Planning and Zoning Commission Mike attended his first Planning Commission meeting on July 7th 1992 to put that into perspective 1992 was the same year the first-ever text message was sent so Congrats Mike lot has happened over those 34 years but Mike has been a remarkably consistent presence on the Commission by my rough math he's attended somewhere around 300 meetings rarely missing one and is one of the longest serving commissioners in the city's history During that time, Mike also served in leadership roles as both chair and vice chair of the Planning Commission. His commitment to Rock Island extends far beyond that, though. He's also a longtime local business owner operating Eminem Hardware on 14th Avenue for even longer than he served the city. I've had the privilege of working with Mike since I started with the city almost four years ago, and it's truly been an honor. I've always appreciated his knowledge, dependability, and common sense approach to cases. So with that, Mike, on behalf of city staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission, thank you for everything you've given to Rock Island over the past 34 years. As a small token of our appreciation, we have a Certificate of Appreciation recognizing your service. So, Mayor, if you'd like to join me, we can present that to Mike now.

agenda item 8 public comment Thank you, Officer. We have a few people on the list speaking in regards to Dales Medal. You have every option of speaking during public comment, but if you would like to, you can speak during the study session when Dales comes up, or public hearing, excuse me, during the public hearing for Dales. It's your choice. You can speak during the public hearing or you can speak during public comment. I just want to give you that option. Thank you. For the first name Melissa Greenwood.

Good evening.

Good evening.

My name is Melissa Greenwood. I reside at 1704 Stadium Court, Rock Island, Illinois. I'm a long-time Rock Island resident and long-term family ties to the community. I'm here tonight. I was approached in the spring by Monica Amelia in the back and asked if I could speak to the Friends of Douglas on any plans on how to bring baseball back to Douglas Park. i have come up with a baseball initiative that would fund youth baseball for the children that live in the community free of cost and i have a business proposal that i would like to pass to share unfortunately i did not plan very well in print enough but if you guys don't mind sharing i have some copies here for you So just to give you a little background, I was a long-term member of the Rock Island Marlin Little League for eight years, and my son and I have found souls on the baseball field. Kids, youth sports is not meant to be a multi-million dollar industry as it has become. It was meant to be a place for us to go find our friends and have a sense of belonging, correct? With Douglas Park, there's a lot of rich history down there with the city, and the friends of Douglas have put quite a bit of money into the park. And they would want nothing more to see baseball to come back. after a tough decision my son and I chose to leave Little League it was his decision not mine but we without his future and me being the most anti travel ball mom on the planet he wasn't going to play that until we were approached by Ben layer in the Quad City Mavericks the Mavericks was a little league team that just wanted to extend their season and by doing that the only way to go is under the triple-u umbrella however we are not sure if typical travel team we do everything against the grain we don't play in the big JP sports and we very rarely do we play out hitman we try and find cattle fields in the middle of Iowa City we have a great relationship with many teams I'm clue down we went from one team to we are now starting the season next season was six and we are presenting tonight that we would like to use douglas park and in place of that we will host minimum of three tournaments a year where 25 of that revenue will go to fund baseball for inner city youth to expand that to the children that have the financial and transportation barriers i've had conversations with kevin corrigan of the friends of douglas and they have bought into this i have talked to spring forward which is a community great community after school program and i also just met with mr jones from lk would like to sit down with him and i have the backing of the rock island school district so this has moved so quickly i've not had a chance to get in front of mr grip with parks and rec but as we all know a lot of youth sports are kind of dwindling and going by the wayside and a lot of kids are missing out the opportunity we have a very tight timeline if we want to get this done in 2027 so i'm here tonight on behalf of spring forward and the rest of those partners As you can see, I've got it set up to where we would use an integrated Major League Baseball has a youth foundation grant that helps subsidize sports for inner city kids just like this that would help with the startup of the equipment, the training that would be required for umpires and coaches. There is a mandatory abuse awareness that is federally required under the Sports Youth Awareness Act of 2017. And I found a platform sports engine that would provide all of that to where we would be in guidance with the federal regulations as well. what this would do is we're not asking for the city for any money or anything like that what we're asking is for use of the park and we would give 10% of that tournament fees back to the city for the maintenance because you guys do maintain them you also own and operate the concessions 100% I do in heaven though now I just want to make a little note that the numbers are just what I know Brian cocaine and Ben layer the quasi Mavericks organization will would like to sit down with parks and rec and maybe alderman evans and those involved to kind of finalize those numbers i i'm going to tell you i'm just a mom that supports the kids so i don't know the numbers um but that would give 10 back to the city there would spring forward or any other community partner would have a percentage of that for their help with volunteers and they would spring forward would be the um the liaison and that with a 5013c profit because that would open us up for more grants that would help us especially with the major league baseball foundation which i've already done a letter of inquiry to um that would so i guess what i'm here tonight is i'm asking maybe if mr alderman evans if maybe we could sit down and have a conversation um i would like to maybe get in front of parks and recs um my understanding is you have a board meeting maybe tomorrow night and maybe some guidance from the city to see if we can bring this back. I will tell you, me being me, my sister lives two blocks from Douglas, and Saturday when I went to go visit my nieces, I noticed two dads with their children outside playing. So I walked over and I introduced myself and I told him what I'd like to do, and he said that would be the best thing that would happen for this neighborhood. he said i have five kids myself and to find out this man is employed by the rock island school district in the maintenance and he said the biggest logistics problem that we have in this area is our kids can't get to my island i know that from being an officer on that board for eight years trying to work get the board to work with parks and recs to expand out to the underprivileged and the financial burden and that's where our quad city mavericks we we believe in giving back so this is not your triple travel team we just want to give back and we want to mentor those kids and give them a place to belong And that's really all I have. So if I can maybe speak to Alderman Evans after.

Ma'am, on these papers, I didn't see your contact information.

Oh, my phone number, I can give that to you. I can write it down with him in my email. If you guys would like to reach out, have any more questions. I do have all the foundation laid out for this to proceed forward.

Thank you for your time and dedication, ma'am.

Yeah, you're welcome.

Thank you. Can I ask that that phone number get sent out to the rest of the, to the city manager? I'd like to get that number as well and have a conversation.

Yes, absolutely.

Thank you, ma'am.

Thank you.

For the next name, Chad Rose Allen. I'll give you a minute so you can have a complete, oh, okay, there you go, all right.

Good evening, mayor and city council members. My name is Chad Rose Allen, and I'm here tonight on behalf of myself and my business partner, Drew Wofford, and our business Elevate Hospitality Group, LLC. First, thank you for the time that you guys have spent reviewing the proposed partnership with the city and our plans for the former Cabanas campus. I shared many of the details of our project with you previously, so rather than repeat them tonight, I want to briefly tell you what this project means to me personally and what we are committing ourselves to if it moves forward. Eight years ago, my husband and I made the decision to cross the river and make Rock Island our home. We purchased a home in the historic Broadway neighborhood, restored it, became involved in our neighborhood association, and increasingly became part of this community. Today I serve as Vice President of the Broadway Neighborhood Association as well as Vice President of the Quad City Pride Alliance. Rock Island isn't simply where I'm proposing to do business, it's my home. And the property we're talking about tonight sits just two blocks from my front door. For years, I've passed that property and seen both what it had become and the untapped potential in what it could be. When Drew and I had the opportunity to purchase it, we saw an opportunity to make a substantial private investment in a property that has needed significant reinvestment for a long time. Our vision is The Rose, a multi-venue event and entertainment complex consisting of three distinct spaces, parlor, veranda, and stage, capable of hosting weddings, private celebrations, corporate and community events, live entertainment, and special programming. When the property is not reserved for private events, it will operate as Club Torch at The Rose as an elevated and inclusive nightlife and entertainment venue. Although he looks young, Drew brings more than 25 years of experience in the entertainment and hospitality industry and currently owns and operates multiple entertainment establishments in North Carolina. I bring more than 25 years of executive leadership experience along with experience in hospitality, customer experience, entertainment, and design. Together we're prepared to invest significant private resources, time, and energy into bringing this property back to life. The proposal before you tonight involves participation through the city's available tax increment of financing program to assist with eligible redevelopment costs. We view that arrangement as a genuine private public partnership with responsibilities on both sides. Our objectives for the project are straightforward. Rehabilitate an underutilized property, create jobs, increase economic activity, attract visitors, generate additional tax revenue, support surrounding businesses, and create another destination that brings people into Rock Island. But I also want to make one commitment very clear tonight. This project moves forward. Drew and I understand that the approval is not the finish line. It is the beginning of our responsibility to deliver. We will be accountable for turning the plans we've presented into a successful operation and for being responsible partners to the city, our neighbors, and the broader Rock Island community. For me, that accountability is especially personal. At the end of the night, I don't leave Rock Island and drive home somewhere else. I live two blocks away. This project will be part of my neighborhood, my community, and my everyday life. I also want to take a moment to acknowledge that I'm not the only person who chose to be here tonight because this project matters to them. There are residents and colleagues who have taken time out of their night to attend tonight's meeting in support of this project, and I'm incredibly grateful for their presence. There are others who could not be here tonight but took the time to put their thoughts in writing. I brought letters of support with me this evening, and I understand that some individuals have even communicated their support directly to members of the council prior to tonight's meeting. I don't take any of that support for granted. For someone to show up to a city council meeting, write a letter, or put their name behind a project is very meaningful. To those who have done so for the Rose, I want to publicly thank them. Eight years ago, as I stated, my husband and I chose to invest in Rock Island because we believed in this community. Since then, I've had the privilege of serving it. Today, Drew and I have an opportunity to make an even larger investment here and to transform a property with a great deal of unrealized potential into something new. Whatever decision you make tonight, I sincerely appreciate the time you've given to our proposal and the opportunity to present our vision for the Rose. Thank you for your service to Rock Island, and thank you for allowing me to speak tonight.

Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. David Stoner.

Good evening mayor and city council members. My name is David stoner. I live in Moline, but I organized with get the flock out Quad Cities Yesterday, I filed a petition with the city clerk. It's 1708 signatures from across the Quad Cities but with 150 of two of them from right here in Rock Island and They're asking you to end the city's contract with flock safety and not replace it with another surveillance vendor. I believe the city clerk has forwarded it to each of you, and I hope you'll read your residents' concerns. Next door, the Henry County Sheriff ended his flock contract on August 31st. He found no local misuse. He ended it anyway because he listened to his residents. He said public trust and confidence in law enforcement are critical. You can't have public trust in a system nobody can see run by a company that has controversy after controversy. These are Rock Island's cameras paid for by Rock Island. So I ask, how many outside agencies searched them last month? How many searches did they run? And how many came from your own police? I'll put those questions in writing and send them over and I'll follow up at the 28th. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Tom Unley, you can speak now or during the public comment, or excuse me, the public hearing. okay all right uh mr uh robert hoffman you can speak now or you can wait for the public hearing okay and uh mr uh rick uh shoeson excuse me would you like to speak now or would you like to wait sir all right all right moving right along uh jack cullen

Good evening, Marin City Council. My name is Jack Cullen. I'm the executive director of the Rock Island Downtown Alliance. And I am here tonight to speak in support of the proposed development agreement with the Rose. You just heard from the brains behind that great concept that are aligned with our ongoing revitalization efforts of downtown Rock Island. I want to provide just a little bit of background information because I think it's helpful to see what happens behind the scenes before city staff recommend a development agreement and put it in front of city council for approval. I first got connected with Chad in early June, and they had a vision for creating this multi-venue business in the downtown, which was exciting. And they had this location in mind, the former Cabanas Campus. It's this, you know, what could be this indoor, outdoor, you know, exciting venue that is actually made up of four parcels. It's a, you know, almost takes up half a block. and although they have great you know strong business and contracting background what i was impressed by was their ability to ask for help seek guidance that included seeking guidance from experts in in the industry so not only their their eventual partner who has multiple venues in north carolina but others that operate nightclubs and similar type businesses in the region. In addition, they were open to seeking guidance and support from the Illinois Small Business Development Center at Western Illinois University Quad Cities. That's a close partner that we work with that provides free business consultation to entrepreneurs and interested developers just like this. again first meeting in june they put in the work to where we are now we eventually made a connection with the city economic development staff to talk about opportunities to partner with a developer to bring this project to fruition for the community to where we are today with a development agreement in front of the council for consideration So I want to just give kudos to this group for really working hard and putting in all the work and being open to the partnership with our organization, the Downtown Alliance, and the city. And I can share that other neighbors, property owners, business owners around this property are excited about seeing this property come back to life and seeing this vision for this campus. So again, just wanted to speak in support of that and give thanks to the city's economic development staff and hope that you all consider support of this development agreement tonight. Thank you.

Thank you for your time, Jack. Mr. Preston Muhammad.

Good evening. Good evening. Mayor and City Council members, my name is Preston Muhammad. I am an advocate in the black community and I am a member of the Nation of Islam under the leadership of the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan. For 22 years, we've been posted up as our primary spot on King Drive and 18th Avenue. in the distribution of our newspaper the final call which aim is to at this year our aim and our theme is to make our community a better a safer and a more decent place to live and in keeping with that i wanted i have actually two points to make but my first point has to do with safety community safety For 22 years, and we've increasingly saw that corner at 18th and Avenue and 9th or King Drive, where in the western sun, it's very bright. And so in recent weeks, recent months, we've seen cars just run the stop sign. all the way through just 50 miles an hour, 60 miles an hour. Last Saturday, there were three cars, one after the other. They may have been chasing each other, whatever. But it's a problem because you can't see the stop sign at King and 18th Avenue. You can't see it because the sun is so bright in the later part of the day. And so what we're really concerned with is that we have an accident waiting to happen. And the reason why I say that is because there's a trend now where you have young people that are riding scooters. And when they're riding the scooters, there's no regulations or whatever, these motorized bikes. But what I do see is that they, like just the other day, Saturday, in fact, there was a young man that just turned the corner left. He wasn't looking, but here comes a car, fast, runs the stop sign. And also we see children, adults that have their young girls, young boys, give them a joyride or whatever. And so this is the trend that I think is going to make for a very, very unsafe situation. And so I'm here to warn the city that we need to do something very quickly. And what I'm saying is that possibly there should be a warning sign 100 feet from the corner that you have to stop. And we should have the signs that blink, like Moline and Davenport do, so that it will be illuminated to the point where it gets the people's, the motorists' attention. So this is very, very critical, and I'm really, really concerned about it because I know some, eventually, you know, we've been dodging a bullet for years, but eventually we're going to run out of luck. And I don't want to see anybody get hurt, but that's where it's going right now. We have new people in the community. We have a lot of immigrants in the community, people that don't know their way around. There's all kinds of reasons why they don't stop. But we're seeing that it's increasing by leaps and bounds, so to speak. So number one point. Number two point. is that we're here, and I'm speaking in behalf of many of the black leaderships, reverends, and people that are doing good in business in the community, that we are here to support the IDOT's E2, as I think is what we call it, the one that's least invasive in the community. Now, we know that when things like this happen, when there's always progress, we're not fighting progress, but we're only asking that our community not be left out of the progress because when you when you build a bridge there's also what does the chamber of commerce have to do with this are they going to have to build businesses what is the housing uh people that build housing are going to have new houses and and so i'm a student of history and i can tell you that in the 1956 highway act uh was enacted 1949 urban renewal act they cut down over a million houses and hundreds and thousands of black business community communities were completely destroyed and and so i'm concerned about this i'm i'm not wanting to see that happen what i want to see happen is the inclusion of the black community with the progress that is being made. OK, you're going to have a beautiful bridge. OK, it's going to have businesses. There's going to be new houses and everything. But in my experience, from my lens, I see displacement. And so what I'm looking at is that, okay, we're voting on a bridge that has the least impact in terms of displacement and what have you. But what we're looking at is where do we fit in at this? Where do we fit? And all I'm here to suggest is that we be included in areas that we have not been included before. In other words, what we're talking about is financial literacy. We're talking about business development. We're talking about being able to get loans so that as you build businesses down 11, then we will be able to join that. And because, see, I'm personally, I'm insulted. personally because for years I've seen in various communities I've lived in I've seen different groups of people and what they've done is they've come in and made a lot of money as young people call it got their bag and went out to the suburbs somewhere and did not leave a footprint in terms of the health and the welfare and the well-being of the community that they got so much money from. And so it's not a case about prejudice or anything like that. It's just an actual fact. I'm insulted that I've got to go to, OK. You have Indians. You have all of these different groups of people that are coming in. But where is our business development? Because we haven't known that. We haven't learned that. and nobody's trying to teach us that. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Thank you.

Mr. James Blue.

Hello, I'm James Blue. First thing I'd like to talk about is support for the Rose Project. I think it's a really good idea if we have our public investment be with people who live in the city and who have community within the city. It's also nice to know that there'll be an inclusive place that will be safe for people who have fewer and fewer options as we look towards the future and to swap into that There's a lot of discrimination against the LGBT community in a lot of neighboring states. And as we see those people leaving that place to come to Illinois to seek sanctuary, to seek reproductive health care, I think it's important that the city not be a node in surveilling and tracking those people with flock cameras. I think we've already seen it throughout the rest of the country. People's rights are being violated. They're being tracked across state lines and charged with crimes that they did not commit in a state they were not in. And I think it's a bad idea if we invest public land, labor, or resources in being a part of that project. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Moving right along, agenda nine, update Rock Island. I do not have my updates, I do not have my list, so that's something that we're just gonna have to skip over for now. So agenda item 10.

Public hearing regarding a special use permit request from Christina Caldwell of Dells Metal Company for properties at 1600 Mill Street and 1700 First Street.

Good evening. Mayor Harris, council members. My name is Robert Duckles. I represent Dell's Metal Company. Thank you for taking the time to hear our SEP application. Christina Caldwell, Tommy Caldwell, who own and operate Dell's, are here with me today. Michael Valentino, I believe, will appear via remote attendance. Mr. Valentino spent decades with the IEPA and performed the detailed environmental impact study included in Dell's application, which you have before you. That is the Mistardi-Platt report that was directed towards two particular issues that the zoning commission had raised when they had initially denied the SUP application. We then went out and retained to perform an environmental study to address those questions. And Mr. Valentino will speak to you about those items this evening. Prior to that, I'm just going to try to quickly read through a prepared statement. and turn it over to Mr. Valentino, where both he and I will answer any questions that you have. Feel free to interrupt as I go through. If you have any questions based on anything I've said or anything you've seen in our application and the study, I'd be happy to answer them, as will Mr. Valentino. Now, one thing that I did want to note up front It's, some of it is semantic, but it matters. In the city's explanation of our SUP, or the description of the SUP application, it is described as an expansion of a junkyard. That is not accurate. uh... dels not junkyard it's a metal recycling facility uh... the rock island zoning code is not currently have provisions for meddling recycle facilities at dell's but these types of facilities are strongly encouraged and recommended by RCRA. So we are not a junkyard. We do not do the vast majority of things that are listed. The junkyards do, and the zoning ordinance. The other thing, the other element that I wanted to point out, and this will be discussed as we continue through it, it's not an expansion. It's shifting certain cutting from one lot to another, where it had previously been cutting on the other lot for well over seven years. And then after we received the citation, we restricted it to the lot where we are grandfathered in, which is which is directly across the street. And we are seeking to be able to move some of the cutting to the lot that is on the other side of the street. That is what is about. It's not an expansion. The metal is going to get cut either way. It's just a question of efficiency and frankly safety as we'll go through here today, despite that being some of the zoning commissions concerns. uh... as we get into the mustardi platte report the two concerns raised by the zoning commission or specifically the complaint from mr only and uh... perhaps a couple of his employees or neighbors who i believe you'll be hearing from tonight that metal shards and fragments from our torch cutting up it or torch cutting that is part of the metal recycling process would lead sizable shards of metal flying over the top of Dell's fence and landing on or near his property and creating difficulties for him. The Mastardi-Platt report first independently studies and tests that question to see if that is possible. It is not. And then the second issue that the Zoning Commission was concerned with is what is the torch cutting due to air quality standards in the area? And specifically the concern that was raised was is it adversely impacting air quality standards in an unhealthy way when we do cut metal at Dells, specifically in the residential communities and daycare center that is across the interstate? So the Mastardi-Platt report that Mr. Valentino will talk to you about tonight that is in the packet addresses that question as well. Those were the two questions posed to us. Dell took them very seriously. They immediately ceased all cutting activities on that lot, commissioned this study and report to be made so they could provide you with legitimate engineering opinions formed through thorough study and based on a reasonable degree of engineering environmental The second thing that the, in addition to the metal fragments, the second thing that the Mastardi-Platt report found is that the air quality standard modeled in the study that takes place during cutting meets federal and state air ambient quality standards for safety, even within the boundaries of Dell's property. and complies with those standards by even greater margins uh... as materials dissipated further away from those that you go such as across the interstate uh... in the residential community and where the daycare centers located one thing that you will hear mister uh... bounty will talk about his conservative screening i wanted to take a quick second to describe what conservative means because that word can mean a variety of different things with regard to studies in a variety of different contexts in this context conservative screening means screening that is even more strict than that required by the epa and likely to show a problem in the sense that we then went above and beyond to identify problems that the epa's own studies may not identify This all thoroughly supported in the study, and no far anyone has submitted any valid scientific evidence or opinion testimony or data to rebut these findings of safety. What will DELS do if this council approves the SUP application? We will improve the status quo. We will improve the status quo under what was permitted prior. we will improve the status quo on what we were doing prior and i will go through exactly on cutting first again with expansion we're not increasing cutting we're attempting to move across the street and i believe uh... i'm not sure if uh... mister valentino can pull it up on page eighteen uh of his report and page i believe 73 of our application uh there is a diagram uh that that that talks about this we are already being permitted to cut at 1605 first street regardless it's grandfathered in we're doing it we're going to continue to do it that is closer to the interstate it is closer to the daycare center That is where we are being forced to cut now. We are seeking to move across the street to get further away from those locations. Additionally, to further address the staff's concerns, and we submitted a supplement with additional turns to a proposed ordinance so that these are before you and are not merely verbal representations. We are standing right behind it in a formal submission. We will additionally cut with wind restrictions. This is not currently required in the cutting we do at 1605.

Can you explain that part deeper? Yes. With wind restrictions, what does that mean?

I'd be happy to. So one of the concerns that has been raised by both neighbors and the zoning commission is prevailing winds and speed of winds. And which direction is it going? Where would... cutting debris assuming scientifically can travel that far which we can test and we believe the story plot study firmly establishes cannot nonetheless to go above and beyond to reassure the city and to reassure our neighbors we will also use a windsock It will determine the prevailing winds and the directions and if those will be placed on the south end of the property. These are the areas that we've been told are the areas of concern and we would not be cutting if the wind is predominantly from the south to the northeast or the northwest, which have been the complaint of problem areas. We will also cut with time limitations and limit all cutting to three hours in the day or less. Mayor, did I answer your question? Yes, you did. Okay. As far as metal piles and fencing, which is a secondary issue, it's a real issue, but we believe that the air quality and metal shards has been the primarily driving factor here. with regard to metal piles and fencing dells and again this is in the submission that we we supplemented we will comply with the scrap pile height requirements in the code there will be no metal material and any sort of a public right-of-way and within six months dells will build walls screening for the piles at 1600 mill street as they are gradually taken down And on 1700 First Street, which was originally part of our application, we have withdrawn the request to store metal piles or cut on that lot. And all scrap on that lot will be maintained in containers. These are things that we're offering to do additionally above and beyond. which we believe addresses our issues and also creates a general improvement for the entire scenario over what it would be if we were not granted the scp application and were continued to continue to only cut at 1605 which is not an ideal proximal location for the issues that the city has expressed concern with Moreover, it's not efficient for us to only be cut at that lot. We will be able to reduce the piles much more quickly if we can cut across the street and tear down the metal over there. It's much easier for us with moving the metals around the property and getting them in and out off the premises. So if you were to grant the SUP application, The cutting moves further away from the residential neighborhood and daycare facility with which there has been concern expressed. Granting the SUP will facilitate a faster lowering of the scrap piles due to more efficient cutting as well as the promise in the proposed ordinance that we will put fencing around and continue to reduce those piles. um we are voluntarily undertaking a cutting time restriction which we do not currently have and are not bound to if the sup application is not accepted and we would voluntarily take on wind restriction limitations which do currently do not apply to us and would not apply to us because we are grandfathered in i would like to add one other thing here about safety We've gotten complaints about neighbors about these very issues, and we've continued to get them since they have come up. I will also add that there's civil litigation involved in here. I won't get involved in that. But the EPA, the IEPA, they have come out every time we've gotten one of these complaints. They've inspected the property, and they don't write us up, and they get us an absolute clean bill on our air quality and our processes. We have EPA signing off on what we do. We have independently hired a third party at great expense to perform extensive testing, which has supported the safety and efficiency of what we are doing. And the proposal that we are making improves upon the areas that the city has so far expressed concern to us about. We consider it a win-win. The last thing that I would like to mention, just because I want to personalize Christina and Tommy a little bit and some of the things that they've done for this community. Dells is a great corporate citizen here. They've been around for a long time. They employ a lot of people. And they volunteer and open up their facility to a variety of things that benefits the city of Rock Island government. Some of those things, many of those things, actually relied on us cutting on the lots that we are currently not permitted to cut on. And those actions benefited the city with regard to the following projects, which is not a comprehensive list. removing and recycling old rail cars from the Rock Island terminal, tearing out and recycling docks at Sunset Marina. We additionally, although unrelated to that conduct, we also host the fire department to conduct their training on our premises on a regular basis and many more activities over the years, which I have left out of this particular presentation. In addition, if you look in our application, I want you to consider when you have two, three, four individuals come up here and complain about Dells. We have submitted letters from five, six, seven neighbors right in the same area that fully support our application process and believe that we meet every criteria that the zoning code requires and are 100% behind this. This is not a scenario where the majority of our neighbors are against it. It is the opposite. we believe in closing that our proposal that our proposal affirmatively improves conditions for everyone here dell's too not going to say it's not but we believe it improves the conditions that the city has expressed concerns with in all ways particularly with the additional conditions that we have offered to add to a modified ordinance to permit us to do this Thank you again for your time and consideration tonight. I will turn it over to Mr. Valentino to discuss the science of what he did. He is going to keep it short. Well, sir, I have a couple questions. Absolutely.

You were speaking on the windsock, is that correct?

Yes, a windsock on the southern part of the property.

Yes. So in your current location, the location that your grandfathered in, the location that's closest to the daycare and residential areas, with that being grandfathered in now, I'm assuming that you guys aren't using a windsock.

I don't actually know the answer to that. Do we currently use a windsock in the area where we are currently cutting? No. Yes, we're not. And again, we're grandfathered in on that.

So my next question, if you guys were to expand further away and use the windsock, first of all, without using the windsock, being so close to citizens, Just because we're grandfathered in, I mean, I would expect a business to take the safety precautions, even the ones that they don't have to take, like having a wind sock, looking at the wind, even in the location that they're grandfathered in. I mean, a law or an ordinance shouldn't have to tell a reputable company that's been here a while to do the safer thing. I'm not saying the right thing, but the safer thing. That's one point I would like to make. If you guys were to move to the other location that wouldn't be Grandfather Dan, you would use the windsock, you would use all the EPA regulations for that location.

Absolutely. And I'd like to point out on the windsock, and I absolutely understand your point with that. We do have the IEPA and EPA check our air quality and come in. And we have not had any negative write-ups or consequences despite the absence of a windsock. I just want to point that out factually, but I appreciate your comment on that.

Absolutely. And now, if you guys were to move to the new location with new regulations, with new requirements... who would that who who would enforce that and let's just say you know because right now right now you guys are going under the typical muscle memory of not having these regulations you know um business business may be business as usual at the new location Because these regulations will put you in the same frame as a farmer, meaning the weather could dictate your profit for that day.

Absolutely.

So my question is, if deadlines come about and, you know, it's been three or four days and we've got to get this metal cut, who would, if the city road passed and seen the wind sock blowing that way and you guys are cutting, then where are we at?

we just can't call the police on you you know what i mean well so i have i have i have two ways to answer that number one i will openly admit that i do not know your enforcement mechanism specifically as to how it plays out when someone violates an ordinance what we have proposed in the form of an sup application would eventually take the place of its own specific city ordinance so whatever authority the city has to enforce its ordinances any ordinances would apply i presume i believe i'm most likely correct about that perhaps uh council a day might be able to comment on that but i do believe that that is correct um because it would be memorialized into an ordinance which would be equally enforceable as opposed to any along with any other ordinance That's the practical answer. Or I'm sorry, that's the legal procedural answer. The practical answer is my clients want this. My clients want to comply with these requirements. My clients want to be able to do this. They think it's better for them. They think it's going to work out better for the city. They think that everybody benefits. They don't have any reason to try to push you guys and try to hedge it and get away. They don't want to be back here. This is the third time I've been in front of either the zoning commission or the city council to get approval on this. We want to work with you guys and get this done. And then once, if we can get it done, we want to comply with the terms so we can continue to do it. It's very important to us. uh... if for some reason the weather conditions were unique in this particular area uh... that would create a multi-day uh... scenario in which we would be concerned about lowered revenue on a short period time basis uh... the colwells do own other uh... metal recycling facilities in iowa and they could perhaps this is not a permanent solution but perhaps in that type of a situation they would do that but that would be their choice if they felt that the revenue uh was necessary to generate at that time but otherwise if they didn't feel it was that way they just they just wouldn't go to iowa they would just take the days down mayor to answer your question if they violate the terms of the special use permit we simply revoke their special use permit that's the enforcement there you go thank you

But this would be based off a day-to-day. This would be based pretty much which way the wind is blowing. What would we have to stand on to prove our argument?

I share your concern as to the enforceability of what's being proposed.

Yeah. I suppose I would like to speak with my client about it, but I'll point out two things. I believe if the city was concerned based on wind on that particular day, and if they asked, to be able to see that might be well within their rights if they're concerned that there's a violation of the city ordinance going on. Again, I don't know the answer as to how that procedurally plays out. Another thing that I will point out is that, as you will see later this evening, there's a handful of very diligent and observant neighbors who are not satisfied with the way that Dells goes about their business, and if they believed that Dells was not living up to the ordinance, I am quite confident that the city would hear from them.

I have a question. Where did this three hour arbitrary cutting window come from? And it's like you just pulled a three hour number out of the hat. Where does that come from? From the study itself? From the study itself? Can you explain what that study is and where does the three hour cutting window come from?

So I cannot. But Mr. Valentino, who is here, will explain the methods that they use and how they comply with the recommendations and requirements of the IEPA, how those windows are set, and how you use them to determine.

While we're on this question, can we ask him directly now so we're not backtracking later? I'd just kind of like an answer to that before we move on and have to re-ask the same question again.

I don't follow what your last comment.

I'm asking if he's going to explain some of this stuff. I'd like to see if he can answer that now instead of you not answering, then we have to come back and ask the question again.

If Mr. Valentino is prepared to answer that question, he wasn't ready to talk just yet, but if you're prepared to answer, Mr. Valentino. Well, I'm sorry.

You invited us to go ahead and make a comment if we chose to, so I'm asking the question.

I apologize. I was referring to Mr. Valentino for his presentation, but I'm happy to handle it however you wish. Okay.

To be honest, I'm not ‑‑ we did not look at a three‑hour standard. The ambient air quality standards are ‑‑ primary standards are based on one hour, 24‑hour or an annual three‑year average standard. And when we did our air screen modeling, which is a forerunner to full-blown complete air pollution dispersion modeling, we looked at the timeframes aligned with the US EPA National Air Quality Standards, i.e. one-hour and 24-hour standards. So again, I'm just sorry, I'm not sure about how the three-hour figures into the timeline, the timeframe for cutting.

I'm sorry, I just find that whole explanation very unclear.

I just don't know. I mean, the NACs are not based on three hours. The NACs are based on one hour, 24-hour, and annual.

Well, it's part of the amended application, so I guess I'm just trying to figure out where this, why is it not two? Why is it not six? Why is it not four? Where does the three come from? And you really haven't explained to me any way To my satisfaction, where this three-hour number comes from just seems like an arbitrary number pulled out of the air.

Councilman Hurt, may I ask you a question? Because I think maybe we're talking about two different things. And I just want to make sure that I understand where the three, because Mr. Valentino's not sure about the three hours. When you're referring to the three hours, are you referring to the additional terms we proposed for the ordinance?

Yes, you directly spoke about this.

When we would limit cutting for three hours.

Correct. That's the three-hour cutting window I'm referring to.

I'm not aware of a scientific basis for limiting it to three hours. It was a concession to offer to the city to show that we would limit cutting in any given day.

I'm sorry. I guess if you're trying to prove why, I'm just trying to figure out where the three-hour number comes from.

And as I stand here today, I would say it's arbitrary and intended to significantly reduce the amount of cutting in any given day.

Thank you.

Mr. Valentino, he can continue.

If he had a further answer to that question, Mr. Valentino?

No. That seemed plausible, though, what Robert said.

Well, in addition, I guess piggybacking off the mayor's comment earlier about the windsock, again, we're talking about how do you – are you enforcing a three-hour window as well? So I find two issues with this particular item.

I believe I've answered the question about the wind sock and the city's access to that information. and the ability to revoke the ordinance if we don't comply. These are the safeguards that are in place. Unfortunately, I can't answer a question that's essentially based on a lack of trust. I don't know how to respond to that.

And this is a question, while I do have some professionals in the House. Would it be logical to invest in some fans, big fans, to pretty much manipulate the wind, at least in that immediate area?

Again, I went to law school. I went to law school. Is there a doctor in the house? I really don't know. I would actually, I shouldn't say stuff that I don't know anything about. I can tell you that the debris falls fast so i wonder if we're moving if we have fans that wouldn't create even more problem but i mean mr valentino may have some experience with that being something that's been incorporated in locations i don't know i mean conceptually i mean you're just essentially um

You're providing a high-velocity wind if you're using mechanical movement of the plume. A windsock will tell you wind direction. I mean, a windsock. It's hard to calibrate a magnitude of the wind from the windsock alone. I mean, you could have to just rely on National Weather Service data for wind speed. The windsock certainly can tell you the wind direction. But, yeah, large fans could take that rising plume and push it in a certain direction. Certainly, that would, I mean, if that's your intent is to maintain a, say, a south to north direction of the plume, certainly you could control that with fans if they're moving a certain amount of air. These, I would imagine, would be pretty large fans, though.

And, sir, you know, I would like to take a minute just to clear something up. You know, as a council, as a city, it's not as if we don't trust you. It's that with anything, with any partnership, with any dealings, business dealings, we want viable ways. We want clear-cut ways on how to hold each other accountable. So when we get in this unique environment, this unique situation to where we're all depending on the wind and I could have a could have a sock blowing this way and you can have a sock blowing that way you know two winds blowing against each other I mean then you know then where are we and then and then you know as a city you know it's our job to to be good partners to be good stewards with the businesses especially the ones that been here a long time making making great investments however our greater priority is is to protect the residents and the citizens that live here in the city, especially when we talk about safety. So it's not the fact that it's no trust. It's just the fact that we would like to see an ability to check and balance, to hold accountable. Okay, well, if this isn't going on, then where we are, other than because currently, Any complaint, any violation that we've noticed, we've just had to call the EPA. And by the time they get here, by the time they send a letter, the wind has changed 50 million times. That is the real issue. So it's not the lack of trust, it's just the lack of a clear path of accountability. And that is what, it may not be this meeting, but that is ultimately what we want to solve here.

And that is what we want to solve here. and so that is the purpose for the wind socks is so that we can keep track of some of these items and that is the purpose for the three frankly councilman hurt the the phrase about trust was just the idea that we would operate over three hours a day that was it we we we have said we will operate over three hours a day I know that my client wants to accomplish this arrangement with the city, and that is why they're willing to do this for three hours a day. There's trust involved in that, but there's an ordinance to enforce it if the breach of trust occurs. And same with the windsock, and same with all of the other proposals that we have in place here. These are objective. They are documented. They are in black and white. And they are usable to require my client to comply. Otherwise, they lose the benefits of the SUP. And then frankly, I believe that the city of Rock Island, for health and safety purposes, lose some benefits too. Because based on the study before you, and based on the relocating of the cutting, I believe we're actually actively resolving issues that currently exist under the current status quo that we're under because the city no longer allows us to cut partially on the other lot. We absolutely understand the health and safety of the community. And I believe we've demonstrated that and perhaps gone above and beyond what others have done in similar situations. I frankly don't know. This is my first time up here. Well, third time in Rock Island presenting this particular argument. But we are very hopeful that at the end of the day you'll see that this is a positive good for everyone, and that given what we've included in this, and given that we went out and got the study performed at great expense, And given what it shows, that we have demonstrated a very serious commitment to admittedly furthering our own business interests while also very seriously taking into consideration the health and safety of the surrounding areas in a scientifically documented way that, to my knowledge, no one else has yet done. Contradict.

I just want to speak. First of all, this is in my ward, and I've been a councilman now a year and a half, and the complaints and the calls that I have received based on this particular business. I've sat in two hearings, and truthfully, I apologize, but it's left me with my head just hurting, just listening to how you've tried to explain this. I've read back and forth on this. I don't see us, especially me, being able to approve this at this point because I'm not confident in what you guys bring to the table. And I apologize if I have to say that to you, but based on my residents and my ward's complaints, we're just not there yet.

Councilman Evans, is there any particular question that I can answer for you or that Mr. Valentino can answer to help relieve any, not all, but any concerns that you have?

I think the problem that I run into is I've sat back and I've listened to everybody else's questions to not over-repeat the same questions. And I'm still just not there. I'm not confident in what I'm reading or hearing. And so for those reasons, for me, I'm a strong no on this proposal.

Mayor, has the applicant concluded their presentation? Perhaps we could have opponents, proponents speak on this.

The only thing that has not been done, and if the council wishes to hear from him, is Mr. Valentino is prepared to provide a more scientific database explanation of exactly what it is he had to do. Granted, I've spoken for quite a bit longer than I anticipated to. I had intended for Mr. Valentino.

I have one more question before Mr. Valentino comes. Yes. How many employees is employed with Dells?

I believe 40?

Yes. Yes. 26. Okay, so now out of the 26 employees, are any of them professionals with familiar with EPA terminology? We see a lot of companies that would, no matter what their business is within the organization, they would have a safety director. They would have, you know, the company I'm familiar with, you know, they would have an EPA director. Someone's specific job is to watch that and to make sure the company is in compliance. It has nothing to do with the day-to-day business. They're just watching the regulations. Does Dell's have anything of the sort like that, any professionals like that?

Yes, we have some of that.

what would like i i'm not digging at you ma'am but what what would the job title be called what what what do you call them okay okay

Mayor, that attorney, he is my partner. His name is Bill Anaya, and he has been working with the Dells family for decades, and he's deeply involved in going over what they do to make sure that they're environmental compliance.

Okay, Mr. Valentino, you have the floor.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Mayor and Council Members, for this opportunity to speak with you tonight. As Robert said, I'm Michael Valentino with Mastardi-Platt. We're a consulting firm outside Chicago. Mastardi-Platt does air emissions testing, ambient air monitoring, environmental health and safety, site remediation. So we're a very well-rounded consulting firm. I'm one of the senior consultants. Prior to Mistardi-Platt, I was with the Environmental Protection Agency. That's the US EPA Region 5 in Chicago. for 38 years. And for the last three years, I've been with Mistardi-Platt. We were retained to answer two questions primarily. One is the transport of larger metallic fragments that from videos that were sent to us by mr anaya were deposited on 18th street along unley marine and the question whether those could be the direct result of torch cutting of turbine components and the second was what's the impact on local air quality To the first, we looked at particle transport. Use a high-temperature oxygen propylene torch. It reaches flame temperatures of over 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit. So some of the metal is just vaporized. And then it coalesces into small submicron particulate. And these small particles rise with the plume, the column of smoke that rises above the torch. And it has a lot of heat. as it rises because of the heat generated from the propylene torch and so these the plume will rise high and then eventually as it loses its thermal buoyancy will start to fan out laterally and with wind speed and wind direction. The other fragment of the metallic particles are larger. These tend to deposit within several feet or so of the torch itself. And these would be the larger, 100 microns or 1,000 microns in size. And based on the videos that we that we obtained and among several of us in the office looked at those and those did appear to be large particulate which would not carry long distances. They have very rapid settling velocities. Particles settle in air column in direct proportion to their particle diameter and so larger particulate would not carry probably more than 50 feet or so and the smaller particulate would carry long distances. What we did when we arrived on site in March of last year, four ambient particular monitoring stations, the north, east, south fence lines, and then along the entranceway, just as you turn north off of 18th and you enter Dell's property, there's a roadway there, and we set up an ambient monitoring station there. We collected real-time data for 30 days. We set up two high-volume ambient air samplers, one by that roadway and another right near the torch cutting operation. And then we had a third high-volume air sampler. We tried to capture some of the plume. And so we had a hood hanging from an extended forklift. And that was connected to another high volume sampler. And those three high volume samplers, we collected data for 24 hours. We took the filters, we sent them to two different labs. We did particle size analysis and chemical composition of the particulate. And the results show that the roadside high volume sampler would It had different particle size distribution and different composition, much less ferrous metal than the high volume sampler right near the torch cutting and from the capture hood above the torch cutting area. Second part of the study, which I co-authored with Ryan Lackner, he's one of our younger engineers. He does all of the air pollution dispersion modeling from Astarte-Platt. And we took a very conservative approach. And we assumed a very small fraction of the particulate was being captured in the hood. And by assuming a very small amount, we ran trial and error on the error screen, the pre-screening model. And we determined, well, let's set it at one one-hundredth of a percent of the amount of the plume rising from the torch was actually captured in the hood and from the hood through the uh ambient air sampler and onto the filter and uh the reason we did that was to maximize the modeling results and the model is called air screen it's an epa approved screening model and Robert earlier mentioned conservative approach. Air screen is intended to maximize centerline concentrations and it's centerline meaning there's no dispersion of the plume laterally. It just stays along the centerline and a cohesive plume that maximizes ground level concentration. It also assumes very stable atmospheric conditions. When the atmosphere is unstable, you get a lot of mixing. You get a lot of thermal rise of whatever the pollutant is and mixing in the air as it rises and then laterally, vertically and laterally spreading out. And as it goes further from the source, the concentration of the pollutant decreases with distance. In the very stable environments, in very stable atmospheres, the plume doesn't have a chance to rise as high. There's much less turbulence. There's more of a stagnant atmosphere. Sometimes there's an inversion layer where instead of the heat rising, temperature rising. the atmosphere cooling as you rise, it actually heats. So a hot plume will not rise high. It'll stay close to the ground. And then you get, you maximize ground level concentrations near the source. And that's what air screen does. And when we ran it, uh, we wanted to approximate, well, what, what would air quality impacts be? Because we didn't have monitors set up, uh, long distances from, from the facility air screen, uh, It takes centerline concentrations from the point where the torch was, and we approximated that on a map and mapped this out. And we used terrain elevations and all the data inputs in accordance with air screen parameters. It calculates concentrations at 10 degrees, so 36 lines around the compass, and going from 25 meters from the torch out to 1 kilometer, 1,000 meters. And the results of that computer model were that the maximum ground level concentration would be at 69 meters, which is essentially at the fence line. And again, these are modeled results. These are projecting based on stable atmospheric conditions and low wind speeds. And the pollutant concentration will decrease with distance because, as I mentioned earlier, you have just a dilution effect. As a plume rises and fans out, it grows three-dimensionally, and the concentration of the pollutant from the source decreases as it goes further downwind. And in those results, projections would be, again, based on air screen, would result in none of the exceedances of national air quality standard at the fence line. And, again, we believe we were very conservative, and we believe we used all the – the most conservative assumptions to derive the worst case results in so doing this. And if you look at page 18 of the report, figure five, it shows the red arrows pointing to the radius of 69 meters, which is essentially the fence line. And the yellow arrow is pointing to a radius of 280 meters, which is at the skip along point. daycare facility. And the projected model results show that the ambient air quality standards would not be exceeded at the daycare center. And again, these are the results of modeling, not actual sampling for 30 days at daycare. locations you know 1 000 meters downwind the model does that and it's intended to do that and epa approves of these models and we we did use a conservative approach by using air screen and i think that that's really it if you have some questions i just tried to kind of keep the comments brief

I had a feeling there might not be any questions after that, but did anybody have any?

No questions for Mr. Valentino. A comment, I suppose, to you and the applicant. I'm getting the sense here from the overwhelming amount of information that you're trying to make the point that this proposed use meets some of the standards that the city has for issuing a special use permit, the staff, And the commission has said it does not specifically that it will not be detrimental or in danger of the public health, safety, morals, comfort, general welfare, or that it will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted, not substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. That's what I'm getting. You're saying your proposed use is not going to do those things, and so You know, you're disagreeing with staff, our staff here, effectively saying don't, you know, do not reject our special use permit here because we do meet these standards by what you're presenting here tonight. But still, standard C. the establishment of the special use permit will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for the uses permitted in that district. A junkyard or metal recycling center, as you very intentionally pointed out at the beginning of your presentation, nothing of what you presented here tonight addresses the fact that this proposed use does not meet the standard that staff have identified here as impeding the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. So even if I were to grant you, our zoning code says that if a special use permit is to be offered, It has to meet all of the standards. Staff and our commission have said this proposed use fails a number of standards. You are objecting to two of those alleged failures to meet the standard. There's still nothing that you presented here tonight addresses the third standard that I've raised here about not impeding the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. several city plans, whether the comprehensive plan, the sunset business plan, the most recent port district plan that we just procured this year, identify alternative uses for that area, the sunset business park, a junkyard does not meet the use that we've identified for that area. And so while I appreciate all of this information about the health and safety of neighbors, I still don't see how you meet all of the standards to be issued at a special use permit.

I appreciate your position. It is incorrect that we have conceded the others. We actually have very thoroughly articulated arguments in opposition to every single position that the city committee took or the commission took in making their recommendations. I would also add that a significant number of their recommendations are speculative and completely ignore the environmental evidence that we have put before you. There is no rebuttal of that whatsoever, yet they continue to express concerns with EPA compliance and air quality standards with absolutely nothing to rebut it. I've removed those from my consideration. And in addition to that, we have identified each one of those particular issues to talk about. You mentioned in particular the future, the comprehensive plan. I will mention that. The comprehensive plan specifically includes this use, what we are asking for, in industrial by including outdoor storage areas and what is to be permitted. The special use permit is expressly consistent with that comprehensive plan. As for the Sunset Business Park plan, It also flags industrial as the appropriate future use and includes relocating Dells within three years. The city approached Dells about this. Dells was willing to do it, but the city no longer pursued that particular issue. As such, there is no longer conflict with the Sunset Business Plan. I would also say that you're focusing on the notion of a junkyard as opposed to what the actual conduct, what the actual actions that we are seeking to do, as opposed to what a junkyard could do, which is keep things, never recycle them, never get rid of them, create all kinds of environmental problems for the area, which is not at all what we do. and we ask that you focus on the actual actions that we're seeking to take and juxtapose them with both the comprehensive plan and the sunset business business park plan you will find that they are 100 consistent so that would be my response to that particular point thank you for responding to that

I have a couple questions. Yes. Does Dells currently have a respiratory protection program in place?

For its employees when they do the cutting? Yes. I'm just, they are OSHA compliant 100%, but I will let her answer.

You did make a comment earlier, or one of you two did, about small particles still carry. Yes. I can tell you this has been coming. listening to all this for a couple years now and I do have some businesses that are locally nearby there that in my ward as well and also in Alderman Evans, that we have to also take into account their concerns and their ability to do their businesses. And they should be able to enjoy their business. They shouldn't. I've seen the smaller particles, which by listening to one of you two briefly a minute ago, said those small particles do carry. So anyway, I just feel like I don't think this is, oh, another question. Was anybody from the city present when these studies were taking place, or is it just the study taken at the direction of the Dells, but no city person there to kind of witness this or anything?

I don't know the answer to that question.

No, there was no one from the city there when we set up the sampling stations or gathered the air filters and sent them off to the labs.

Okay.

Certainly the city is welcome at any point to contest any of our findings.

Well, I think with something such a big deal as this, you would have had somebody from the city president to basically verify some of these things going on. But anyway, just a lot of things I have to also represent.

Yes. Again, Councilman Hurst, I frankly don't know how to respond to questions that are essentially suggesting that we're fudging numbers.

No, what I'm suggesting is I thought maybe someone would have some answers for some of these questions that may have come to the council today. You guys are giving a presentation. I would have thought that. You know, there would have been a little bit more due diligence done. Maybe have somebody from the city there to verify. Some of this is going on. I mean, otherwise, we're just, you know, taking the word of, you know, two people here trying to get to reach one objective. So anyway, I plan on voting no on this, just for the record.

Mayor, perhaps could we have opponents and proponents to the application speak now?

Yes, sir. Have you spoken your piece for other residents? I don't want to cut you short by any means.

I did want to say one thing to Councilman Evans, just briefly in closing. Yes. I understand your concerns, and I understand the complaints that you're getting from the people in your ward, and you said you've been there for about a year and a half. You've been getting those complaints throughout this time period. Yes. This time period is during the status quo in which Dells is restricted but closer to the residential neighborhoods and the daycare center. So we believe our proposal will help relieve the complaints that you are getting from your residents which are happening under the current status quo, which we believe is less safe for the community. And with that, I can stop.

Hold on. I just want to respond. I do appreciate what you're saying. But I sat here in the last hearing and still my numbers out here, my emails out here, I've heard nothing from Dales. So even though you guys went back It's in my ward, and I'm still getting complaints from the other side. I've not been involved in what Dale's been trying to do to rectify it at all. And I think that's also offending to me, too, because I do have to speak for the people overall in that ward, and I would have loved to have had Dale's point of view, and I have not had that.

But we apologize for that, and I would say that what we've been doing is laid out in the report, but I do appreciate and understand your statement concerning that regard.

Absolutely.

When I first came in, I've been over there to introduce myself. I have been to Dell several times. So I've always made sure that I was accessible. And for this whole moment, I've heard nothing from you guys directly at all.

And Mr. and Mrs. Dell, the owners, point taken. I do try to make it a point to visit all of our businesses, especially the ones that are employing a good number of people. So you can count on me when I get back in town next week. You can count on me to come introduce myself. I would love that.

In closing, we believe there's a mutually beneficial solution here. We really do, big time. Thank you.

Thank you.

So would you guys, oh, let me call this first name. Tom Unley. Come on, sir. Thank you for being patient.

Mayor, members of the council, thank you for allowing me to speak once again on this issue. My name's Tom Unley, I own Unley Marine, and I'm across First Street from the proposed special use area. I've operated my business for approximately 15 years, and I'm asking you to deny this special use permit. And before discussing the city's findings, I think it's important to look at how we got here, because this issue did not begin with this application. Around 2010, the city addressed these same properties at 1600 Mill Street and 1700 First Street. The city's correspondence then stated that an industrial metal and waste salvage operation or junkyard was not permitted under the existing zoning. Warehousing and parking could occur, but outdoor salvage operations required additional zoning approval. Despite that, at some point, Dells began conducting outdoor scrap storage and processing later on these properties. In January of 2023, I came before this council because I had concerns about the effects of Dell's operations at Dunley Marine. I spoke about smoke, dust, metal debris, and what I was seeing and experiencing at my property. After I raised those concerns, Dells sued me, and that lawsuit's ongoing, but that's beside the point of what the council must decide tonight. And in 2024, concerns involving the torch cutting of wind turbine components were also brought to the Illinois EPA. The Illinois EPA later documented that Dells had failed to remove and sand protective coatings before cutting. That's important because one of the questions throughout this entire process has been what my and other properties may be exposed to when coated industrial components are torch cut. And to this day, we still don't know the chemical composition of that smoke. I think you raised that concern at the last council meeting. I would like to know from Mr. Valentino, when that smoke crosses the road and enters my front door, is it safe for me to breathe? Is it safe for my customers to breathe? safe for my employees. And then in December of 2024, this council considered the previous special use permit and denied it. Applying that denial, the cutting operation closed as Dunley Marine stopped. And something happened that I believe councils should consider very carefully. Conditions at my property improved. The smoke, dust, and debris I had been experiencing were dramatically reduced after the activity closest to my business stopped. That isn't a computer model. That isn't a prediction. That's what I personally observed at my property after the activity stopped. After the 2024 denial, Dells had an environmental assessment performed concerning the operations that remained, but that assessment was performed the location where Dell's is currently operating. It did not test the location directly across from Unley Marine where it had been cutting and did not test conditions at my property. The way I read the assessment, however, it says that the particulates from Dell's operations can be carried approximately 69 meters or 226 feet from the source. My business was approximately 160 feet from the cutting activity that had previously occurred across from First Street. That concerned me then, and it concerns me today. So in July of 2026, I did something that I had not previously been done. I hired an independent environmental company and paid to have my own property tested. The company collected two settled dust samples at Unley Marine. One was collected from a boat cover outside. The second was collected from inside the high vac ductwork of my building. The testing found metals in both samples. The outside sample contained total metals of approximately 0.21% by weight. The sample from inside my Hivac ductwork contained approximately 2.5% total metals by weight. Zinc, copper, and cronium were the most prevalent metals in both samples. The environmental consultant concluded that the metal-bearing particulates being deposited on my property are consistent with the industrial activity such as metal cutting and grinding. They also conducted that the accumulation inside the HIVAC system shows that metal-bearing particulate matter entered my building and accumulated in the ductwork. The report further identifies metals with relatively low occupational exposure thresholds, specifically lead and arsenic in the dust. Now, I want to be very careful about what I'm telling you. Those dust samples were not designed to determine the exact source of every particle. They were not personal air monitoring studies. And the report does not claim that those dust concentrations established what any individual person has inhaled. But I do not conduct metal cutting on my property, so they had to come from somewhere. I'm not asking this council to treat the report as something it isn't. I'm telling you what was actually found on my property, and I'm telling you why, after everything that has happened here, those findings concern me. And I'm not distributing that private report tonight, but I believe I have every right to tell my elected representatives what I learned after paying to investigate conditions on my own property. And now in 2026, Dell is once again asking the city for this special use permit covering 1600 Mill Street and 1700 First Street. The city's own application describes the request as a special use permit to operate a junkyard, including outdoor storage, transferring, and cutting of scrap metal. Those aren't my words, those are the city's words. And this time, we have the city's professional staff analysis. The community development department examined this application against the standards required by the zoning ordinance, and the result was clear. Standards A, B, C, and D were not met. Only the traffic standard was met. The staff report also makes an extremely important distinction Compliance with those regulations does not establish that the proposed expansion is appropriate from a land use perspective. This is a zoning decision. The question isn't simply whether an operation can satisfy an environmental regulation. The question is whether this used belongings on the I-1 light industrial properties and whether Dulles has satisfied the city's standards for receiving this exception. According to your own professional staff, it has not. And under standard A, staff concluded that the junkyard expansion would be detrimental to public health, comfort, and general welfare of surrounding properties. Under standard B, it explains that one light industrial district is intended for activities contained within fully enclosed buildings without external impacts such as dust, smoke, fumes, and odors, odors detectable beyond the property line. And your staff specifically acknowledges external impacts from the cutting of scrap metal, including smoke fumes. I stood across the street, I watched those plumes, I photographed and I recorded them. I watched cutting occur approximately 160 feet from my business, and after that activity stopped, conditions at my property improved. Under standard C, the staff concluded that this expansion would impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property. The city spent years planning the future of Sunset Business Park. The 2000 Sunset Business Park Plan envisioned trucking, warehousing, multi-moral terminals, and manufacturing. The city's 2026 Port District Master Plan identifies this area as strategically important for future industrial development and attracting modern manufacturing, logistics, and other employment-generating industries. Your staff concluded that expanding the GenCard does not fit those redevelopment objectives. And under Standard D, staff again determined that the approval standard was not met. And then there is the basic zoning question. Those properties are zoned I-1 light industrial. The city report states junkyards are not allowed in I-1 light industrial district. The applicant is asking this council to grant an exception. And that brings me to something I want to ask this council. How long does a business owner have to keep coming back before city council to defend the use and enjoyment of his own property? I didn't purchase property in an I-2 heavy industrial district next to an established junkyard and then complain about where I chose to locate. My business is in the area city zoned I-1 light industrial. The applicant is asking the city for special permission to operate and use... that isn't ordinarily allowed there i believe i've been coming before the city about these concerns since 2023 i've documented what i've seen i've taken photographs and videos i participated in hearings i've dealt with environmental agencies i paid out of my own pocket to have my property independently tested and i'm being sued by dells i stood here through the previous special use permit proceedings This council denied that permit in 2024. The nearest cutting stopped and conditions at my business improved. Now, less than two years later, I'm standing here again. So I respectfully ask, how many times does a neighboring business owner have to come back here and defend the same property from the same incompatible use? At some point, the city zoning has to mean something. And you do not have to resolve every environmental question tonight to deny this permit. You don't have to prove an environmental violation. You don't have to determine the source of every particle found on my property. And you don't have to simply take my word whether this is an appropriate land use. Your own professional staff already analyzed it. Standard A not met. Standard B not met. Standard C not met. Standard D not met. the community development department recommends denial and the city's report concludes the sup request does not meet the standards for approval when you look at the entire history from the city's position around 2010 to becoming before council in 2023 to december 24th denial to The improvement of my property after the nearest cutting stop to the independent testing I paid for in 2026. And finally, to your own professional staff's recognition, I believe the direction is clear. I spent years trying to protect the business and property that were already here. I'm asking you not to make me start this process all over again. Please follow your ordinance, please follow your staff's findings, and please protect the surrounding businesses and neighborhoods. And please deny this special use permit. Thank you.

Thank you, sir, and also thank you for your patience. Thank you. The next person I would like to speak, Mr. Robert Hoffman.

Good evening. First, I want to thank everybody for your service and your time this evening. It seems like this is going to be a rather long meeting, so I appreciate you guys hanging in there and keeping with us. My name is Robert Hoffman. I'm an employee at Jackson Auto Body and Custom Paint, Rock Island, Illinois, located at 1833 First Street, roughly about a half a block from Dell's main front entrance. I want to start off by giving everybody just a little bit of a definition here, because there seems to be some claim that Dells is operating a metal processing facility, when in reality, metal processing facilities and junkyards are the exact same thing. According to the Illinois combined statutes, a junkyard is an establishment or place of business which is sustained, operated, or used for storing, keeping, buying, or selling junk, or for the maintenance or operation of an automobile graveyard, and the term shall include garbage dumps and sanitary landfills. To go further into that, junk is defined as opposed to in the Illinois Composed Statutes to mean old or scrap copper, brass, rope, rags, batteries, paper, trash, rubber, debris, waste or junk dismantled or wrecked automobiles or parts thereof, iron, steel, and other old or scrap ferrous or non-ferrous materials. So by the Illinois Code of Statutes, yes, Dell's is a junkyard. They are also a metal processing facility. Both things can be true at the same time. However, also in the Illinois compiled statutes, it says that no person shall establish, maintain, or operate a junkyard or metal processing facility within 1,000 feet of the nearest edge of right of way to any federally owned highway, which I believe Illinois 2 is. and their entrance is well within that thousand feet. So based just on the Illinois compiled statutes, this should be not allowed. To grant this exception and exemption to this would establish a precedent that would be able to be leaned on by anybody else that wants to open up a junkyard right next to the state-owned roadway. And I'm not sure, that's usually not always a great thing. Speaking on the report, they hired their report. They claimed many times they spent great amounts of money to fund this report. But then, as you guys have noticed, they didn't involve anybody of any kind of actual official capacity to monitor and make sure that the testing situations were actually not just made in favor of Dells Metals. So they could have very easily set this up and then had them come out and not decided to burn as heavy as they usually do. I'm not saying that they are or not, but there is a reason for the need for having an actual official involved in things like this. So that there's absolutely no sense of impropriety. There's absolutely no shadow of doubt. There's no reason that anybody could even have a possibility of questioning something as absurd as that. And I said, I'm not saying that they did. But the fact is that there is a single bit of doubt that they could have. And that alone is enough to discredit the entire report. To say that there hasn't been any scientific evidence produced to disprove anything is actually a logical fallacy called confirmation bias. To say that you, because there hasn't been something to say that it isn't true, it must be true, is not true. Finally. They've shown absolutely no concern for their surrounding neighbors. The daycare gets covered by smoke every day. I can see the smoke rising up as I'm coming down 18th Avenue from above the hill, so miles away I can see it. I can see it if I'm coming to work from Milan as I'm coming down 92. So to say that there is no environmental impact from the smoke that goes out of their property, or to say that, as they have in previous sessions, that all of the things that go out stay within the property of Dell's can't possibly be true. Because if I can see it miles away, even the slightest wind is going to take it off of their property. And anywhere off of their property is residential neighborhoods and other businesses. their zone light industrial for a reason. They were given an exemption and they've shown absolutely zero regard for the city when it comes to adhering to that exemption. They've expanded their business over the years and used their grandfathered status as a way to get around all of the things that they're doing. A grandfather status is supposed to remain the same, not expand explosively. And I feel like in this situation, we shouldn't be talking about giving Dells more access. In fact, I feel like we should be looking at removing that exemption and reclaiming that area for Rock Island, because honestly, it's a giant eyesore. Thank you for your time.

Have a wonderful night. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. And also, thank you for your patience with waiting. Mr. Rick Jackson? This will be the last speaker for the evening.

Good evening, Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Rick Jackson. I own and operate Jackson Auto Body, 1833 First Street, Rock Island. I would like to share an event that occurred immediately after I spoke with the City Council meeting on December 9th, 2024, regarding Dell's Metal Company being denied a special use permit application. The morning following the Council's decision, Adele's metal company driver came onto my property at 5.59 a.m. to retrieve a lugger box that I had been using to recycle scrap metal at the time. The container was full of scrap metal and had accumulated on my property. Instead of removing the container safely in the daylight, And with this content during normal business hours, the driver dumped the entire load of scrap metal onto my parking lot and then took the empty lugger box away, leaving me to deal with a pile of metal that had been left behind. I was never contacted by Dells informing me. Their services were ending. As you see in the video and the photos, this scrap was dumped very closely to my customer's property in the dark in retaliation for me speaking at the city council less than 12 hours prior over my concerns of the health and safety of myself my staff and my customers prior to this incident Jackson Auto Body was a customer of Dell's Metal. And for four years, they routinely came on the site, picked up the scrap container and the contents, and reimbursed me for the metal contents. What Dell's Metal did in this incident was not good business, not being a good neighbor, and very unsafe. I believe this incident is relevant because it reflects the type of relationship and conduct the neighboring property owners have experienced. Actions like this affect surrounding businesses and property owners, and they are part of an overall picture. The council should consider when evaluating whether this applicant is an appropriate candidate for a special use permit. My purpose in sharing this is simply to provide the console with another factual example of my experience as a neighboring property owner. I've included photos and there's a video for reference to this incident. Going forward on this, we talk about windsocks and I have not ever seen a windsock and they've never used anything before. So now all of a sudden they're going to do it now. It makes zero sense to me. If I was to go out and burn leaves, I'm going to get, the cops called on me, I'm going to get the fire department down there. They're going to say, no, you can't burn. But we're burning steel. We're grinding steel. All this stuff is getting airborne, and it is absolutely getting airborne. And it's paint, okay? It's paint that's getting torched. It's going up in the air. And it's going on our property. It's going in people's lungs. What's going to happen when someday I get cancer? I don't know what's in this stuff. It's not fair for me or my surrounding neighbors to have to breathe any of this. So that's all I got. I appreciate your time. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Thank you. So that would conclude our public hearing. Moving on to agenda item 11.

A report from the Community Development Department regarding a special use permit request from Christina Caldwell of Dell's Metal Company for properties at 1600 Mill Street and 1700 First Street, First Reading.

Motion to deny the request.

Second. I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderperson Swanson. Aye. Parker. Aye. Poulos. Aye. Healy. Aye. Evans. Yes. Hurt. Aye. And Barnes. Aye.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, sir. Agenda item B.

Report from the Community Development Department regarding a property purchase at 2504 Fifth Avenue for $1 plus closing cost first reading.

Move to approve the purchase. Authorize the city manager to execute the agreement subject to minor attorney modifications. Consider, suspend the rules, and pass the ordinance.

Second. I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Roll call, please.

Alder Prison Swanson? Aye. Parker?

Aye.

Koulis? Aye. Healy?

Aye.

Evans? Yes. Kurt?

Aye.

And Barnes? Aye. Agenda item C. Report from the Economic Development Department regarding a development agreement with Elevator Hospitality Group, LLC, doing business as the Roast First Reading.

Move to approve the agreement, consider, suspend the rules, and pass the ordinance.

Second.

I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion?

Thank you for your patience tonight. Glad we got to this.

Clerk, please call the roll.

Alderperson Swanson.

Aye. Parker. Aye. Kulis. Aye.

Healy. Aye.

Evans. Yes. Kurt. Aye. And Barnes. Aye.

Congratulations. Agenda item D.

Report from the city attorney's office on an ordinance amending section 3-9B and repealing section 3-13 of the code of ordinances of the city of Rock Island, Illinois, regarding single serving alcoholic liquor containers within the downtown liquor control district first reading.

Motion to consider the ordinance and suspend the rules. Motion to consider the ordinance and suspend the rules.

Second. I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Roll call, please. Excuse me.

Thank you for your patience this evening as well, and for the opportunity to talk a few weeks ago. So I'm not sure what has been communicated, but tonight we are hoping to broker a compromise. proposed prohibition on selling any alcohol in and around our downtown before five p m is no longer what is being presented here tonight this will prohibit convenience stores and only convenience stores this will not apply to breweries and restaurants uh... but this will prohibit convenience stores from selling any number of single serving containers tall boys small bottles of liquor You can't sell one of them, you can't sell three of them, you can't sell six of them until 5 p.m. I heard what you said in our meeting about how maybe we can find a way so that you can still sell a 12-pack to a guy getting off work at 3 o'clock in the afternoon. Seems reasonable. Our issues downtown that we're trying to address, the daytime drinking, public nuisances, littering, is coming from the tall boys and the small bottles of liquor. So I appreciate council's willingness to compromise. I'm glad we were able to come to a compromise on this. Staff, thank you for going back and forth many times on different ideas. Thank you to our businesses in downtown for... you know talking and figuring out what to do here i will say i'm willing to try this but if the issues downtown do not improve we may you know be back here talking about this again so i hope that we can find a compromise here that works for everybody and that we can continue to see good positive news happening in our downtown thanks is there any more discussion

Clerk, please call the roll.

Alderperson Swanson. Aye. Parker. Aye. Hulis. Aye. Healy. Aye. Evans. Yes. Hurt. Aye. And Barnes. Aye.

Agenda item 13.

Move to approve consent agenda items A through H. Second.

Second.

Second. Second. Second.

I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderperson Swanson. Aye. Parker.

Aye.

Kulis.

Aye. Haley. Aye.

Evans. Yes. Herb. Aye. And Barnes. Aye.

And that is A through what? H. Okay, okay, all right, all right, all right. Agenda item 14.

Claims A through C. Motion to allow claims A through C. Second.

I have a first and a second.

Is there any discussion? Due to the nature of my employment, I need to recuse myself from this vote.

Any more discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderperson Swanson. Aye. Polis. Aye. Healy. Aye. Evans. Yes. Hurt.

Aye.

And Barnes. Aye.

Motion to allow claims D through H. Second.

I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderperson Swanson. Aye. Parker. Aye. Gullis. Aye. Healy. Aye. Evans. Yes. Kirk.

Aye.

And Barnes. Aye.

Quiet down just a little bit, please. Thank you. Agenda item I.

Report from the fire department regarding the purchase of air monitoring calibration equipment from Realco Safety Supply, Bettendorf, Iowa in the amount of $14,035.

Move to approve the purchase.

Second. I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderperson Swanson. Aye. Parker.

Aye.

Poulos. Aye. Healy. Aye. Evans. Yes. Kurt. Aye. And Barnes. Aye. but you've got to change report reports for request for the emergency repair unit seven thousand seven one one seven fire engine thirty three at commons sales and services rock island illinois in the amount of three thousand seven and seventy three dollars making sense there there's two first

I'll go second, don't worry about it. Okay, okay. So do I have a first and a second? Okay, I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Clerk, please call the roll.

Alder, Chris, and Swanson. Aye. Parker.

Aye.

Hulus. Aye. Healy. Aye. Evans. Yes. Hurt. Aye. And Barnes. Aye.

Agenda item 15.

A, report from the Community Development Department regarding a memorandum of understanding allowing for the provision of building plan review and inspection services to the village of Sherrard.

Motion to deny the MOU.

Second.

I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion?

Can I get a presentation from staff as to what we're doing here, what we're hoping to accomplish?

Are we talking about the MOU with the village of Sherrard? The village of Sherrard had reached out for assistance. They had seen some increasing volume of different projects. It could range from a house building project to a small renovation. They had wanted to explore a partnership with the city, basically have... certain inspection and plan review services. The idea behind the MOU is that we would do a single project kind of plan review for them and see how that went before we explored a longer term relationship. The project in question is actually quite a simple one. It is a large parking lot review. So the idea here would be is that we would do the site plan review and inspection for that, assess if that was a good working arrangement, and then we would come back with a proposal for something larger.

I guess, why does staff want to do this? Are we hoping that this creates a new revenue line for the city? That is correct. We can get fees from Gerard. Correct. And- How does inspections from other departments and scopes within the city play into this process?

So under this MOU, this is limited only to the community development kind of phase of review. And for this nature of the project, that is all that would be involved. So in the future, if we wanted to pursue a larger arrangement, we certainly could do that. And we would have to talk about how other departments might be involved.

The city of Rock Island is doing the building inspection, site planning, whatever portion of this, but then like the village of Sherrard would do the fire inspection portion of it?

So in this particular case, there's no structure, so there would be no fire inspection.

Sure, but if there was...

We would have to negotiate that in a future arrangement if that was of interest.

I think I would be more comfortable voting on an MOU if all of this were ironed out before we do a pilot program with just one specific department or scope of work. Yeah, I'll leave it at that.

And also, the potential revenue stream for the profit, is it worth the gas money to get out there? I mean, what are we talking about?

We have not calculated that yet at this time, but we have had conversations with the Village of Sherard very explicitly stating that we would need to be made whole for any of those costs. Yeah. So yeah.

Well, I wish, you know, to piggyback off what all the partnership. I wish we could iron that out and have those because, you know, council, I don't think they would deny anything that would be beneficial, especially financially for the city. You know, we just see as of right now, we just need more information on the matter.

How long do you need to work with the village of Sherrard to get some of the concerns that council has? I'm asking so that I can make a motion to table.

Well, I guess I'd like some direction from the council on whether or not you are interested in pursuing, as was originally proposed, just a pilot project where we were going to kind of work out what that working relationship would be versus going full bore and actually pursuing a larger scale MOU or intergovernmental agreement. So I want to make sure I understand what council's preference is.

The latter.

The latter, okay. The Village believed that a pilot project would be the more appropriate first step, so I'll need to communicate this to them and get a better sense of how long it would take for us to negotiate an intergovernmental agreement for your consideration. So I can't answer your question directly because I need their input. I would point out though that we do occasionally perform inspections as a courtesy for neighboring jurisdictions. We all kind of have that reciprocity with one another, so it is not the most unusual thing for us to explore doing.

So, Miles, are you saying that the fire department is not going to be doing any inspections?

Not under that particular pilot project because there is no building involved.

Well, what is the IAFF's stance on how to jurisdiction assignments such as inspections? And I personally feel that that would be the case. I think we're taking resources away from our own city when they have plenty of inspections to do here. So I'm just kind of curious. So you're kind of throwing this out there, but you don't really have any other.

We haven't explored that yet because it wasn't part of that particular pilot project.

My suggestion would be to kind of get all that together and then come, if that's the thing, come back to the council. But as of right now, I can't support that.

If we vote this down, can you come back with a larger proposal?

I can certainly do that if that is the will of the council.

I mean, I guess. Do we want to table it or do we want to vote it down?

I would rather table it. I would rather vote now. I mean, you know, council can do as they please.

I'll make a motion to postpone until the first meeting in 2027. I'll second.

Because I would like to, you know, look at staffing, especially since we're going into budgeting also to see the impact. So I would be okay with postponing it.

So I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Does everyone know where we are? Okay, roll call please.

Alderperson Swanson.

So we're voting to postpone, correct? Yes. Aye.

Parker.

Aye.

Poulos.

Aye.

Healy.

Aye. Evans. Yes. Hurt.

No.

And Barnes.

Aye.

All right, so agenda item IP.

Report from the Community Development Department regarding a certified local government grant agreement with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources for a historic resources marketing interpretation plan.

Move to approve the grant agreement and authorize the city manager to execute the document subject to minor attorney modifications. Second.

I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderperson Swanson. Aye. Parker.

Aye.

Kulis. Aye. Healy. Aye. Evans. Yes. Hurt.

Aye.

And Barnes. Aye. Agenda item C. Report from the finance department regarding an amendment to the interagency agreement for the advanced metering infrastructure project ARPA restricted funds.

Move to approve the amendment and authorize the city manager to execute the document subject to minor attorney modifications.

Second.

There's been a first and a second. Is there any discussion?

roll call please just a second can we uh get just a little explanation explanation or background since this is arpa funding it is it's arpa restricted funding so right now we have three iai agreements that are open it's the 31st avenue reconstruction and road diet project the 35th street west parkway project and the water meter project The first two are road projects, and those have to have all invoices paid by September 30th. There was some concern that we wouldn't have all invoices paid by September 30th, so we've paid up until this point, and then we'll start transferring the funds, if approved, transferring the funds from those two agreements to the last agreement, which is the water meter project, and finish paying for some water meters with the restricted funds.

Any more discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderperson Swanson? Aye. Parker?

Aye.

Gullis? Aye. Healy?

Aye.

Evans? Yes. Hurt?

Aye.

And Barnes? Aye. Agenda item D. Report from the Public Works Department regarding an amendment to the Intergovernmental Service Agreement for Grounds and Surfaced Area Maintenance with the Brock Island Arsenal.

Motion to approve the amendment and authorize the city manager to execute the document subject to minor attorney modifications.

Second.

There's been a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderman Swanson. Aye. Parker.

Aye.

Kulis. Aye. Healy.

Aye.

Evans. Yes. Hurt.

Aye.

And Barnes. Aye. Agenda item E. Report from the Public Works Department regarding an extension to the janitorial services contract with FBG Service Corporation in the amount of $185,976. Motion to approve the extension.

Second. There's been a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderperson Swanson.

Aye.

Parker.

Aye.

Gullis. Aye. Healy.

Aye.

Evans. Yes. Hurt.

Aye.

And Barnes. Aye. Agenda item F. Report from the Police Department regarding a memorandum of understanding with Rock Island County and the City of Moline for the 2026 Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant, JAG.

I have a first and a second.

Is there any discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderperson Swanson. Aye. Parker? Aye. Ulis? Aye. Healy? Aye. Evans? Yes. Ert?

Aye.

And Barnes? Aye.

Then I'll execute agenda item G.

Report from the police department regarding an agreement with Star Chase for two squad-mounted technology systems in the amount of $14,687.24.

I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderperson Swanson. Aye. Parker.

Aye.

Poulos. Aye. Healy. Aye. Evans.

Aye.

Hurt.

Aye.

And Barnes. Aye.

Agenda item 16.

Budget adjustments A through C. Motion to approve budget adjustments A through C. Second.

I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Roll call please.

Alder present Swanson. Aye. Parker.

Aye. Kulis. Aye. Healy. Aye.

Evans. Yes. Hurt.

Aye.

And Barnes. Aye.

Agenda item 17.

A report from the Community Development Department regarding an update to the Community Development Block Grant Manual, including the addition of the CDBG Subrecipient Guide and the CDBG Administrative Manual.

Second.

There's been a first and a second. Is there any discussion?

Can staff kind of touch on the changes or updates that were made?

Sure, so the two manuals that are discussed here are actually brand new documents being incorporated into the overall CDBG program manual. These are documents which will help guide subrecipients kind of as they apply for and utilize funds that they secure through the competitive subrecipient grant process. The administrative manual then explains how the funds are managed more broadly. So in effect, they're just expanding on what already exists. They don't substantively change any of our existing processes or procedures.

What prompted staff to want to include this?

Two things. One was looking around at best practices from other CDBG entitlement communities and noticing that many of them had developed manuals of this kind. Two, feedback from subrecipients seeking additional guidance on how to perform as best they could.

Have we been having issues with subrecipients performing or whatever the right word is?

In the last couple of years, subrecipients have performed quite well, expending funds in a timely manner and reporting back appropriately.

Nice answer. I can make a longer answer. Miles' glass is half full.

Miles, can you also talk about the scoring? I was just looking at the committee meeting, and they had like two options to consider. So I'm just kind of interested in the reduction if they've received funding in the prior years, how that can be decreased. And then there was something else also. So can you touch on that and how is it beneficial or would it have some type of negative impact on recipients that may receive grants year after year?

Sure. As a reminder, any applicant for the social service funding pool every year goes through a grading process. The higher your score, the more likely you are to be funded at your requested amount. The Community Development Commission has continued to tweak and adjust that methodology as time has passed. Certainly as the number of applicants and the volume of requests has increased, they have become more concerned about making sure that scoring incorporates as many factors as possible so that there is a robust evaluation of a very competitive pool of applications. One of the things that they have been discussing is adding a standard around if you have been a past recipient, And there are new folks asking for funding that you not score as highly as a past recipient to give an opportunity for new requests to be considered. Basically to keep the pool rotating through different potential sub-recipients.

Any more discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderson Swanson.

Aye.

Parker.

Aye.

Gullis.

Aye. Healy. Aye. Evans. Yes. Hurt. Aye.

And Barnes. Aye.

Agenda item 18.

A report from the mayor's office regarding an appointment to the fire pension board trustees.

Second. I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion?

Yeah, I do have something. Is this a similar process to the fire and police commission appointment? And the reason I bring it up is, I mean, I'm going to vote for it because I don't believe in penalizing citizens. But I'm really frustrated by the fact that we keep violating our ordinance. There's been no communication. with me or I don't know any other council people regarding the person that's being appointed to this. In section 2-219, consideration of appointments needs to be done with communication with council. In section 2-220, the decisions of appointments are made jointly by mayor and council. And they brought this up repeatedly in March, in April, And in May, until we got up to the state deadline of appointing for the library board where we could actually not go any further. But I am just really struggling with, I have to adhere to ordinances, our residents have to adhere to ordinances. But it appears when it comes to the appointment to commissions, boards, and committees, are ignored and not even processed. So I'm just making that clear for the record that moving forward, could we please, after six months of asking, adhere to the ordinances of the city? Thank you.

Thank you. Jessica, would you like to comment on the time frame for this appointment? Or maybe you shouldn't. Maybe you should. I mean, I just didn't want any, I just didn't want to put any business out there that you didn't feel comfortable putting out, especially pertaining to our timeline for this appointment. So if you don't feel comfortable, that's fine. We can just move on with the vote.

It hasn't been noticed yet, so we should move on.

Okay, all right, all right, all right. We'll move on then. Is there any more discussion?

I guess my question would be to our city attorney if there's any violation at this point.

We have routinely not been following this ordinance. Since I've been here, I don't know that we've followed this ordinance in terms of our appointments. Yes, technically the way that we're supposed to do vacancies is they're supposed to notify a council within 30 days of any of any term or any vacancy. Within that 30 day period, the mayor is then supposed to, or is able to make any appointments for that vacant position. If it is not filled within that time period, technically council can also make an appointment. Although, to be honest with you, I haven't looked specifically at this commission to see if it's by statute, to see if it's mayor only. So like police and fire commission, that has to be done by the mayor only. I don't know off the top of my head about this one. but yes i mean technically um i i don't know if we if we ever have and i would defer to amanda um in terms because i'm not involved in the commission vacancies but technically you're supposed to be notified of all the vacancies you're supposed to be notified of all the applications as well we haven't followed it in the nine years that i've been on this city council

I've never heard of it. I've been functioning with council for a while. It just kind of got me. It may be factual, but I've never. I thought it basically all went through the mayor, so that's fine.

Well, I would ask people to read the ordinances. They're online. Also, regarding police and fire commission, section 2.235 states the appointments are given By board, the board of the commission appoints the people. So I would strongly suggest that we read the ordinance.

I would agree because I was on the fire and police boards and I would rather that we're doing this properly.

I think if I may, this is very similar to OMA compliance. Also in the nine years that I've been on city council, we more often than not have not been in compliance with OMA with respect to our various boards and commissions. What I've identified is that most of the time, this is not like a policy disagreement or like a none of us sitting up here, but it's simply an operational dysfunction Right? We have too many things going on within general administration, too few people, too few people who have certain skill sets or familiarity with things, et cetera, and it just gets missed. And so if we want better compliance with these ordinances, we have to address general administration, the staffing needs, and the operational success of that department. Again, nothing that we're going to accomplish up here at this table, but just city management, operational, general administration needs to improve operationally for us you know, abide by these ordinances.

So I guess my point is, since we are aware that we're not following the ordinance, then I can't agree to vote yes on it.

Any more discussion?

Is it okay if I say something?

No, no, no, no. I mean, well, no, because, you know,

It would just be some context behind why the board asked for an appointment for this board. The board specifically requested that council, the mayor appoint someone. The person that was on the board was Mayor Tome's appointee and that person resigned. So the board asked me if I would have the current mayor appoint someone to the board for the replacement. Just a little background.

Thank you. Any more discussion?

No, and like I said, I have no objection to the person, and I will vote for the appointment. I'm just making a point that I've been asking for six months for us to adhere to the ordinance, and I've been ignored. And so I'm just bringing it up because this is the latest appointment.

Any more discussion?

Todd, where are we at on hiring an executive assistant?

We're setting up interviews for executive assistants. We're collecting applications, again, to try to find somebody. We've offered a position to a number of people that haven't been able to meet their pay expectations. So hopefully this time we'll be able to do that. I would note that under the Pension Fund Board, the mayor has two appointments. Two members are active members of the Pension Fund, and then one member is a retired person under the Pension Fund.

And assistant city manager?

That one was at another interview for us, so it's a little bit further along.

Okay, carry on. Thank you. Any more discussion?

I guess, is there any way to amend this so that I'm okay with voting? I mean, I know Dr. Hulan. I'm sure he would do a great job. I just, basically, again, when you're saying you're not following something,

could make a motion to amend to suspend the, or not really suspend the rules, but to appoint over the inconsistencies in division two, so article six of division two. So to make that appointment. So you would make a motion to amend to appoint that individual and to do that over the requirements detailed in article six, division two. So that way you're at least acknowledging that you are not following the ordinance of this appointment.

All right, well, I would like to make that motion to amend to appoint over requirement. Is that it?

Yeah, over the, I would say a motion to amend to make the appointment without the notice portion of the ordinance requirement.

I'll second that amendment.

So I have a first and a second. Is there any more discussion? Roll call, please.

Alderperson Swanson. Parker? Aye. Fullis?

Aye. Healy? Aye.

Evans? Yes. Hurt? Aye. And Barnes? Aye. I'm 19. Rock Island Port Authority.

Motion to close the regular city council meeting and convene the Rock Island Regional Port District meeting.

Second. We're first and second. Is there any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Hearing none.

Mayor and the council, we have no update tonight.

motion good answer tom motion to exit the rock island original port authority and reconvene the regular city council meeting there's a first and second is there any discussion all in favor say aye aye all opposed hearing none agenda item 20. i thank you to the united way for another fabulous day of caring

Here in Rock Island and across the Quad Cities, I was with my brothers and sisters in the Quad City Federation of Labor over at Longview Park, opposite our parks department, cleaning some vegetation. I never thought I would be using a machete as a volunteer, but that was pretty cool. But then afterwards, I went over to the Hauberg Estate, and they had 160 volunteers there, a little beehive buzzing away, really fabulous. There was projects at the academy, all over the city. So thank you to our volunteers who came out and helped out Rock Island, and to the United Way for organizing another successful event. I have something.

Alderwoman Barnes and Alderperson Poulos and I attended the Knights of Columbus Police and Firefighter of the Year Awards last night. Very nice event and congrats to Officer Anzaruni Kimba and our Fire Marshal John Briggs. So congratulations to both of them.

Yeah, congratulations guys. Chief, please let them know. And Chief, please let them know. Thank you. Anything else? All right, agenda item, where are we at, 21?

Close session. 21. Close session, 5ILCS120-2C11, litigation when an action against, affecting, or on behalf of a particular public body has been filed and is pending before a court or administrative tribunal, or when the public body finds that an action is probable or imminent, in which case the basis for the finding must be recorded and entered into the minutes of the closed meeting.

Move to add a closed session. Second. I have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Hearing none, closed session.