City Council - Regular Meeting

I told her that's I I I go At 5:29 At 5:29 At 5:29, you still at 529? Hey. At 5:29 still . right. OK, yeah, so you should, yeah. OK The chair will call the April 21st, 2026 meeting of the city council to order, please rise for the pledge of allegiance. Pledge allegiance to the flag. of the United States of America. and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God. Indivisible with Liberty and justice for all. Clerk Redpath, can you please call the roll? Alderman Cox Alderman Gregory. Here. Alderman Williams. Alderman Rockford. Awour. All the women attriano Aman Carlson A William McConnley , Alderman Donlin, Alderman Hanauer, Mayor Busher, President , Mayor, you have a quorum. Thank you, clerk. The Civility pledge in the interest of civility, I pledge to promote civility by listening , being respectful of others, acknowledging that we all are striving to support and improve our community and understanding that we each may have different ideas for achieving that objective. This evening there are no proclamations or presentations.

The next item on the agenda would be docket number 2026-012 for the property located at 1509 Noble Avenue. The petitioners are Tate R. Hartman and Danielle C. Hartman. Present zoning classification is R1, single family residences District section 155.016. The requested zoning relief is variants of Section 155.068B1 garages or accessory buildings or structures to allow the existing detached garage structure including the recent addition thereto to remain in place as shown on the Plat of survey with setbacks to the North property line of 2.1 ft for the northwest corner of the garage and 2.3 ft on the northeast corner of the garage. SpringfieldS Sangamon County Regional Planning Staff recommendation is approval, planning and zoning Commission recommendation is approval to concur with the staff recommendation. The chair will now entertain a motion. Thank you. Um, I move that we accept the Springfield Zoning and Regional Planning recommendation . We have a motion and a second to accept the regional planning staff recommendation for approval. Uh, is there any question from the alders on this particular zoning item? Seeing none, Mr. Sheehan, do you need to say anything? All right, sounds good. Uh, with that then, the voting will now be open. All those in favor of the motion please vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And the motion passes with 9 voting yes, none voting no. Thank you very much. The next item on the agenda is docket number 2026-013 for the property located at 1700 South MacArthur Boulevard. The petitioner is Abdullah Hussain. The present zoning classification is S2, Community shopping and Office District Section 155.031. The requested zoning relief is a conditional permitted use pursuant to Section 155.031C9. Drive-in or drive-up window except for drive-in or drive-up windows for the sale of alcohol located on zoning lots adjoining the R1, R2, or R3 zoning districts, but for an alley and Section 155.203 . Certain drive-in businesses to allow a drive-in or drive-up window for an ice cream shop on

a zoning lot which adjoins the R2 zoning district before an alley, and a variance of section 155.322C, illuminated signs to allow an illuminated sign menu board to be located approximately 92 ft from a residential zoning lot. The SpringfieldS Sangamon County Regional Planning staff recommendation was denial. but the Springfield City of Springfield Pinning and Zoning Commission recommendation was based on the amended site plan grant the petition as submitted with the condition that the petitioner shall install a stop sign at the drive-through exit lane off of Laurel Road, subject to the approval of the traffic engineer. The chair will now retain a motion. I, uh, move that we approve, uh, the Springfield Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation. All right, we have a motion and a second to, uh, grant the petition as the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation was with the installation of a stop sign. Um, older woman Conley. Just real quickly, I want to point out first of all, this is super exciting to see Baskin and Robbins coming back. I'm very pleased for that. Anytime someone puts, um, ice cream in a drive-up window, I'm gonna be in favor of it. Um, but I do want to point out, I appreciate that the, the exit from onto Laurel is a right turn only. I think that's really important. That's a very busy intersection and having people turn both ways coming out of there could be complicated. So, um, I appreciate, but very much looking forward to having them back. And thank you Thank you. Any other alders have any conversation for this particular zoning item? Mr. Hussein, did you want to say anything to the group? All right, thank you for coming tonight. With that being said, the voting will now be open. All those in the motion, please vote . Yes. All those opposed will vote no. And the motion passes with 9 voting yes, none voting no. Congratulations, sir. Thank you. Thank you. The next item on the agenda is docket number 2026-014 for the property located at 3126 South Sixth Street. The Petitioners are the old fashioned ink present zoning classification is B1 Highway Business Service

District Section 155.033. The requested zoning relief is a conditional permitted use pursuant to sections 155.033C7. Conditional permitted uses in the B-1 Highway Business Service District in Section 155.200 taverns to allow a tavern with gaming terminals and having liquor sales by the drink. Springfield Sangamon County Regional Planning Staff recommendation is approval of the conditional permitted use limited to no more than 861 square feet in the suite known as 3126 South Sixth Street. Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation is concurrent with the staff recommendation for approval. The chair will now entertain a motion. I move that we accept the Springfield Planning and Zoning Commission recommendations. We have a motion and a second to accept the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation of approval. Any discussion from the alders on this particular item. Seeing non-voting will now be open. All those in favor of the motion will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And the motion passes with 9 voting yes, none voting no. This does conclude the zoning portion of our meeting. The chair now recognizes Treasurer Redpath Fager for the presentation of the financial report. Thank you, Mayor. The treasurer's report for the corporate fund for the month of March, beginning balance, 63 $34,0481. We took in total receipts of $14,485,000945. We had total disbursements in the month of March totaling 15 million. $89,546 which left the corporate fund ending balance in the month of March at $62,4030,008081.

The ending general fund balance included 3,229,000 $89 which was the ending ARPA money for March. That concludes my report. Thank you motion to accept the treasurer's report as submitted. We have a motion and a second to accept the treasurer's report. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion please say aye. Those oppose nay, the ayes have it. She also recognizes the budget director Metzger, for any questions of the OBM contract report that was sent out. Do any alders have any questions on the OBM contract report. Seeing none, we will move forward. The chair will entertain a motion to dispense with the reading of the minutes of the April 7th, 2026 regular city council meeting and approve the minutes. We have a motion to second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Those oppose nay, the ices have it. The show will entertain a motion to incorporate the pre-council first reading of ordinances into the record of this council meeting. We have a motion in a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion please say aye. Those oppose nay, the ayes have it. Next item on the agenda is the consent agenda. The chair will entertain a motion to incorporate the pre-council reading of the consent agenda into the record of this council meeting. We have a motion in a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion please say aye. Those opposed, nay, the ayes have it. The chair will now entertain a motion to place the consent agenda on final passage. We have a motion and a second. Alderwoman Conley, thank you, Mayor. I just need to, um, point out again for the record, I will be abstaining on items 2026, 154 and 191, since those are both related to the Department of Natural Resources. OK. So with this consent to gender report, you have that the clerk 154 and 191. Thank you, older one. Yeah. Any other discussion? Seeing none, the voting will now be open. All those in favor of the motion will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And the motion passes with 9

voting yes, none voting no. There are no items currently tabled or remaining in committee . The next item on the agenda is 2026-155. An ordinance authorizing execution of an annexation agreement between the city of Springfield, Illinois, and 2631 North Dirkson Parkway, LLC for the properties located at 2631 Dirkstone Parkway for the Office of Public Works. The chair will entertain a motion to recess the regular meeting and hold a public hearing for consideration of this annexation agreement. Second. We have a motion to second. Any discussion about the process? Seeing none, all those in favor of going into a public hearing, please say aye. I pose nay. The ayes have it. The public hearing is now open. Is there anyone in the council chambers who wishes to discuss the annexation agreement for the property at 2631 North Dirkson Parkway. Motion to adjourn, uh, public hearing and uh and resume the city council meeting. We have a motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor of the motion please say aye. Those oppose nay, the eyes have it. The chair now places will entertain a motion to place agenda item number 2026-155 on final passage. We have a motion on a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, the voting will now be open. All those in favor of the motion will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. OK. Alderman, oh, there we go. Thank you, Alderman. Uh, the motion passes with 9 voting yes, none voting no. The next item on the agenda is 2026-156, an ordinance annex annexing certain described real estate property located at 2631 Dirkson Parkway for the Office of Public Works. The chair will entertain a motion to place agenda item number 2026-156 on final passage. We have a motion to second. Any discussion? Seeing none, the motion the voting will now be open. All those in favor of the motion vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And the motion passes with 9 voting yes, none voting no. The chair will entertain a

motion for an omnibus vote for agenda items 2026-172-2026-173 and 2026-174. Don't move. We have a motion and a second for an omnibus vote. I will read the ordinances in the record, and then we'll go to discussion. If anyone has discussion. The ordinances are 2026-172, an ordinance approving the appointment of William Matson to the Police Community Review Commission. 2026-173. An ordinance approving the appointment of Doctor Kamau Kamayo to the Police Community Review Commission and 2026 - 174 an ordinance approving the appointment of John Herring to the Springfield Disabilities Commission. Now we'll go to discussion. Is there any discussion on these items? Uh, Mayor, I was just wondering if anyone, um, who is being appointed is in the audience and would like to come up and introduce themselves. Thank you, Alderwoman. Are any of the three , members being appointed in the audience, Alderman Connolly would like you to come up and say hello. Would you like to come up? The doctor is here. Come on up. Thank you for serving and thank you for coming up. Do you mind just telling the elders? we are, yeah. Uh, just tell them who you are, if you don't mind and, and what commission you're serving on. on the ice. Any And the doctor is that you, you, I, am I allowed to say where you work? OK, at UIS, so I don't wanna, oh, retired, sorry. Celebrate that. Yes, yeah, any other discussion, I just, I just wanted to thank you for serving on this. This is an important commission, um, obviously, there are a lot of issues that come up in, in council chambers and, and in the city at large. And so I appreciate your your time, um, on this commission. Look forward to, um, to seeing sort of the results of, of your work as, as things move forward.

Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you, doctor . Appreciate you, bro. OK, so the chair will now entertain a motion to put these items, we, we did a motion and a second discussion, so now we need to go on all those in favor of putting this on final passage before we vote, please say aye. Those opposed nay. The eyes have it for final passage. So now the chairman wants a motion to place the items on final passage. 2026172173 174. We have a motion and a second. Did you get both of those, clerk? Yep. OK. Uh, any other discussion on these items? Seeing none, voting will now be open. All those in favor of the motion will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And the motion passes with 9 voting yes, none voting no. The next item on the agenda is 2026-175, an ordinance approving an amendment to the Rules of Procedure for City council. ordinance. Second, I have a motion to second for withdrawal. Any discussion from the alders. Seeing none, uh I'm sorry, I would Button's not working very well? No, I. That's an older woman. Older woman Notriano. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I was just gonna ask, um, was there any rationale for withdrawing or what's Well, I think based on the, if I can there. Oh, absolutely, alderman, go ahead. Be one of the spot, one of the three sponsors original sponsors, uh I would like to, uh, based on the discussion we had last week an opportunity to talk with those offices. something that everybody's. consider OK, perfect. Yeah Any other discussion from the alders. Seeing none, all those, oh sorry , alderwoman Conley are buttons slow. Oh, Alderman Gregory, sorry I was just, yeah, it is working a little slow. I was just, I, I definitely agree with you. Thank you all Autumman Donlin, but one of the things that we definitely got to, you know, get in our policies is the rotation of um. the committee chair, so I, I mean that's of the committee chair you said committee chair that's important. That's something we do now that was, that was in that language as well. So there, there is some

things that, that we probably need to look at sooner or later, just FYI. Yeah, Alderman Donlin. On that note, Alderman, and we did not talk about this. I don't give this too much because brought, but. Yes, sir. The council back in the day. Uh-huh. It was like 2000. did pass an ordinance to that effect, but it never got caughtifying. OK. Right. Yeah, we need to do some things for sure. Clean up. I appreciate your willingness to and sit down and work through it . No problem. Always. Any other discussion Seeing none? All those in favor of the motion to withdrawal, please say aye. Those opposed, nay. me point voter. We have. Yes, Aldermen. We have two speakers. There's that wanted to speak on this ordinance, if you want to still speak, you can speak at the public for part of this meeting at the end of the meeting? Yes, sir. So the eyes have it. There was no nays, so the motion has been withdrawn, but the ordinance has been withdrawn. The next item on the agenda is item number 2026-176, an ordinance authorizing notice of intent to establish a state tax and revenue Starbond District and authorize a feasibility study not to exceed $75,000 to evaluate the potential creation of a tourism and economic development district utilizing Starbond financing in support of the history across the tracks initiative, East West Downtown Development and Future expansion opportunities for the Bank of Springfield Center. The chair will entertain a motion to place agenda item number 2026-176 on final passage. 2, we have a motion in a 2nd. Any discussion from the alders first. Seeing none, clerk? Uh, I have one speaker, Aaron Kirkpatrick. I want to announce it one more time. Aaron Kirkpatrick OK. That was the only one we had on that one. Thank you, clerk. The voting will now be open. All those in favor of the motion will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. We got slow computers today, don't we? I know. The motion

passes the 9 voting yes, none voting no. I'll slow down for you, sorry. The next item on the agenda is 2026-187, an ordinance authorizing execution of a contract with the board of trustees of the University of Illinois for advisory board development facil facilitation of research and planning in an amount not to exceed $54,592 for the Springfield Police Department. The chair will entertain a motion to place agenda item number 2026-187 on final passage. Don't move. yeah We have a motion in a second. Um , any discussion from the alders on this particular ordinance. Alderman Williams. Yes, uh, uh, can somebody explain. Uh, yes, Chief Beal is here. Um, so this body is to uh pay for some uh research done by UIS. So back in 2022 was a study done by the Community Health Roundtable. That, that study we looked. at the health of the community and also to do with the community relations. I think um, through that study there was conversation started with the community of Roundtable sprinkle . and script the coalition on command race ism Since then, we've had countless meetings but a lot. um, a lot would be years. um. does this look like how do we better relationships, uh OK. through that it was a discussion about putting together some kind of group of folks who could be essentially a conduit between the community members and the police department. and the police department and the community and so through that, uh, we want to have UIS uh all this study for um, and we have them uh, meet with community member what this looks like. like in our community to establish this group of people, this entity, if you will. uh, in our community. So there's a lot of studies uh around the nation.

that really look. at, uh, these, these boards and these committees are. groups of folks and what does that look like in? through that, uh, we want to find out what that looks like, not only uh nationwide what does that look like with these for OK, so, we're using a university , um, to actually conduct the research. or, or are they gonna use, they're gonna talk to our community members. Excuse me. work. a conversation with what this might look like within the Springfield. Thank you, Chief. Alderman Gregory, thank you. I'm , I, you know, I'm for this, and I, I know, um, um, all the woman Simpson. I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm for this, but I, I just I, I just think that we will not get anywhere with true um data and true true opinions if we don't have people on the advisory board from the most policed area, whether those are good interactions or whether those are bad interactions. I think that's so very important that these opinions and this whatever we're gonna do has to has to have some folks that come from, you know, being pulled over, been through with good and bad that can really get some some truthfulness to this thing, um, and, and when I looked down the those who are gonna do the research, I don't see that, you know, point of order, the, the mic there is not working apparently at the podium. hello. at the podium so Is it not plugged in? doesn't let me plug it in. Chief I appreciate Jack of all trades. Work now. Hey, there you go.

Oh sorry Arleman Gregory for the interruption. No thank you. Um, and, and, and I think that's important. I mean we even have officers that live in in in some of this area, you know, I, I see the cars parked there. They live in those areas, so I, I even think, you know, they would be good to be a part of this, you know, um, I think when we, when we have people studying from the outside to the inside we we sort of don't get a true sense of feeling and, and, and you know that's why we're still here you know and um you know I got good respect for you, great respect for you, um, I respect our department, you know, good policing. um, and, and, and that's just my take on it. So that's, that's what I would like to see, uh, uh , that, that, that be a part of this that at least half of these members are, are that we that we um put together are from that area that that that would be my, you know, per se amendment to this is is that when they do the research and we put together this advisory board . Those people are from that area that's gonna at least half of them are gonna be from that area to give you their expertise. I might be able to spell some of the uh concerns that you might have, um, the, the research that US has done is for a nationwide research of what this looks like nationwide, not necessarily for Springfield, uh, from that through conversations with Skoder and the Health Roundtable we're like, what does this look like in Springfield, which is what sparked the January 24th meeting with our community. There was uh 15 or 16 different, uh, groups if you will that were invited to this extremely diverse group of folks came in they were invited to the table and asked questions about what does an advisory board look like in Springfield, Illinois. Um, yes, we know what this looks like nationwide, but what does it look like in our community, um UIS is not going to select this board, um, they're this board is gonna be community uh community born and selected by uh those members that have been part of these conversations for the last

3 years, Sco to a roundtable and the Springfield police department, specifically myself. I've been there from the very get go on these meetings and so yes, I, I understand your concern and I, we, we as a group as a whole, I think I can speak for us all, we agree with you. OK. So that'd be my amendment when we're done talking. I appreciate you. All the women know Triano. Thank you, Mayor. Um, so it's, it it was a little, uh, nebulous at first. What the, the commission was going to be, but OK, so it's an advisory board, but it's not, I guess where is once we get the study outlying what the board looks like, who's going to fund it? It like, this would be held separate from, from the, from the city. It would not be, uh, the, the city would not, there would not be appointed by the mayor, would not be appointed nobody would confirm it from the from the council members or anything like that. This would be held separately from that, um , we have not had that conversation about where it might be funded, but in, in my understanding it would be a voluntary voluntary basis, um, it's community born, uh, it's really a relationship builder between uh the police department and our community members. OK, I , I just, um, my fear is that, uh, we'll get a study saying we should do XYZ. And if there's no ownership , so to speak, uh, there's no organization, whether it be community-based or the city or UIS, uh, to actually, you know, implement the findings of the study then, you know, have we got our $54,000 worth sort of. And that's been a commitment that started uh before me, before I was a chief. It started with Chief Scarlett, uh, I was part of those conversations with him when I was a commander of field operations, been part of them since day one. it was a a commitment that I made not only to uh Skoda and the Roundtable, um, but to the administration that that we're gonna continue these conversations, uh, we see the value in this and we're gonna follow through with this, um, I'll be honest with you, I've been pushing this

to move faster than it is, um, and some of my, uh, some of my uh partners that are in the crowd tonight can tell you that I want this thing done like yesterday, um, but we also know that's an important to make sure we get it done right, uh, so it doesn't just fall flat on its face. Um-hum. Sure. And so, um we're, I know we had a, a recent meeting, but the data that they're using is going to be, has already been collected and is from like 2022 to January. Yeah, that's, that's from the Community Health Roundtable study that they did, UIS, uh, just doing studies to look what does it look like nationwide, uh , as, as a, as a committee outside of, outside of the city um and what does this look like within our city um as it pertains to our community and what does our community foresee uh this partnership looking like OK, great. If we at all could have, uh, someone from UIS come and speak to us a little bit about, you know, their plan, what they're gonna do, um, I, I would, I would be, uh, interested to hear that and interested to know of any ways that we as council members can help support that effort and make sure that, you know, it goes somewhere. So thank you, thank you. um, Alderwoman Conley , and we do have a community member who signed up to speak, who is an expert on this, by the way. Alderman Conley, Alderwoman Conley, sorry. That's fine. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Chief. Um, I would just like to echo, I've, I kind of you know, I've, I've read some of the background of this. I know, I remember when these conversations started, um, just want to make sure that we get, um, I know part of the scope of this work is, is to develop sort of that, um, that the design and whatnot, but then weicrophone. Sorry, can you hear me now? Thank you. All right, thank you. Sorry, Tony. Um, just that we get regular updates, um, um, of, of when the meetings are and, and they can just be an email so that we understand where things are and what, what this, what the progress is, um, because they,

I'm intrigued to see how this plays out and, and hopefully we'll have some again, more best practices that we can implement and, and take away and, and see active progress. So thank you very much . Thank you, Mayor. My pleasure My. If the alders don't mind, I'd like to let the community member who's an expert at this situation, go ahead, clerk. Gail Simpson. Definitely an expert Welcome back Madam Mayor others Good evening Good evening. Good evening I'm here to bring additional context to uh Chief Bill's request. My name is Gail Simpson. I'm a former city alderwoman I'm an actively engaged community, community member both civically and politically. My community engagement began many years ago and continues. I align myself with people and organizations that are also actively engaged. The community health roundtable consists of community engaged individuals. We are ordinary citizens who saw that there exist a disconnect between many in the Springfield community and the police. We developed a white paper in March of 2022, a few years into our coming together that is very intentional and its examination and recommendations on policing and community health . We organize with the specific intent of figuring out how to address the social determinants of health. those social factors that were not given positive attention can have detrimental impacts on the community. especially communities of color.

Some of that we pay particular attention to our economic stability, healthcare access and quality. neighborhood and built environment, social and community contexts, all of which can bring on stressors. that lead to health issues and impede one's quality of life. We invited the Springfield Coalition on Dismantling racism because of their work with discrimination and racism and involved the Springfield Police Department because because they are central. to many of the determinants of health. and a positive relationship with the police could be impactful. I'm gonna stop right there we have members with me if you were staying. These are members of the Community Health Roundtable and also SCOA. Thank you It is imperative. that we continue these discussions and the framework both of which have led us to where we are this evening. Our efforts did not emanate from any specific crisis. but from the knowledge that police and community relations across the country. are broken and there needs to be a method to repair, rebuild and sustain healthy police community relations. While this endeavor has not been driven nor controlled by the Springfield Police Department. under then Chief Scarlett and now Chief Bill, they have been active, willing and meaningful partners. We understood then and now that addressing the community relationship with the police and

vice versa would be paramount to making Springfield a safer and more inviting place to live. Our recommendations and goals have always been to work with like-minded and cross sections of the community to bring change . Change is sometimes a slow process, but diligence, intentionality, commitment and determination help where there are obstacles and setbacks after many meetings and outside discussions, it became abundantly clear that we needed to ground any proposed plans in research and empirical data. Molly Lamb, a member of the Round Table and a staff member at UIS became a valuable resource providing administrative support administrative support with the credibility of an institution of higher learning. we supplement supplemented their research with real life experiences during our community , community event in January where we boldly asked community members to share any and all experience that's dealing with the Springfield Police Department. These efforts continue to be a work in progress with a goal establishing an entity. not an advisory board we don't, we don't have a title at this point. but an entity that brings the police and the community together and it's sustainable. We are steadfast in our commitment to continue the work thank you. Thank you very much alderwoman. I appreciate it. Alderman Gregory, you still have your button pushed, so I'm assuming you want to speak. Yes. OK. Thank you. Uh, uh, former Alderwoman, uh, I appreciate that and, and much love to those who was on um that board I was on the community roundtable part of that as well and I do remember that it was a good conversations um but as we know what it says on paper is what um it ultimately

is and all in this paper says for advisory body development and um I truly feel for us to pro progress and proceed that members of that board or any advisory board that comes from a study have to come from our most policed area. What would you say that is, Chief? I mean, I our most police that we, you know, ACLU has done our studies. We've talked about the areas that that have the highest stats today, 47% of the calls were serviced in the city come from wards 2 and 3. Right. Well, can we, can we get it a little tighter? because I know it's like a one area that that has 400 is significant. It takes, yeah, so if calls for service in B 400. So. that's my amendment, Murdoch. My amendment is that half of whatever body comes from this. needs to live in whatever area, whatever beat has the most stops. and that may change. Let's just call it beat 300 and beat 400. That would be a more 300 be 400 because it may change. Hopefully we can get it together through not only policing and community health methods, but through investment like we can hire 500 police. We can hire 1000 police, but if we don't invest and make our communities better then y'all got your work cut out for you, so, um, that's, that's my focus that's, that's, you know, I'm, I'm all for it so. uh, so that's why I've been with Murdoch. Do I got a second? Second OK, so the motion is to um uh, what what body just any any anybody put together on that, that, that comes from this. half of that body comes from. Comes from 300 and 400. From the

city side or from everybody who's a part of. this collaboration. Whoever's a part of this collaboration. OK. Because shouldn't we, shouldn't we have their opinions , shouldn't should I mean, I'm, I'm just, I'm just asking as a person who you know May I ask a point of order during this? Do you mind alderman? I guess I'm curious because the money is to pay UIS for the work, not to create the advisory body or whatever it is. So I'm not sure, um, point of order if we can dictate the board if this is only to pay UIS . That's why I'm asking like, are we splitting hairs here? I guess I'm trying to figure out. It says, it says to it says authorizing a contract with the board of trustees with the University of Illinois 4 advisory body development fillitation and research or planning in amount not to see they're doing the research, but I don't know that they're. So creating the council, I guess, or the board or whatever it's gonna be called on. I don't know his name. Yeah, UIS would not be creating this cos this this this this. this group of folks, uh, this, this, this, uh, partnership I guess if you will, would be would be created by the community members. um, it's gonna come from in selected by by the group that we've had this working group that we've had, uh , with Community Health Roundtable SCODR, and the Springfield Police Department and, and I think those those groups that are involved in this see the value in lived experiences, uh, that that folks have, uh, with involvement with the police department, so, um, I think that we would, we would understand we obviously take that into consideration. and when we when we're building bylaws and mission statements and things of that nature. I and , and, and I totally agree with you. I just think that um that has to be in writing that when when this study is done and whatever it presents itself like it will say the you know you guys need to put together 7 people or 10 people and, and, and have them working on police and community relations throughout their time. past you, past me and everybody

else. Half of those people need to come from the highest area of stops. The most interactions with policing and that may be 300 and 400 now. It may be. 8 next year, it might be 10 and 10 years, who knows, but that's where the, the, the, we have to get there like me telling me telling somebody else my experience with policing and then them delivering that. is different from me sitting right there, eye to eye and saying, man, this is what I went through. This is, this is what I went through and this is how it made me feel this is, you know, what really truly goes on, you know what I'm saying, versus us telling somebody else and we're not gonna tell them the whole story, we're not gonna tell them the truth, you know what I'm saying not to interrupt you, but I guess UIS is not they're not building this board from start to finish. They are making the recommendations as to what bylaws might be, what mission statements might be, what this may look like, how many members are on the board? Is it 25 or is it 5, and things of that nature like we, we don't even know those answers yet, um, so it's, it's there's a lot of, there's a lot of red tape yet to be worked out as to that, and this ain't even with the police department because this is a separate entity. So my, my thing is, is. is, is my, my ask of UIS. is that through their research and study that half of whatever body or board that they research and come up with that that should work. should come from the highest areas that that is that is policed that has the highest interactions and they'll always have that stat, um, throughout time. I, I understand your concern, sir, but I, I guess UIS is not making, they're not making the selections, the the selections are gonna be made from community members, uh, that are part of the representation of this Skoda Roundtable and and the Springfield police department, mostly from Skoda and Roundtable since they have that it is. Put that in the language.

that that round table and whatever comes from it. that half of that a portion of that needs to be needs to be from the highest interaction areas. I, I just don't understand what's what my confusion with your amendment is the is the the researchers at UIS. You're not asking for those researchers to come from that, but whatever advisory board is eventually created. Correct. Um, because that's what they're planning and that's what their study is going to tell us what's the best route to do it. OK I'll let him finish I mean, the amendment then would be that the, that we I mean we have a team of people now that we that we work with and stuff so I mean I, I, I understand what we're trying to do. I under I understand, I think I understand the goal now. This is just a contract to approve the study, but we can, we can put trying to see how we would work this in, um, but it would likely be uh facilitation research and action evaluation planning amount, not to exceed $54,592 provided that such advisory body . shall or must um thank you, uh, shower must be comprised of um half of uh what was the, what was the phrase that you used? Half of, uh, is it beats 3000 and 400. Is that what you're saying? Or the highest, highest, highest beats for call to service. OK, it's, I think that's limiting UIS and what they're doing and and it's putting, it's putting some, it's not limiting it's, let me say

this, and, and auto woman, I, I respect you. I appreciate you. Your 5 minutes is is done, but I will, I will say this. that I understand what we're doing, but we're not gonna get a true outlook from any board we have we we work with people right now, right? That's from the east side that's from different areas of the thing that we talk with that we work with when tough times come up we have that going right now so what I'm saying with this this particular contract. whatever comes out of it, whatever body, whatever, whatever group of people. they gotta come from the area that's getting stopped the most. It only makes sense to, to, to work with those people. They're smart, some of them got degrees, some of them have turned their lives around, been stopped, being pulled over, they can help us get to where we try to get and give us some true stories and, and, and, and, and guess what, all the researchers, all the, the people uh uh with degree they're gonna do the work , the analysis or whatever, and they're gonna tell us what type of group we need to put together . to, to help us build this ground and half of some of those people gotta come from that area. They gotta, they gotta been through something there's no and and not saying that people have not been through something, but if, if you ain't been stopped and felt it, you know what I'm saying? Just, just right now I can just stop right now and be spooked. wholeheartedly You know what I'm saying? So it's gotta be people like that for us to get a real look. I, I, I agree with you it needs to be a diverse group of folks and it needs to be some folks that I've had interactions with the police, but I don't know that's within the purview of UIS is my is my point that I'm trying to make it's not. I'm just they, they, they're gonna do their study. I'm not trying to direct them how to do their study, but what comes out of this, this, this, this study will 11 requirement that I'm asking that comes out of this study is that 5% of the people that's on this, whatever we do

community engagement team that we put together that we might have to fund in the future come from the area that's getting that's that that that goes through it the most. It's only fair, it's only right. I'm not, I'm not, I'm not even trying to make this a difficult thing. Sure, no, and I think through the study from UIS I think you, you would, you would find that look the that's probably the recommendation of their, their research that they're in their findings, um, but I don't know that we can, we can't tell UIS this has to be what you're going to do because they're not the ones that are building this board. They're giving us the research what the born looks like, but then just go to the round table in the Springfield Police Department are the ones gonna build these bylaws off of what potentially is recommendations from UIS's Build all of those, but when, when the board and the people are put together and that's gonna carry out all of that, they should come some of them should come from that area and that's probably that's, uh, but I, I, you know, you might be going, I'm like, who knows it needs to be in right no none none is factual unless it's in writing and I, I don't think that's hard. I don't think that cuts UIS out of anything, they're still gonna do their thing. They're still gonna get their $50,000 and they're not losing no money, but what comes after it? they should have to come, they should, some of them. half of them, if it's a 7 4 of them, if it's 84 of them need to come from the area that gets policed the most. Yeah, and I think that I think there's value in that. I think there's obviously we would be looking at that. I just don't know that we, that's the conversation for right now. This is a conversation after this thing uh the bylaws are built, the mission statements built, and what does this look like? Who are now we now selecting? I like to have an understanding from the get-go. That's all I'm, that's all I'm saying. I, the money's here this changed. Nothing with what nobody's doing this this is just saying the after effect some of those people need to come from that area and, and, and it will help us a bunch and I think we run away from that. I think we, we really run away from those who who who who you know are are different than us

yeah and and not you as particularly police, but I this this whole system we gotta let people be involved and that's how we fix it. If not, we're just gonna keep running around in circles cause we don't know what it's like, we don't even in good times, you know what I'm saying So that's why amendment Murdock, what you got for me. All right. Go ahead. OK. So, under section one of the ordinance, this amendment would add after the um after the first sentence, which ends not to exceed $54,592 then add a sentence that would say the project scope uh or the agreements project scope shall specify that at least half of its advisory board Let me make sure that's right, at least half of its advisory body members shall be comprised of individuals that reside in the two beats that have, uh, the highest crime rate. Yes. OK, so you had a second, I heard the second, um, so we have Alder signed up to speak, but only on the amendment right now. Sure. So, if you're signed up to speak, we're only talking about the amendment at this time, not the ordinance itself. So older women, not Trianada, do you have anything on the amendment? I do. Thank you, Mayor. Um, so I, uh, definitely wanna give support to Alderman Gregory and um his effort to make sure that, uh , justice impacted individuals are a part of this body, um, I think it does fit the proposal, um, although it doesn't fit in the ordinance itself. Like if we actually look at the, the project scope, um, they are going to be helping them draft bylaws, uh, and things of that nature. So for us to say now, um, whenever you draft those

bylaws, make sure half of the people participating in this entity. come from, uh, the, the two highest speeds what? I don't, yeah, like I don't know however you want to specify it, however you said it um, but yeah, it, it's, it, it, it definitely fits in with the project scope page that was submitted with this. I think it's just like all, uh, OK, let me see, so, um, it would say it will, so the body will design a community-based participate participatory research approach to garner community voices and perspectives. And so right there , we could just be more specific about the community based. Like, make sure that this community that we're drawing from is the two highest, uh, calls for service speeds. That makes sense? It makes sense to me, but I guess it still I go back to there's not a UIS thing I don't think but it but the other point being I guess would be what happens when we have a a shift in in crime data. in the middle of somebody's term , do we remove them from the board, you know what I mean, that's just another concern like I understand that, but then what if things change, what if, hey, shootings went down this particular area. Now we have you know, an abundance of criminal activity in a particular area do we, do we remove that person from this board? I mean that's, that's challenges I think we're just, we're handcuffing ourselves, um, I, I, I think, I think the representation that we put into this, um, especially in January 24th when we had 16 or 17 different groups of folks from extremely diverse uh, you know, segment of our community shows the representation that you're going to get from the the people that have been working on this for almost 3 years, being Skoder, roundtable in my in ourselves. Can I ask you, were any of those individuals, people

who live in beats 300 or 400. I'll tell you who they are. They're coral, Black Lives Matter faith Coalition, greater, uh, Springfield Interfaith, Heartland House, Junior Frontiers, Massey Commission, Ministerial Alliance, NAACP Neighborhood Associations, 1 in a million. Scion, SPD obviously were there at the table, uh, Urban League and the Mayor's Youth Council, so you have a diverse, uh, group of folks from all over the city. I mean, and I think your board is gonna be representative of that and, and I, I can't speak to the membership of every single one of those organizations, um I would imagine that a a few of those organizations do have people who live in 300 and 400, but not all of them do. and a lot of them aren't like based in beats 300 and 400. I, I would say, um, but I it, it definitely like to say that we're handcuffing them in this The problem is we're outsourcing , making, uh, uh, a policy to UIS when we would really like to make sure that you know, we can have some say over what this body ultimately looks like, um, and if you don't want to put beats 4 and 300 and 400, you can just say based on evidence, the membership should be from Beats, who half the members should be from Beats who have most calls for service, and they're gonna in the bylaws, they're gonna say, like this person, our, our members are gonna our terms of our, our members' terms are gonna be like 1 year, 2 year, 4 year, and so that will determine when people get replaced or not. Are you I feel like we're building bylaws right as we stand here right now, I'll be

honest with you, so, well, I mean, uh, all, all I'm saying is, um. that we're, we're definitely asking them to, uh, like engage the community that Alderman Gregory is talking about. So if we could be more specific with the members, um, I, I don't. I don't see how that, uh, conflicts with the proposal as it stated and, um, I think we should all support Alderman Gregory. Thank you, Mayor. Alderman Williams, are you also on the amendment? Yeah, I'm on the amendment. I think we're making much about nothing. I, I, I think that what he's proposing is fine, it doesn't change anything. It doesn't disrespect and I'm a part of some of those groups that was named. All we do is put the language in. Now it's in writing, and we're done with this. We move on. Uh, I don't know, this is the problem, chief with relationships, now that they're here and listening, it's because y'all resist everything. What's wrong with putting something in writing that that gets gets me with with the law enforcement mentality that goes on, we're OK, so what, it may not be UIS that we're really gonna do this piece, but it's in there and we have it in writing, so when UIS finished, can't nobody go back and say, well, that ain't what our intention is, or, or play the games that we deal with. This is what's causing this and making us look at stuff and saying well let's put an end on the front end. Now we ain't got to worry about it. It's not hard and it's not for you to accept, it's for you to, we're telling you we made a motion. I'm calling the question and let's find out what's gonna happen there. Well, if he, if he moves to call the question, then he needs a second, and that would, that then needs to carry a biopsy, I, I won't be disres

let them finish and then we'll, let's move on, please. You're withdraw your question? Yes. OK. Thank you, sir. Any other comments? I'm finished for right now. Alder and Hanauer. OK, so. You're on the amendment as well, right? Yes, ma'am, sorry, just making sure, but, so I understand. when this is done when they're done, it comes, doesn't it come back to us at that point we have to prove we have to prove what they do. I think uh if they want funding, yes, it would come back to us, but it is not going to be an appointed border commission by the city. This border commissioner, advisory councilor , whatever term they decide to call themselves because that's not been chosen yet, will be of community members chosen by community members to then have engagement with the community and come back to the police department and hold the police department accountable. It's that arm's length transaction that we've all been asking for, and this started in 2022. So the city is not involved. We're just, we're just giving money. We're, we're helping pay for the research for it because it's something the community has been asking for and again this started in 2022. The committee has been asking for it. I've been supportive of it since I became mayor. I've been meeting with these groups as well, and I support this advisory group. I just, I'm, uh, my concern is, is it,, is it is is it,, is it is is it,, is it handcuffing UIS ? is it handcuffing the commission, uh, amendment? Yes. That's your question? Got you. That's, that's my big concern. OK. So, thank you. Um-hum. Uh, older woman, Conley, do you have questions on the amendment on the amendment, yes, um, I, I would just like to point out to everybody, um, on the horseshoe. What we're actually approving in this project scope is conducting research on evidence-based best practices and success ful models for community participation in policing partnership advisory bodies and, and I understand Alderman

Gregory, what you're trying to get at. I, I genuinely hope and expect that best practices, evidence-based best practices and techniques will bring forward exactly the kind of, um, recommendation that you're putting in, um but I also understand there, there's a certain concept of continuity of, of how this will work and how this will carry forward. And, and I think expressing that that's that interest and that desire to ensure that, that impacted individuals have a secured seat on this body. I think is, is an important point for us to make at this time. Um, again, my expectation, um, just, you know, kind of from some of the reading I've done around this, this, this concept, um, I've gone to some of these diff different sorts of trainings My expectation is, is that very much we will see evidence-based best practices that will support exactly that kind of a makeup. So, um, I think, uh. corporation council, the language you proposed certainly gives flexibility to ensure that wherever those highest crime data numbers go, that that's where there is, we, we expect to see active participation from those parts of the community involved on the board. So I, I think I understand the concerns, but I also, I think that we will , I, I don't, I'm not bothered to vote for this to support this ordinance simply because I do expect that what we will see as a best practice. and what we will see as, as evidence-based from the research that has been building in this field will actually support lived experience as part of a mandatory requirement for anybody. So, um I certainly, I appreciate your, your concerns, Alderman Gregory. We've, we've seen things come and go that maybe is, um, less effective and, and this

gives a little more of a united support behind ensuring that lived experience is, is part of the, um, the panel that we would hope to see from this. And again , we, we, but we've seen this in , in all the practice. We've seen this when, um, our, our community partners from the unhoused community to come forward. People with lived experience and having that voice and having that those actual practices and as part of a deciding body is, is, is a critical component to any sort of an advisory body like this. So we've already seen this, this as, as an example in other agencies that we deal with , and again, I, I don't have a concern with voting for your, for your amendments simply because I think it's going to be supported by the project itself and, and what UAS comes back to with us. So thank, thank you for the consideration, Chief. And, and I just want to say I, I appreciate, I think I see where you're coming from this too, and , and you wanna make sure that there's, there's flexibility that we give. We're kind of we're, we're putting people with research experience and, and that background in charge of designing this for us. And again , it's been kind of a constant theme. We don't want the police to be the leaders in this. We want you to find good partners, work with them and build from that. So I, I understand that. I think that in the end though, what we're looking at is probably coming to the same place anyway. And, um, so I, I think. it's important for us to express this in writing that that expectation, but I also, again, truly, Alderman, I, I believe that this will be borne out by the evidence. And, and Chief, I think you'll be able to see, I think, I think we'll be coming to this point anyway, um, and again once we hear back from the UIS, once we hear back from, from the results of, of this research base, um, I'm a big believer in seeing what what subject matter experts have to say on on on an issue. And I think Alderman Gregory, what you're highlighting is when it

comes to over-policing, we have subject matter experts in our community, and we want to make sure that they're heard. So, um, thank you, Mayor. Any other discussion on the amendment AldermancGregor, Alderman Williams, I see that you're still, uh, signed in. I just want to make sure. No, you're good. I just wanna ask. OK. Seeing none will take a vote on the amendment only at this time. All those in favor of the amendment, please say aye, those opposed nay. The ayes have it. So the ordinance 2026-187. Now we can open it up for discussion from the council, uh, as amended with the new amendment. So any discussion from the council members on this ordinance as amended. Uh, Alderman Rockford. think to the folks that are here . uh, from the board chief, uh, my question is, is how soon we, we approved this money how soon is this? What's the timeline on this for them. sitting down I mean you, you, you'd start in 2022. Some of this already been discussed and yeah, some of it's been discussed, some of the data has already been collected. It's a matter of aggregating some of the data that we collected on January 24th and put it all together and seeing what the, what does this look like for the Springfield community. So vast majority of this we've already, you know, we've already any, any , can you give a, uh my goal would be by the, by uh September 1st to have this thing completely done. Now that's my goal, um, whether we get to that point, uh, before or after, uh, you know, things, things could change. I don't control everything so but yeah, sooner the better, um, I wish this was done last summer, um, but here we are now. Yes, and, and again, I hope that there's, there's more talk and more communication that this thing just we don't form a board and then next thing you know there's there's guidelines going on and, and everything else is ignored, so I hope, hope you come back with information for us and we've always everybody ask, you know, give us input, you know, the. the report, so appreciate it thank you. Thank you. Alderman Donlin, thank you Mayor , and I, I just want to thank people over here.

have done this for years, literally, and, um, and it's a lot of, uh people that aren't in this room The effort, we need to do better in this community and it's extremely important um, Chief, I just wanna make sure uh once. the report study, whatever you wanna call it, an outcome. that. no they're not may not be requesting money that whoever uh UAS comes here and, and, and or you maybe both, uh, can explain what came out of it, the directions that would be. I believe the group that has been driving this would probably be very active in telling us how that yeah they've been meeting for a very long time, and as the mayor, I just want to thank you for all of your time and effort you've been putting into this to try to help us with the community and our relationship with policing. So I think you should be one of the groups. Any other discussion All right, then the voting will now be open. All those in favor of the motion will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. No. And the motion passes with 9 voting yes, none voting no. Thank you, Chief The next item on the agenda is item number 2026-2221, a resolution to support the expansion of the BOS Convention Center and other downtown tourism projects subject to Springfield for emergency passage. Can I get a motion Yeah, I'll make a motion that we approve this So we have a motion and a second for approval. Now we're in discussion. Looks like Alderman Williams, you have signed up to speak. Uh, yes, Mayor You know, um this issue here is, is, is really in my opinion, vital is, is a vital importance Uh, we did meet with the senator , um and mayor the senator is saying it was your responsibility. to tell the impact that all the people what was going on and what was

happening, I point blank asked her how come she didn't ask Ward 5 Where, where, where it's at and, and, and, and what was going on and how come War 5 wasn't included in War 2, the other pieces downtown, and she said it wasn't her job, that it was yours. So I, I would have appreciated if you would have been speaking with them all along since everybody is saying this has been going on 4 or 5 years, uh, I called up the old mayor, same thing. I'm, I, I, we keep us up, especially the ones whose wars are impacted. This particular legislation touched me, not because I'm anti-expansion. I'm for the expansion, for the record, cause I got a bunch of calls, why are you against it? Why? I'm for the expansion. I'm for downtown Springfield. If the county wants to run a hotel, fine, it's not my job to stop them. Where my problem comes, it is how this is being done and this is what I have said to the senator Well, the authority is just a developer. Well, we don't give developers all this power that this authority is getting. We are in, in my opinion creating a city council within a city council or within a municipality so I'm gonna read my sixth statements on why we should support this and be on record so that the legislation's downtown who are still who are still in revenue Committee. They could hear where we stand on this, and, and you vote it up or down and and we'll deal with the consequences later. This is not gonna turn into an enemy thing. I told the senator this. I support the senator, but this is really not right because it's never been done. So let me read my points. I've emailed you, you have a copy in front of you, but I want the public to know too. So my first point is this is

totally without precedence. for a county government to attempt to create and operate a local government municipality, corporation within the boundaries of a municipality. Unprecedented, never been done before. That's why I'm against them creating this authority. They can still have their hotel. They can still do the expansion. They just can't create an authority and give it all these powers. similar to our powers. Secondly, my example was Cook County. Cook County does not operate or control a taxing body within the city of Chicago. Unheard of. They just don't do it. No county in Illinois operates or controls a governmental taxing authority within a municipality like this. So it's the authority that's my problem, not the expansion, not the hotel or casino and all this other stuff they talking about is strictly the authority and the boundaries, which is what I'm gonna get to. The proposed district. my third point to pose district duplicates the existing taxing and bonding authorities of the city of Springfield. Mayors should know this and should care about this and should have been telling us about this because that's what they're doing, they're duplicating what we do. You know, the city has a broad home rule authority. We all know that to issue bonds and establish taxes for public projects. So they got to make up their mind what actually is going on here. Uh, I'm told they're gonna run the hotel, then I'm told, oh no, the authorities gonna run and tell and be the developers either way. This can be done without having to do this authority. My next point municipalities operate exercise municipality authority within a

corporate boundaries of the city , a county operates in non-incorporated areas and outside of the municipality's boundaries. That's what counties do. Again, that's how we've been operating in Illinois forever and I don't understand how we could be so comfortable to not take a position on this or say that talk about the horse before the cart and all that when it's moving and and revenue. It's signed to a committee. We have to let them know where we stand as a council at Springfield, Illinois on this matter, or else they think, oh well, we're fine with it, we're all happy, yes, we are fine if we can find a way to do a boss expansion. and find even with the hotel maybe, but we can't give our authority away, guys. 4th 1, and it's only 6 of them, so the fourth one is as authorized by the Illinois Constitution, Smith the county and the city of Springfield could enter into a governmental cooperation agreement to address the expansion of the convention center. So you've been talking about this 5 years. Maybe that's what you call yourself doing it, but then somebody comes up with we're gonna create what they're gonna create. I hope you guys have read it. I I I talked about it two weeks ago. You wouldn't let it be on first reading. That's why I'm on emergency pastors now. I'm trying to make us aware of what we have going on here that this bill can really impact us. 5, as a public policy, we should not be trying to create another governmental taxing body when there are already 11 existing downtown, uh, which duplicates existing municipal government authority. So we're just adding on, adding on to the people. The people have enough people taxing us. This is not even needed. They got to figure out a way to do this without that authority and and we'll be fine, we'll all be

happy. Now there's people that's , well, why don't you do the Wyndham first? Why don't you take care of what you already got first, all that has some some legs too, if you will, but we decided not to as a council. Most of you who don't want to take action on this are the ones who voted. against the Wyndham, saying no, I don't want New York to do it. Oh, I don't want Houston to do it. No, because she was playing with local control. And look what local control guide us. They guide us creating their own city council, I guess, so 5 members that we only get one vote or one seat, and it possibly could be the mayor. I don't know. You know, I'm hearing all these rumors now who's going to be on the seats, but we only get one seat and it's it's just ridiculous and I think you guys understand more than what you're letting on. And my final one is the approach proposed by this Senate bill is in conflict really with the requirements established under 55 LICS 5 of the county cos Corporate council . Basically, it provides that after a county adopts a countywide hotel motel tax, then a tourism board shall be established and is to be controlled by the municipalities within the affected county where the board vote is weighted by the populations of each city and municipality well. we're 60% of Sangamon County. Again, we should have the plurality on this board. We should have the seats. So I'm not gonna argue it anymore. I think you guys understand you play games like, oh well, you're mixing legislation. The boundaries are in that legislation. If you read it, you know it is now. They're gonna go from 11th Street. to Walnut They're gonna go from North Grand to South Grand. and say, now it'd be different if they were just saying we wanna do our one little block and we wanna do our convention center. That's 2 blocks. Maybe

we could live with something like what they want, but they're talking about this big area and if you read into the legislation , the word projects are in there . So maybe mayor, this hotel is the first project. Mayor, there's many more projects that are gonna be done, that that they're thinking about that we don't know about and they got all this vast it touches 3456 I don't I I don't think it gets you there, but in other words, it's a pretty big block. of area in that bill. It hasn't changed the 24th ain't here yet. The 24th is the deadline, where if it don't get moved out of committee onto one, to the Senate floor. Then, then it's gonna die and they gotta wait. But that's not until Friday. They still have changed, so I'm saying we should have a position on this somehow about what's going on so that it doesn't look like we're in agreement. The silence is what's killing me. They're not acting like you care , like I said, it bothers me because I don't know if it's because some of y'all are leaving, some of you don't want to take the time to do reading, but the fact is, it is what it is. That authority goes up against, it's, it's just not right. It's never been done. I gave you the facts. You have it in front of you in writing, you have it on your emails, and I, I, I hope that somebody supports it. Thank you. discussion, Alderman Donlin. Yeah, thank you, Mayor, and, uh, and I appreciate your passion, alderman, and can, can this my mic working because they told me it was. older and Donlin. I'm in Ward 9 1/2 now, so anyway, I, I did wanna say a couple of things, uh , uh, that I heard based on what I heard this evening and you know you're right this has never been done. and uh I think I said a couple weeks ago that I, I applaud the efforts of Senator Turner, Representative Coffee, and anybody else that was involved in the development of Senate Bill 3499 because it is outside the box. but when I read originally read

it and I heard about this, uh, you know, we've all heard about the, the study that was started a few years ago and you know I think some of us, some of us, uh , on this council past councils were even interviewed. We were called over to the Covicha Center. um, I think we're all given that opportunity at the time and uh you know like where is it? We all heard about it last session in the last session . Where is it? How come nothing's happening? Are we gonna expand the convention center and, uh, which I'm absolutely in favor of expanding the convention center. We need to do something different. Uh, my organization, other organizations in the state that represent statewide, uh, groups, uh, they're, they're looking at other cities because our space isn't sufficient for some of the conventions. That's a problem. I don't think any of us disagree that we need to do something different, but you know this is like uh when I first read it, it reminded me of the medical district. medical district is not a taxing district. Neither will this be because a taxing district is by defined by statute as an entity that has the ability to levy real estate taxes. This would not, I think all those who have been involved have been very clear about that. What it would do is outside the box, find a way to uh harness revenues and I know the county is charged with some uh, alderman. I had the same concern. I'm always I'm always counting how many people are on what board and where they come from, but the county is the county land, uh, I thought Senator Turner did an excellent job this morning on the radio explaining that it's county land , uh, they've funded, they and the SMEA have funded the study in the tune of over $500,000 is what I heard her say. and they have investments, uh, there's some taxing uh items. The only thing that we would really be asked to do for this. amendment, or excuse me, legislation that I have read more than once um, would indeed, uh, dedicate sales tax dollars from the new hotel, so in other words, tax dollars that are not being generated presently so again I appreciate the passion.

I, I think we just have a, a dis a disagreement on where we head but again I just wanna make sure that I applaud these efforts because it is outside the box. My fear is if we don't do something and really it's not our decision, the the bills at the legislature, not saying we don't have input and people don't listen. but if it doesn't pass what are we gonna do Because the revenues and the the the the revenues that I'm hearing and that I've read about are revenues that won't exist. for towards a project and my fear is nothing will happen. We need to do something different. Thank you for my time here. Thank you, alderman. Alderman Gregory, thank you, and I, I want to make it clear I support BOS expansion. We just, you know , passed past the, um, the last ordinance stating that so I, I, I totally do, um, this, this authority I, I, I'm in agreement with my colleague. I, I, I think anything um that wraps our sales tax dollars because it still would be our sales tax dollars in anything, um, should be, should be our decision. I know we, we'll, we'll get a crack at it, um, it troubles me a little bit that anybody studying, you know, how our, you know, how, how that would be affect, um, and I think more of the concern is the overall box, um, that's displayed out in in that legislation it does go um further than just right there at that hotel and and and within a Starvi district, um, those projects, um, necessarily in that area can can go towards the um um that sales tax can go towards that project um you, you know that's why, you know, for me it's just knowing about it. I I didn't really get the invitation over. I've had, you know, some off track conversations about what would be good for, but from my understanding and you know what was on WMAY Sam Madalia show the actual BOS center is not expanding. The seats is not gonna get bigger, so we're gonna do some fancy stuff. They're gonna build a hotel on their portion, but if we don't

add into the BOS what are we doing Why would we risk taxpayer dollars into a hotel. It's risky could oversaturate the market downtown. several, several things, so that , that's, that's more so where I'm at with it, um, you know, Springfield Business Journal, they've done their reports on what, what we're operating at with the BOS center right now, um, you know, so. as a city council member, you know, from, from our authority it's just nice to know the actual plans and stuff and then let us make a decision, um. and, and I think everyone's made this clear, of course. we support Senator Turner I've worked with Senator Turner. The things that I've learned up here. I sat next to her and him down there So I definitely have learned a lot sitting up in here in this seat so you know the, the, the main thing is, is just about making sure that we know what we're doing. I, I, I think that we all want to see the BOS, we all want to see downtown um grow and, and we're gonna do that. It's just about knowing what we're doing and having some , some, some authority um to make those calls so um I support you. thank you. Alderman Williams. Yeah, I just want to say all the men, Donna and you never address the area You talk as if they're only doing right there. And as I say, it goes from 11th Street to Walnut. You know how much real estate that is. And then it goes from North Grand to South Grand. Now I realize there's other plans and it's taking care of other things and as Carlson likes Alderman Carlson likes to say, oh, it's complimenting these all three bills and that's kind of true, it is, but change that, make it just those two blocks and we'll be fine

maybe. But they're not doing that and you're not listening. They are passing this thing and in revenue if you pull up right now this is the language that's the borders. We need to understand that. Of course I wanted to. You've been on here 12 years. Well, and getting ready to be 12 , you know, and you're on your way out. But my thing is, so we gotta look at what have we as a consul done for downtown since we keep worrying about, well if it don't pass, what then? Well yeah, what then? You, I, I was for the remodel. on both of those occasions. You wasn't. So we had to quit acting like uh only the county can fix something first of all, we need to quit that too, and we need to own up to our actions. We had developers come in here to try to say let's do something with the Wyndham and came up with plans and made adjustments and did all that and it's just true. and we end up with nothing now. And, and so my whole point is, when are we gonna look at us and make some decisions and decide things instead of saying, oh they came up with an idea. Oh, I'm selling the farm to get it, but let's let them have it. Because you're on your way out, I don't know what your motivation is. But I know this, that if you took a picture of what downtown looked at when you got here and what it looks like today, you should have a better attitude. You should be for us really trying to, to voice ourselves to say get something done instead of playing this local game that they play when they know it's not free. We keep hearing, ain't no ain't no taxes gonna be raised. Ain't not that sweet. OK , so now we're relying on some taxes on something that ain't even a reality yet. But we're gonna build a hotel and expect the people that staying at a hotel is gonna cover the bonds for $200 million. No! And then they get the sales tax, oh we can't forget that.

because they have other plans, they're gonna have to develop within this big block to produce the money. That's what they're doing, and it's no longer gonna be Springfield's downtown. It's gonna be like everything else you see and come . It's gonna turn into Sanmon County because they're gonna slap their name on stuff. I don't know what they're gonna call it a hotel. I, I, I'm a little ashamed of my senator right now. She knows me and her at a disagreement on the shame of my mayor right now, cause no one stopped to take care of Springfield or think about Springfield and the language. They can read. and if it wasn't true, or as Carlson says, I'm confused. It wouldn't read what it reads. It wouldn't be going through a state legislative committee in this language. So I mean, do what you want, you'll be on record one way or the other. I'm at peace with it now. I've done my part. I've made you guys aware of what I feel and think and, and we're gonna call the vote. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I would like to ask as aldermen, um, Williams had pushed out there when we were in a meeting with the senator. I think that was the only part that was like uncomfortable when she said well haven't you all met with the mayor? Has the mayor kept you in the loop with uh those conversations and I had to be honest and say no, but is there more conversations going on as this comes forward because it's my understanding that you all need. need to talk about this and then once it passes anything moving forward would still have to come back in front of us, but is there continuing conversations with you and the county and SEA and the senator. I have not been in a meeting for probably a month now. So, OK. Um, and do you mind meeting with Mia Alderman Gregory to talk about I guess from before. how where does the city sit what where are you trying to go with

your vision as you're the person at the table with them, um, so I I've never denied you a meeting. Yeah, but, but when she asking us that I guess like that's and I might need to take some of the responsibility of not reaching out to you to ask those questions like hey where are we at with this? What are your thoughts about this? What will we be contributing as a city have they put a request in for us to contribute any funds. I think you said Alderman Donna Donelly, it was 500, I think I heard it was 600,000 that they put in they're donating the land so I can see why they're asking for the 3 positions and as you all heard me say last week I asked, could it be 221, so two people from the city, 2 people from the county, and then of course Sia. I don't think that that's gonna change so we have to continue to move forward , but I would ask that we're me and Alderman Gregory are included in these conversations as it encompasses our backyard. Sure, and I will have a conversation with you, and this has been public knowledge. There's been, I don't know how many umpteen newspaper articles written about a BOS center expansion 4 or 5 years, and we all did get invited to the BOS Center and we got to be quizzed about it and talk to individually so we didn't violate Open Meetings Act. So I wasn't trying to hide anything. This has been going on for a very long time and you've all been engaged in conversations so I just, I don't think I was involved in the authority, the, the, the makeup of the body of the authority. There's no authority made up. It's It's, it'll legislation and it'll be forthcoming where you have the three county members or am I wrong with that part that is at the house. I've had that's not my input, ma'am. So that's. So, they just came up with just one person from the city and they didn't have any I believe the reason the county was requesting so many as the financial contribution from the county, the responsibility financially from the county and then the property that they were donating, so. OK. which we are not doing any of those things, so. Correct. And then just move. I know you say and I tell people that all the time, of course I read the paper

like you do too, so I, I get to stay in involved by reading the paper and listening to everyone, but then when it's acts more in depth, I think that's where that question came from in the meeting so just I'm just saying moving forward could we be included in that if it's anything or if you have any questions that we may wanna have some input on. thank you. Uh, clerk, do you want, or Alderman Gregory, sorry, did you want to speak in before we go to the public? No. OK Clerk, I'm gonna let you, Alderman Gregory, you'll get another opportunity if you'd like one. But you speakers and Logue Ann Log in regards to Illinois Senate Bill 3499 that we create a new government to taxing body to exercise municipal authority within the corporate limits and jurisdiction of the city of Springfield, but under the supervision and control of the Sangamon County Board. This bill is an opening a slippery slippery slope that seeds city authority to the county. If this does pass, the board should consist of at least the 3 city council members that have wards in this very large area. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, Laurie McKurin Good evening. Um, I'm here in support of this ordinance, and I'm in support of development, but we need economic development that's led and controlled by the city. Don't give up control of economic development of our city without a fight. You've already handed much of the responsibility for development over to the SpringfieldS

Sangamon Growth Alliance and as a private company, they're spending our tax dollars and none of us know what their plan is or what their projects they're negotiating. So please main control of our development. The county board thinks that the data center is positive in economic development. Are we willing to take economic development at any cost. Development that has impact to our residents, of course not. The county board seems to be willing to do that, and now you're willing to allow state legislation to turn over control of a huge swath of Springfield to the county. That huge swath of town is not county property. You were all elected to be leaders. Leaders don't relinquish control of city authority to the county. Don't be willing to throw away your authority and your responsibility for accountability and oversight. This is our city, not the county's. You should be driving our development, responsible economic development that benefits the city and the residents. Transparency around responsible economic development needs to include public hearings and public input and decisions need to be controlled by the city, no one else. Don't give away this responsibility to someone outside of our city or to an organization that has no public visibility Do what you were elected to do. Lead and vote yes on this ordinance. Thank you. That's it. OK, that's all we have for, uh, citizens who have signed up to speak any alders have any other further discussion before we take a vote . Last call OK. So, um, the, um, ordinance will be up for a vote. All those in favor of the motion will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. Oh, there we go. Voting is now open. And the motion fails with 6 voting no and 5 voting yes. Mayor. Alderwoman Conley. I'm sorry, I think you're listed twice on the body. So 5 voting yes, 5 voting no. Good job, Honorable come and even look at that. Did I pay somebody to do that?

No, I'm teasing. It's a joke. It's a joke. I did not. So the motion fails with 5 voting yes, 5 voting no, because it takes a supermajority on emergency passage, correct? That's correct . OK. Thank you, Alderwoman kindly. I appreciate that. The next item on the agenda is item number 2026-222. An ordinance authorizing sub-recipient agreement 102601-5 with memorial Behavioral Health pursuant to ICEia co-responder grant agreement number 102601, and payment in the amount not to exceed $752,000 from July 1st, 2025 through June 30th, 2026 for the Springfield Police Department. This is for emergency passage. Some second. I'm a motion in a second. Any discussion from the elders? The chief is standing up because he's expecting some. John, did you make the most? Yes . Yes. And then, uh, Alderman Rockford made the 2nd. Any other discussion? Oh, Alderwoman Conly, sorry, go ahead. I think, um, I think we owe the chief an opportunity to just kind of explain once again, if you could, what this co-responder model looks like, um, and how it operates. And I see some of his recipients in the audience, so thank you for coming, by the way. Yeah, so, uh, our co-respondent model looks like at the Springfield Police Department it's a, uh, it's a mental health uh professional riding along with a police officer, uh, we ride anywhere 60 to 70 hours a week, um, and we respond to those mental health calls for service, uh, where the pro the mental health professional can uh engage with uh the person that's in crisis, um, this grant money is not only for that, but it's also covers uh the District 186 Mosaic program that they have there where they have quiet rooms with mental health professionals within those quiet rooms, and we support that through this grant as well. Thank you very much. Thanks. Thank you, Chief Oderman Gregory . Now, I was just going to say, this has been a, a, a good, good , good program to keep going and , and, and we, we've been fast about this. I think we, we did a pilot back in 2019 and um you know it's it's paying out dividends and, and it's something that um we hear

frequently that that that we want, we know, um, so I, hey. keep applying. It's a, it's a great program and um no matter what happens with the funding, I think we need to find a way to keep it going. Absolutely. That's good to hear. Thank you. OK. That's, I see no one else signed up to speak. Thank you, Chief. Uh, voting will now be open. Those in favor of the motion will vote yes. Those opposed will vote no. An older woman, kindly, you help me out, so the motion passes the 10 voting yes, none voting no. Thank you, A Roman Conley. Uh, before we get to unfinished business, I would like to ask everyone in the audience and at the council chambers, uh, to have a moment of silence. We did lose one of our library pages at Lincoln Library over the weekend . Donna Page, so I would, or Donna call, sorry, she's a library page, not Donna Page. Name is Donna Call, so. I'd like to ask for a moment of silence from one of our employees. Thank you all very, very much. I appreciate it. Is there any unfinished business to come before the council from the council members. Seeing none, is there any new business to come before the council from the council members . Seeing none, we will go to citizens who have signed up in advance to address the council. Ready? Gyla Willis Gyla Willis James Meister. Thanks James Meister 11:39 North Franklin, Springfield.

I'm gonna give you three different phrases words here. perjury, sovereign citizen, qualified immunity. Obviously, yes, this is about Springfield Police Department. Perjury in the Illinois State statutes as a person commits perjury when under oath or affirmation in a proceeding or in other matters whereby the law the oath of the or affirmation is required He or she makes a false statement material to the issue or point in question, knowing the statement is false. This is uh a class 3 felony. Second one is uh qualified immunity. We all know that the Supreme Court has given the police department qualified immunity and they're allowed to lie to our citizens. This is something that needs to stop. This is why the citizens and the police have such a divide. Sovereign citizen is a sovereign citizen is an individual who believes they are not subject to government laws or authority and answers only to their own interpretation of the law Police officers pull over a person Person goes, well, I don't want to answer your questions. I have 1/5 Amendment right. What are you, a sovereign citizen? No, I'm not a sovereign citizen. I have 1/5 Amendment constitutional right not to incriminate myself and not to answer your questions. They get on the, on the, uh, radio and ask for backup because they've

got a problem. This is bad again. Our divide between the police department and our citizens police officers are allowed to falsify reports because the other police backed them up. They're only now just being required to answer for these because they're getting videotaped and the tapes are not matching what they're putting in their paperwork. I have been in the last few months trying to get the police department to quit parking outside Walmart blocking the sidewalks and fire lane. I've seen several officers shopping in there while they're doing that. No lights on, no nothing. I talked to internal Affairs. They said they'd talked to the police department. Uh, 78 months ago, uh, Sergeant Michael Egan almost killed two people drunk. police officers didn't arrest him like they would one of us citizens. They waited 5 to 6 days before they arrested him. He got to go home with his family. They went to the hospital A few weeks ago We have an incident in here with an old police officer making derogatory remarks. inappropriate, but the police stood up and said no, he didn't do that. A few, uh, about a month ago. some other people were in here talking about the fact that um the uh excessive force in our schools. Police chief comes up, police chief Bill comes up and says, well, I know nothing about that. I'll have to look into it. Please cheap be apparently doesn't know much. I know you guys love him. I know he's

working hard, but when it comes to his officers, he protects them. and not the citizens of this city. It is time I've asked for his resignation before I'm asking for it again. Police Chief Beale needs to resign. If police chief Beale refuses to resign, necessary to counsel needs to take this matter up. That's just 4 incidences that I've given you now. We can come up with a whole lot more just since he took over. So we need to stop this qualified immunity. They lie, they lie We don't need those police officers. We need police officers that'll tell the truth to citizens and tell the truth in their reports. and it's time to stop calling the citizens of Springfield names like sovereign citizens. The only ones that think they're above the laws, the courts, and the police because they have qualified immunity. Let's remove it Thank you Robert Collinsworth Robert Collinsworth. Hilda Rays Hilda Rays James Johnson I don't even know where I wanna start after the way this meeting started today. It's kind of sad that. the alderman in Ward 2. just asked for people are to beat 300 and

400 to be on this and we discussed this for 4 2030, 40 minutes. and he's right Oh, let me mention that I'm from B 400 I volunteer to be on that. So for the ones who's saying if there's anybody that wants to be on it. I volunteer But those people that were sitting right there, part of that. they're gonna make sure that. it has so Shaun, no worries. They are all on top of what you were talking about and you were right and just for that. Now Mayor, that James that just spoke. they're calling for the cheap, that's getting louder and louder . I don't know if you've been hearing it. but it's getting louder and louder. and I wanna say this for my people of because I was here a few weeks ago on one of those incidents and you know we're not, we're not gonna get mad about people calling us names. We're gonna overlook them, we're gonna smile at them. but in the meantime, I want all y'all to be getting ready, be prepared. See we gotta stay focused on the bigger picture. So we gotta prepare ourselves. black men white men who are on the same path that we are. Now what really gets me you know, it's bad enough that we deal with the wolves, but you know what's worse than a wolf. is a wolf in sheep clothing.

So from here on out there's an old saying, Still waters run deep. We're gonna sit still on some stuff and be real quiet, but we see what's going on. and for that the police department, or better yet for that news department because then you know once again here we are with black history again for us. because the news department thought the incident at Carer Cox was a big deal and we had to do two news stories on it. So how about we have our police chief come up here and tell us when things get real big in our community and beat 400 and 300 have shared with all of us and not just with you guys. because whatever happened at Comaco Park, it became newsworthy. But let me also remind you or tell you about, there was a high speed police chase early Sunday morning. and we ain't heard nothing about that one. So how about you had a police chief start reporting on activities that goes on in our community Now too my alderman and all the gentlemen around this horseshoe. We gotta get back to educating our people. We gotta get back to educating our kids. because we want to blame the police sometimes, but it ain't always a police fault. And let me make myself clear because there's a lot of misunderstanding about where I stand with the police. So I'm gonna say this one last time that I like the police that come through our communities and wave . and speak and treat us with respect

and with dignity I dislike the police who think they above the law like that one man was Mr. James was saying. and we have that and Mayor, let me tell you. them officers that have that mentality. they're gonna get your community , your your city in trouble. You got some lawsuits coming. Park District got a lawsuit too if you don't know about it. And guess what We ain't forgot about the shootings. and the officers who who shoot young men in the back. We don't like them So, uh, you might wanna have a talk with your with with your command staff and your chief. because you're the head chief or the head person of our city. Daniel Ocks Good evening My name is Daniel O. I'm a resident of Ward 4. I live in Sand Hill Road. I was born here and I've lived most of my life here. I've raised daughters here and I'm not here tonight as an activist. or an opponent of law enforcement. I'm here as a member of the community asking for specific, reasonable changes that improve outcomes for everyone involved. I am not anti-police. I am pro-effective policing. So tonight I ask myself a simple question before coming here. What do I actually want to

change. Not everything, not ideology, not politics. Just a few things that are clear , measurable, and within your power to fix. I'm asking for three things. First, identification and justification. Any officer initiating a nonconsensual encounter should be required immediately to provide their name, ID number, and the lawful reason for the interaction. not eventually, not if asked, but immediately per policy. And I want inside that policy written codified in the writing. that if that standard is not met, then the encounter defaults to consensual, and the citizen of Springfield can just walk away. that protects the public and it protects good officers from unnecessary escalation. Second, use of force. striking a person who is prone or otherwise contained should not be standard practice outside of clearly defined extreme circumstances. We all understand officers face real danger and that is exactly why policy should require them to wait for backup when a situation exceeds what they can safely control without escalating force. That is not hesitation. That is discipline. and discipline is what keeps both civilians and officers from getting hurt. Third, hiring and training. Right now, there is no requirement that an officer candidate demonstrate proficiency in non-striking control techniques before being given authority over the public in life and death situations. to me and many others in this community.

it doesn't make any sense. I'm proposing a requirement that all officers, new and current, be trained, certified, and annually recertified and effective non-striking combatives such as jiu-jitsu or equivalent systems because when an officer has the skill to control the situation without striking someone. they are more effective, more confident, and far less likely to cause unnecessary harm and escalation. That reduces injuries to officers and civilians. That reduces lawsuits and work injury claims, and most importantly that builds trust with our community. These are not abstract ideas. These are not, these are practical and enforceable standards. and they are narrowly tailored on purpose because they are achievable. So here's the only question that matters now. If these proposals improve safety for civilians, reduce liability for the city and make officers more effective. What is the argument against them? And if there is an argument then it should be made here in public in front of the people that you serve I'm looking at you also Chief Bill, because I'm glad that you stayed to hear this. We, we would like that response not later, not privately, not buried in process. because this community's paying attention now. and we are not asking for everything. We're asking for what is reasonable. and the question is whether this council is willing to meet that standard. Thank you Joseph Comer

Josepholer Darren Comeer I 00 goodness, this moves, OK, don't touch All right, I will give a glimpse in less than 5 minutes, but there's a bigger picture. You guys know her as number 141601. I know her as my chicken nugget. Her name is Promise Davis. I came into her life when she was about 9 to 10 years old, freaking awesome kid, but OMG I've seen a pattern in her behavior that I could tell was not just a kid being defiant but actually couldn't control some impulses, bright kid but manipulative, learned quick. Her life's blueprint birth to five was rough. She's had many family members try to help teachers myself because all we see we all see something in this girl. I put it like this there's two households when she was 14, she was able to choose where she wanted to live. What 114 year old won't choose the fun house. Where's the help when we try to get her the right help. Families, they tell us, get an attorney. Do this. Where do we have the time to do that? When we got to pay bills and then definitely when the child is fighting as well as that other party against it. we tried to warn her about jail, but every jail experience let her right back out. There's no bail thing. It's not good. She turned back into that lost little girl that I know when she got hit with fist of reality. Mental health is real, and our Springfield Police Department is trained for it. I know we have

seen some very well trained officers why I sat and watched officers by my job, fully de-escalate situations that could have definitely turned into a shots fired shots fired call. I love working with the officers by my building. They treat all races with the same respect properly de-escalates all situations even when being charged at by a black man it's the reason why the situation did hurt me and made me question that particular officer's heart I knew she was going to miss court dates. Why? I know her pattern, so I'm now mentally walking her through something very traumatic and also social media is using her face like crazy as she goes through the down part of her pattern. I can't tell you her diagnosis. When did she start putting on the news? When did we start putting on the news when someone misses court dates she's literally just got hit with reality, literally. So can you imagine your inner child dealing with a big adult moment. She knows she messed up and the situation is part of her bigger picture when she grows up successful and rewriting her early life's blueprint. I asked media to remember mental health is real. Please be mindful and understand that there is more to this story . Our youth are crying out. Our culture always kept mental health silent. They call it being crazy or culture didn't they didn't trust the system so you were taught not to tell no one what goes on in the house. We need to teach our youth and our culture that mental health is real and it's time for all of us to see the bigger picture. But like Michael Ja ck son said, we need to look in the mirror Look in the mirror and that's where it starts at. she's it's not just her, it's the whole it's it's a lot more. it's a lot more, um, some sys systems really need to be put into place to help these particular individual children because it's this she's not the only one and it's only gonna get worse if you understand mental health and a person's blueprint, how the child was raised when you understand when there's two

different households and they're both fighting going back and forth. and you see, you see this individual, you see this child and you know exactly where destruction is coming, but then we go to state's attorney, she's 14, she can choose where she wants to live at. At 14, what choices do you have? At 14 at 14 we tried and we're still trying. but understand this can happen in any household . Thank you. you Ken, Ken Paa First, let me say thank you for withdrawing the ordinance of the rule changes. Those were guaranteed to get you guys in trouble. Um squashing free speech, restricting things like that. That's always problematic. I got to say though, the metal detectors are a nice touch. Um, I got to wonder how serious the threats are that we actually have to create another barrier, um, to citizens coming out here to speak at council. It's already kind of problematic when I came here years ago, we didn't have problems and I'll note for you most of the threats are coming from whose end of the audience. not mine Those threats didn't start when my people started coming here. Those threats started after somebody who's still not banned from here. for using some pretty offensive language that apparently only 5 of us sitting directly next to him heard and nobody asked us about her for the investigation, which I thought was odd. But I digress. I don't expect

fairness or equity in terms of distributing those kind of things. I mean, after all, it's here I'd be here to speak, but 60 day ban 60 day ban, she's been banned before. Did I miss that? But we just jumped to 60 now. We just use it completely random system of days we pick for when we decide to throw people out of here. Oh, I forgot. We're not, we're not throwing them out of here. We're just not gonna broadcast and we're just going to prevent the rest of the public from hearing what they have to say. as though most of you are listening anyways. It's just frustrating, because what I hear is promises, promises from the chief, promises about yet another advisory council, $54,000. Dude, I, I live in 400 right now . I can tell you exactly what it's like over there. I've been a justice. It's called a justice affected individual, by the way, if we're talking about restorative justice means. We want someone who's been affected by the justice system, not someone who studied it, or sat in the classroom or talked to an affected individual for a couple hours. You ever been beat up by a cop? You ever been smacked around? You ever been sat in jail for longer than 72 hours, and they just wanted to teach you a lesson. When you talk about who you seat on these committees, professors and degrees sound great, but those are the same results we've gotten for years. You're not talking to the people that are actually affected by these things. I am. I've been affected by it for years. I still live in that neighborhood. I still get anxious when the police pull me over. I still get anxious when I even see him. because they've threatened my life in safety. They've taken people's life and safety. And every year of my life I have to hear about these exploratory committees. Where's the other

member we just named to the police commission. Who is this mystery fellow? I've been trying to find out who he is. Is he, is he the documentary guy? That's the only name I can come up with . Where's his bio? Who's this man representing us on the police civilian Review Commission, which by the way, I would think that the appointees would be able to say. Disgusting, man. It's insulting to my intelligence and everybody else's that we do these kind of things or we're gonna, we're gonna get advice on it. You want to hear from those people they're literally right down the street. I guarantee you they'd love to talk to you. I'm sure they have plenty to say about their interactions with SPD. But we need to study for it. $54,000 after another study, after we talked to all these groups, but those groups will tell you the same exact thing. You need to hear from the people that are actually affected by it . The 5 to 1 pullover ratio. That makes sense to any of you guys? Anybody know the population that's that black people are in Springfield and yet their ratio to pullover is that much higher? Do we need another study on that to figure out that the police are disparately over policing particular neighborhoods and individuals. It, it's just, it is so frustrating week after week to come here and have people act like they don't understand it. Like you need someone who's smarter than the rest of us to tell you. They're gonna tell you the same thing. They don't live there, they don't know, and they'll never find out because the closest interaction they have with police is shaking their hand at these meetings. It's frustrating because if you really want to find out what's going on. If you want to really hold the police accountable, get some people that got some teeth behind it, and aren't worried about making everybody feel better or being nice about it. I don't like cops. I'm not friends with them. They are cordial to me because

they're serving my community. That's the bare requirement of their job, but I don't like them . I don't have to defend that. I don't have to say I'm buddies with them, and I hope everything's good for him. That's not what an adversarial relationship is between members of the community and the police, and that's what we see now. Thank you. Thank you Salem King Salem King. Can I get a motion? Hm? Is that the last speaker? Yeah, he's not here. Jordan Shaw. Oh, I thought that was, oh, we had two that signed up for the ordinance. I'm sorry These are the two the center for 17. You're right, sorry. My apologies, Ms. Shaw. One moment. Good evening Good. So I'm going to be completely honest, um, I had a short little respite this weekend because of the Midwest con that was happening over at Springfield Pear Ground. and I got to talk and hang out uh with uh one of my favorite online creators, Brad Jones. So I'm gonna be a little happier than a lot of the other previous people cause I'm still on that like. a good feeling, but I'm also still aggravated with the things that are happening, so apologies my mood's gonna seem a little more mellow, but that is why. So I'm here to talk as not only a resident of War 2 but also as somebody who volunteers at Intricate Mines and works closely with the executive director Tierra Standage. and yesterday she had posted that she was banned for 60 days due to uh her understandably upset public comment in regards to the remarks that happened uh during the previous city council. Now I understand that people will not believe me when I uh when I

tell you I had just found this but I'm going to read it I pulled it online, and it is so phenomenal It basically goes on that not everybody can speak about how they are. They cannot speak their anger because they will be you could take it literally or not. They will be policed. on how how emotional they get or how angry they feel. and that is a privilege that I have. I have very rarely ever been told to calm down or that I'm too loud or too aggressive because I have a fairly light speaking voice, More often than not, people ask me to be louder so to not understand how people feel and how they are reacting to legitimately upsetting information. such as hearing somebody using a racist or sexist slur, not even what we're talking 2 seats in front of them beside them. and to understandably speak about that emotion from their gut. and try to speak up for not only the older people, but the older people who are trying to help the citizens and residents of this town and for them to get in trouble for speaking how they feel I understand that there are people who cannot voice how they truly feel. because they have to hold that in. because if they show their anger , if they show how they feel, they will be reprimanded. whereas I have the privilege of being soft spoken.

I don't honestly see me ever getting in trouble for having this kind of tone. and it is very unfortunate to know that there are going to be some people who come to this podium and speak about far left idiots and 4 or 5 older people who don't know what they're doing and they're gonna be able to walk out. walk out with support and not be banned. But then when citizens come up here and are understandably enraged about it, they're the ones who get in trouble. people who who have this automatic reaction to the negativity that this disgraced SPD chief had given They're the ones who are going to get in trouble for it and not for the initial cause of just anger. Now I understand that in this day and age there's probably a lot of glazed eyes and laying back in your chair and not really caring about what people are saying, that's OK. It's a lot but you really got to stop policing how people feel and how people react, especially when somebody who has a clear and a clear and obvious reputation of not really caring about their citizens. and really are fine with just openly insulting people? You got to give them space to react and you got to let people voice how they feel and not have this fear over their head that they will be reprimanded Thank you for your time Tricia Duckworth

Excuse me Thank you Good evening, council members, Mayor I'm here to speak about the proposed rule changes and about what happened in this room because while they may not be directly connected. The way that moment was handled matters. I briefly spoke on this last week, but I want to fully address it. I had hoped to address this directly through email with the mayor and not have to come back before the full council. but that was not responded to So I'm gonna say it literally. What happened in this room was not a disagreement. And the response to it was not accountability. because after that night, after a racial slur was directed at a sitting alderman and I was also called a degrading name. I listened to your response, Mayor. and what stood out to me was not just what you said, but what you didn't. At no point did I hear a clear statement that those words being used are wrong. Instead I heard that no rules were broken, and we were told this is a disagreement, and we should meet in the middle. but that was never a disagreement. and that should have been the easiest thing to say. because leadership does not require an investigation to say that racial slurs and degrading language is unacceptable. It requires judgment. It requires clarity, and it requires the willingness to say it out loud. That did not happen What was said to me is not the issue. I addressed it when it happened.

which is unacceptable is what happened after. There was no meaningful follow up, no efforts gather additional accounts or verify what was already being reported. So that was not a lack of information. It was a lack of action and still a public conclusion was made. What exactly was that conclusion based on? Because when leadership makes determination without gathering firsthand information, that's not due diligence. And it does not reflect accountability. It gives the appearance of an investigation without the substance of one. and raises serious questions about whether the focus was on understanding what happened or just simply covering it up? And that undermines trust completely. So I'm trying to understand what message did that send because when language like that toward anyone is not clearly condemned. It tells this community that accountability is optional. And when others have faced consequences in this chamber for less in the past. That raises a serious question What standards are you applying? When enforcement depends on the situation of the individuals involved. That is not fairness. That's double standard. That erodes trust that brings me back to the proposed rule changes, phrases like personal wrongdoing. and behavior that intimidates others are extremely broad. They rely on perception and we have already seen how perception played out in this room. So when authority is expanded based on subjective interpretation without clear standards that does not create fairness. It creates discretion and leads to inconsistent enforcement. Who's deciding what is intimidating, who decides what is wrongdoing. If those decisions are left to perception alone, then these

rules do not protect the public They create a way to silence it. You already have rules prohibiting slurs, degrading language, and personal attacks. Those rules were not enforced, and now instead of addressing that failure, you are discussing new, new rules that further restrict the public. That is not accountability. That's deflection. When leadership fails to investigate, fails to enforce existing rules and fails to clearly condemn behavior. that should never be acceptable. That is not effective leadership . And if this is your standard of leadership we can expect, then that is something this community needs to seriously consider because this is not just about one moment. It's about what your response to that moment says to everyone that watched. Also, I'd like to address that you said you've been called worse. at your podium OK, you campaigned for your position. I was just in the audience. I didn't campaign. I don't get paid. I was only here to advocate for children with autism, how they can be misperceived, especially my black child with autism. who's gonna grow up But I was called things, and I said it in the moment. but you never reached out Thank you. Thank you. Can't get a motions? Motion a second the speakers OK, uh, second, we have a motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor? All those opposed? The eyes have it. Thank you, Alderman Gregory for saying aye. Thank you you're the only one, so thank you