[00:00:01]
PLEASE CALL THE ROLE COUNCILMAN COOPER.
COUNCILMAN MCDANIEL? PRESENT, COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY.
PLEASE STAND AND JOIN IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ALL FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO REPUBLIC, WHICH CAN ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE.
[II. Appearance of Citizens]
OUR MEETINGS WITH THE APPEARANCE OF CITIZENS.A POLICY RELATIVE TO APPEARANCE OF CITIZENS IS AS FOLLOWS, A 30 MINUTE TIME PERIOD IS PROVIDED FOR CITIZENS TO APPEAR AND EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL.
EACH CITIZEN SPEAKING WILL BE LIMITED TO ONE APPEARANCE OF UP TO THREE MINUTES.
NO IMMEDIATE RESPONSE WILL BE GIVEN BY CITY COUNCIL OR CITY STAFF MEMBERS.
CITIZENS ARE TO GIVE THEIR DOCUMENTS, IF ANY, TO THE POLICE OFFICER FOR DISTRIBUTION TO THE COUNCIL WHEN THE MAYOR DETERMINES THAT ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS POLICY HAVE DONE SO.
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND KEY STAFF MAY MAKE COMMENTS.
UH, YOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES, AND WE DO HAVE A REQUEST TO SPEAK FROM A COUPLE OF CITIZENS THAT PHONED IN THEIR REQUESTS EARLIER.
YOU ARE ALLOWED TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME AND AGAIN WHEN THE ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE THREE MINUTES AT THE BEGINNING AND THREE MINUTES AT THAT ITEM, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW.
SO DOES ANYONE WISH TO APPEAR BEFORE COUNSEL TONIGHT? YOU, IF SO, APPROACH THE PODIUM.
YOU JUST NEED TO GIVE US YOUR NAME, BUT YOU DON'T NEED TO GIVE US YOUR ADDRESS.
UH, TONIGHT I HAVE MY WIFE SHERRY WITH ME AT THE PODIUM.
AND SHERRY AND I HAVE BEEN VERY ACTIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY OVER THE YEARS.
WE WORKED WITH CITY GOVERNMENT, WE'VE WORKED WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
WE'VE WORKED WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
BUT TONIGHT WE HAVE A CONCERN OF AN ISSUE THAT HAPPENED A FEW DAYS AGO THAT AFRICAN AMERICAN MINISTER WAS ARRESTED, BOOKED, FINGERPRINTED, AND HAD A MUGSHOT.
AND HIS FACE WAS PLASTERED ALL OVER THE INTERNET.
AND I JUST, WE JUST FELT LIKE THAT WAS, THAT WAS JUST WRONG.
ALL FOR A CITY VIOLATION CODE THAT HE SAID HE HAD PLA HE HAD PAID SOME A FINE ON THAT, BUT I GUESS THE FINE WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH.
AND A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY ARE VERY UPSET WITH THIS.
AND WE FELT LIKE IT WAS NOTHING MORE THAN A CHARACTER ASSASSINATION FOR A MAN WHO HAS DONE MANY THINGS IN THIS COMMUNITY AS A THRIVING BUSINESS.
AND WE JUST FEEL LIKE THERE'S NO WAY FOR HIM TO BE TREATED.
SO AS I THINK ABOUT THIS OVER THE YEARS, THERE'S A LOT OF WHITE LANDLORDS THAT HAVE PROPERTY IN THE AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY, HOUSES DILAPIDATED GRASS, GROWING TRASH EVERYWHERE.
OVER THE YEARS, I'VE NEVER SEEN ONE OF THEM ARRESTED, BOOKED, FINGERPRINTED, AND HAD A MUGSHOT.
AND IT'S NO WONDER IN A FEW MORE WEEKS, WE'LL HAVE A LUNCHEON AT THE DECATUR CONVENTION CENTER.
AND FOR YEARS, VERY, VERY NOT ATTENDED VERY WELL BY BLACKS.
AND I CAN SEE WHY NOW WHEN THINGS LIKE THIS HAPPEN, VERY FEW BLACK PEOPLE EVEN PARTICIPATE IN THAT LUNCHEON.
A LUNCHEON THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE GIVING THANKS AND BEING PROUD OF THE COMMUNITY AND, AND HAVING UNITY.
SO ALL I CAN SAY IS GROWING UP, I THINK MOST OF US KNEW, THE ELDERS ALWAYS TOLD US THAT GOD DOESN'T LIKE UGLY.
AND TONIGHT MY WIFE AND I DEFINITELY SMELL A STENCH OF UGLINESS.
DOES ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK BEFORE COUNSEL TONIGHT? MY NAME IS VERLIN ROSENBERGER.
I'M A MEMBER OF THE ILLINOIS PEOPLE'S ACTION AND THE PEACEMAKING COMMITTEE OF FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH WHO SUPPORTS I P A THIS WEDNESDAY.
OCTOBER 18TH IS THE 51ST ANNIVERSARY OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT.
EVERYBODY WANTS CLEAN WATER, AND EVERY CI CITY SHOULD MAKE SURE IT'S CITIZENS HAVE CLEAN WATER.
ILLINOIS PEOPLE'S ACTION HAS BEEN PETITIONING THE MCLEAN COUNTY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
[00:05:01]
DEMANDING THAT NO CARBON DIOXIDE DRILLING SHOULD BE DONE THROUGH THE MUHAMMAD AQUIFER AND THAT NO STORAGE SHOULD BE PERMITTED BELOW THE AQUIFER.IN THE PAST, DECATUR HAS HAD THE NEED TO TAP INTO THE MUHAMMAD AQUIFER WHEN OUR LAKE LEVEL HAS BEEN LOW.
SO I P A IS WORKING TO HELP US TOO.
NOW, DECATUR NEEDS TO DO ITS PART TO ENSURE CLEAN WATER IN LAKE DECATUR BY NEVER ALLOWING POLLUTING C O TWO COMPANIES TO PIPE CARBON DIOXIDE WASTE TO DECATUR AND DUMP IT WHERE IT COULD TOTALLY RUIN OUR SOURCE OF CLEAN WATER.
OUR CITY HAS SPENT THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO DREDGE THE LAKE FOR A LARGER SUPPLY OF WATER.
LAST JULY, DECATUR CELEBRATED THE 100TH ANNIVERSARY OF BEAUTIFUL LAKE DECATUR.
AND LAST SATURDAY'S PAPER HARALD AND REVIEW RAN AN EXTENSIVE STORY ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY'S JEWEL AND THE WRITER'S BELIEF THAT LAKE DECATUR IS UNAPPRECIATED.
IN ANOTHER 100 YEARS, WILL RESIDENTS STILL BE ABLE TO CELEBRATE OUR LAKE AND BE GRATEFUL FOR CLEAN WATER FOR THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT AFFORDS FOR RECREATION AND JUST THE BEAUTY THAT IT BRINGS TO OUR COMMUNITY? YES, BUT ONLY IF THIS CITY COUNCIL AND THOSE LEADERS WHO FOLLOW YOU WILL PLEDGE TO NEVER ALLOW POLLUTING COMPANIES TO DUMP THEIR TRASH OF ANY KIND.
HERE, REMEMBER FLINT, MICHIGAN AND THE LEAD IN THEIR WATER, LOUISIANA, WHERE SALT WATER HAS BACKED UP INTO THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER THREATENING THEIR DRINKING WATER AND DROUGHT AREAS WHERE THERE IS NO WATER.
REMEMBER THAT C O TWO PIPELINES HAVE BURST CAUSING MAJOR PROBLEMS. PLEASE DO NOT TAKE OUR CLEAN WATER FOR GRANTED.
MY HUSBAND AND I BELIEVE THAT DECATUR IS A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE.
THERE'S SO MANY THINGS AND MR. ROSENBERGER, YOU'RE OUT OF TIME.
WELL, WE DON'T WANNA BE THE PIT OF THE PRAIRIE.
DOES ANYONE ELSE WISH TO APPEAR BEFORE COUNSEL TONIGHT? HELLO, COUNSEL.
UH, THE FIRST THING I'M GONNA LET YOU KNOW TODAY IS MY BIRTHDAY.
I'LL BE SENDING A BASKET AROUND TO YOU SO I CAN HELP PAY FOR THESE FEES YOU'RE PROPOSING.
SO I GUESS I'M SPEAKING FOR THE PEOPLE THAT THAT HAS TO GAMING PARLORS AND ALL, AND I THINK WE'RE WONDERING WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO ESCALATE THE PRICES SO MUCH HIGHER THAN ALL THE SURROUNDING TOWNS THAT ARE, HAS THE SAME DILEMMA THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH? I MEAN, I MEAN, THAT'S A BIG QUESTION.
WE, WE HAVEN'T GOT AN ANSWER TO THAT.
I MEAN, I AM A GAMING PARLOR AND YOU'RE JUMPING IT UP TO $10,000 AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY, WHAT'S THE PURPOSE? BECAUSE WE ALL CAME INTO THIS THING TOGETHER WITH YOU GUYS.
WE, WE HELPED COMPLETED THIS PLAN.
SO WHY ARE WE GETTING ATTACKED? IT ALMOST SEEMED LIKE AN ATTACK BECAUSE IF YOU, LIKE I SAID, IF YOU LOOK AT IT, ALL THE OTHER CITIES ARE NOT DOING THAT TO THEIR BUSINESSES.
ALL THEY DID WAS JUST LIKE ED AND DAVE HORN PROPOSES TO LET IT STAY IN PLACE AS IT IS, PUT THE LOCK DOWN LIKE RIGHT NOW AND CONTINUE FORWARD AND COME UP WITH ANOTHER IDEA TO HELP DECATUR GET BETTER.
ANOTHER IDEA IS SOMETHING THAT OUR OTHER CUSTOMERS, THAT IT'S INDICATOR THEY CAN PARTICIPATE AND HELP MAKE THIS CITY GROW AND GET IT BACK LIKE IT WAS.
'CAUSE WE'RE DWINDLING PRETTY BAD.
AND I MEAN, JUST TO DO WHAT YOU'RE DOING, IT'S ALMOST LIKE A A NEGATIVE ACTION ACTION.
IT'S GOING DOWN INSTEAD OF UP.
SO WE NEED SUPPORT AND THAT'S WHAT WE RELY ON YOU FOR, NOT TO PENALIZE US, BUT SUPPORT US SO WE CAN GET OUR BUSINESSES GOING AND GET, GET THRIVING AGAIN.
SO, I MEAN, IF YOU CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION, WHY NOT DO WHAT OUR SURROUNDING TOWNS ARE DOING AND THEY ARE SUCCESSFUL, WHY NOT FALL INTO PLAY WITH WHAT THEY'RE DOING? AND T WE'RE TRYING TO HIT US SO HARD.
AND MR. SPES, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MORE MINUTES WHEN WE GET TO THE DISCUSSION ITEM, OKAY?
[00:10:01]
OKAY.DOES ANYONE ELSE WISH TO APPEAR BEFORE COUNSEL TONIGHT? HELLO, GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS ABIR MOTIAN AND I WANTED TO TELL YOU THE OTHER DAY I WENT TO THAT, UM, TO VISIT THE HISTORICAL SITES AND IT WAS LOVELY.
I LOVED IT EXCEPT FOR THE PART WHERE PEOPLE STARTED DOING SHOOTING.
AND SO THERE WAS A SHOOTING NEARBY WHERE, WHERE THEY, WHERE UM, PEOPLE WERE GOING TO VISIT THE HISTORICAL SITES.
THAT'S NOT GOOD FOR TOURISTS AND IT'S NOT GOOD FOR PEOPLE JUST TO SHOOT GUNS TO HARM PEOPLE AND THREATEN PEOPLE'S LIVES.
SO I WANTED TO ASK YOU, IF POSSIBLE, IF THE CITY OF DECATUR WOULD BE ABLE TO PUT STREET CAMERAS ALL AROUND THE AREA BY THE HISTORICAL SITES, EVEN INCLUDING ON EL DORADO, EVEN ON MONROE AND GRAND, EVEN ON MAIN AND GRAND, EVEN ON MAIN AND EL DORADO AND, UM, OTHER AREAS AROUND THERE EVEN FURTHER DOWN SO THAT WE CAN HELP TO KEEP THE HISTORICAL SITES GOING AND THEN ALSO WE CAN TRY TO BETTER THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
ONE MORE THING I WANTED TO SAY IS I WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR, UM, HAVING THIS, UM, STRONG COMMUNITIES PROGRAM THAT IS VERY HELPFUL FOR DECATUR IN PRESERVING DECATUR AND HELPING DECATUR STATE, UH, A SAFER PLACE.
ALSO, I DO AGREE FOR THE POLICE GETTING THE CRIME PREVENTION SURVEILLANCE TRAILER.
I AGREE WITH THAT AND ENCOURAGE THAT AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING THAT ALSO.
AND, UM, I WANT TO ALSO ASK YOU FOR THE DECATUR BUS COMPANY, IF THE CITY COUNCIL CAN REACH OUT TO THEM AND THROUGH MAYBE A GRANT, IF THEY CAN HAVE, IF THEY CAN APPLY MORE STRAPS INTO THE BUS.
WHEN WE RIDE THE BUS, WE'RE GOING LIKE THIS OR, YOU KNOW, AND THEN SOMETIMES BUS DRIVERS, WHEN WE GO INTO THE BUS, THEY WANT US TO FALL ON OUR FACE SO WE WE'RE NOT EVEN HOLDING ONTO ANYTHING BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING TO HOLD ONTO IN SOME SEATS THAT, THAT ARE, THAT WE'RE BAITED TO SIT INTO.
SO I WAS WONDERING IF, IF IT'S POSSIBLE, IF WE CAN'T GET MORE POLES IN THERE, HOW ABOUT STRAPS TO HOLD ONTO SO THAT PEOPLE DO NOT FALL SO THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT HURT AND SO PEOPLE ARE NOT BAITED.
AND I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU THAT BECAUSE, UM, YOU KNOW, WINTER'S COMING, THERE'S GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, ALL KINDS OF, UM, RAIN, YOU KNOW, SALT IN THE BUS, OIL IN THE BUS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
ALSO, I WANT TO TELL YOU THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE PREPARING TO DAMAGE SIDEWALKS AND WATER PIPELINES WHERE THEY, WHERE THEY MEET, THEY'RE, THEY'RE PRE-PLANNING ON DAMAGING PIPELINES AND SIDEWALKS BEFORE EVEN THE WINTER COMES SO THAT THEY CAN BLAME IT ON WINTER.
ALSO, I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THE PEOPLE WHO THROTTLE ENGINES, THEY'RE ALREADY PUTTING ON PURPOSE WITH A MAFIAA PUTTING OIL ON THE STREETS SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE ACCIDENTS HAPPEN SO THAT THEY CAN BLAME THE WHAT'S WRONG WITH THEIR ENGINES ON ACCIDENTS.
THERE ARE TEAMS AND MAFIA'S PRE-PLANNING ACCIDENTS IN ADVANCE AND I JUST WANT YOU TO CONSIDER THE BACK HISTORY OF THEIR THROTTLING AND HOW THEY ARE ROUGH WITH THEIR ENGINES.
DOES ANYONE ELSE WISH TO APPEAR BEFORE COUNCIL TONIGHT? GOOD EVENING COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I'LL BE RESPECTFUL, BUT I'LL BE BLUNT.
I'M HERE TO MAKE A POINT, NOT A BEST FRIEND.
I DON'T HAVE MUCH TIME, SO I'LL BE SPEAKING FAST.
HOPEFULLY SOME OF YOU ARE ABLE TO LISTEN BETTER THAN YOU HAVE THE COMMUNITY OF DECATUR.
MY NAME IS AUSTIN NZI ON SEPTEMBER 25TH, 31 YEARS AGO.
I WAS BORN AND RAISED HERE AND SINCE THEN I HAVE GONE TO SCHOOL HERE CURRENTLY RAISING A HELLFIRE OF A SEVEN YEAR OLD DAUGHTER AND A GENERAL BUT STRONG NINE YEAR OLD SON.
I'VE WORKED HERE, ATTENDED SCHOOL, STARTED A BUSINESS HERE, AND I'M RAISING MY CHILDREN HERE.
TO SAY I'M INVESTED IN THIS TOWN IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT.
SOME OF YOU FROM HERE ARE INVESTED IN THIS TOWN AND SOME OF YOU'RE NOT INVESTED LIKE THE REST OF US.
SOME OF YOU'RE HERE SIMPLY FOR A TALENT, A TALLY ON YOUR RESUME.
I'M HERE TO MAKE A STATEMENT AND 40 TO 50 YEARS, I RESPECTFULLY FEEL LIKE IT'S SAFE TO SAY THAT A GOOD MAJORITY OF YOU WILL NOT BE HERE ANYMORE.
SO I'M HERE NOT FOR YOU OR FOR ME.
I'M HERE FOR YOUR CHIL YOUR CHILDREN AND YOUR GRANDCHILDREN.
I'M HERE FOR MY CHILDREN AND MY FRIENDS.
RESPECTFULLY, A FEW COUNCIL MEETINGS AGO YOU STATED THAT A SIMPLE GOOGLE DOCUMENT FOR THE VIDEO GAMING WAS ENOUGH TO DETERMINE THAT IT WAS THE VOICE OF DECATUR AND YOU WERE APPROVING OF THE RESULTS.
IF YOU DON'T MIND, AS A POINT, AGAIN, RESPECTFULLY, I'LL CREATE A GOOGLE DOCUMENT FOR THE PEOPLE TO VOICE THEIR OWN OPINION ON WHETHER THEY APPROVE ON YOU BEING ON THE COUNCIL.
SURELY SINCE YOU ACCEPTED THE RESULTS OF THE DOCUMENT JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCEPT THE RESULTS OF THE GOOGLE DOCUMENT FOR YOUR REMOVAL.
[00:15:01]
DISRESPECTFUL, I'M HERE TO MAKE A POINT.YOU WOULDN'T ACCEPT THOSE RESULTS 'CAUSE IT'S NOT ON THE BALLOT, IT'S NOT A FORMAL FORM, IT'S NOT DONE BY A FIRM.
SO PLEASE JUST SIT ON THAT FOR ONE MOMENT.
HARRIS TOWN IS SITTING PRETTY WITH THEIR DISPENSARY LISTENING TO THEIR COMMUNITY.
WELL, LAST MONTH THERE WERE 89 LICENSED VIDEO GAMING ESTABLISHMENTS AND YOU WANT TO CREATE A 89 A WHOPPING $8,900 ADDITIONAL REVENUE.
AND OF COURSE, THE ADDED $4,000 INCREASE IN THE P LICENSE.
TRUST ME, MUNICIPALITIES OUTSIDE DECATUR THAT DON'T REGULATE THEIR GAMING PROPERLY LOOKS HORRIBLE.
GET OUT THERE AND TALK TO THE PEOPLE WHO BRING IN THE REVENUE FOR THE CITY WITHOUT HURTING SMALL BUSINESSES.
I'M SURE OTHER SMALL BUSINESSES OWNERS HAVE MADE IT KNOWN WHO THEY TRULY, THAT THEY'RE TRULY INVESTED IN THE CITY.
THAT IS WHERE YOU WILL FIND YOUR ANSWERS.
IF YOU WANNA CREATE ADDITIONAL REVENUE, LISTEN TO PEOPLE THAT VOTED YES JUST A FEW SHORT YEARS AGO FOR DISPENSARY.
STOP PUNISHING EXISTING BUSINESSES OR RAISING TAXES ON THE GOOD FOLK OF DECATUR.
THESE ARE JUST A FEW PROBLEMS AND IF YOU JUST SIMPLY LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED YOU FOR YOU TO BE THEIR VOICE, YOU WOULD FIND YOUR ANSWERS.
BECAUSE WHAT IS GONNA HAPPEN WHEN THESE EXHAUSTING BARS IN RESTAURANTS ARE GONNA MAGICALLY INCREASE THEIR MARGINS TO YOUR LIKING? I'M HERE FOR THE FUTURE OF DECATUR AND ALSO MY FRIENDS WHO HAVE PUT THEIR BLOOD, SWEAT AND TEARS INTO THIS COMMUNITY.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK BEFORE COUNSEL TONIGHT? OKAY, SEEING NONE, WE WILL MOVE ON TO APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
HORN, THAT I WAS GONNA SEE IF THERE WERE COUNSEL COMMENTS, SO OH, OH, OKAY.
I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THIS.
UH, CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? YES.
MY NAME IS S WINDING AND I HAVE A FOUR LOCATION HERE.
UH, WE HAVE A LEGAL LICENSE AND WE HAVE OBJECTION REGARDING THIS, UH, 50 CHAPTER, 52 ITEM 53.
THIS ENTIRE SECTION IS TRYING TO PUT US A REALLY BIG TIME TROUBLE ON THE ROAD.
WE ACTUALLY, I JUST BUILT A ONE LOCATION RIGHT ON JASPER AND WOOD STREET.
WE SPEND SO MUCH MONEY WHEN WE BUILT THE LOCATION AND THOSE ALL LOCATION IS RUN BY EMPLOYEE.
LET'S SEE IF MY EMPLOYEE MAKE A MISTAKE, ONE, MAKE A MISTAKE, SECOND, MAKE A MISTAKE, THIRD MISTAKE.
YOU GUYS GONNA TAKE OUR LICENSE AWAY? I SPENT SO MUCH MONEY ON THIS LOCATION.
I KNOW ANY EMPLOYEE COULD MAKE MISTAKES, SO THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU GUYS GONNA RUN ME OUT AND THAT PLACE IS GOING DOWN THE HILL.
I THINK THAT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE FOR ANY BUSINESSMAN FOR THE DECATUR AND ESPECIALLY IF, LET'S SEE YOU GUYS.
IF SOMEONE WANT TO COME MOVE IN DECATUR AND IF THEY SEE THIS KIND OF RULES, NOBODY WANT TO COME HERE TO DWELL THE BUSINESS.
SO I THINK FOR CITY OF DECATUR, YOU GUYS HAVE TO TALK TO THE BUSINESS PERSON, BRING, HAVE A MEETING WITH THEM.
I MEAN, LAST WEEK MY MANAGER ACTUALLY DID AND GENTLEMAN TALKED TO US.
WE TRIED TO EXPLAIN HIM WHAT'S THE SITUATION.
I THINK WE HAVE TO OPEN A DOOR FOR THE BUSINESSMAN SO THIS CITY CAN BRING A MORE REVENUE IN BECAUSE I KNOW EVERY SINGLE LOCATION IN CITY OF DECATUR WHO HAVE A LEGAL LICENSE AND THE GAS, THEY PAY A LOT OF MONEY TO THE CITY.
I JUST ONE A MONTH TO THE CITY FOR THE CITY TAX.
THIS BUSINESSES GONE GO DOWN THE HILL.
I THINK IT'S GONNA BE A REALLY BAD IDEA IF WE GONNA MAKE A REGULATION LIKE THIS.
AND ALSO I WANT, WE HAVE A LOCATION REAL IN A BAD NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAVE A DRIVE-THROUGH WINDOW.
YOU GUYS PUT A, SOME RESTRICTION NOT TO OPEN AFTER 10:00 AM WE ARE IN A BAD AREA SOMETIME WHEN OUR EMPLOYEE DOESN'T FEEL SAFE, WHEN WE HAVE A DOOR OPEN AND PEOPLE COME INSIDE, THEY JUST SO SCARED BECAUSE PEOPLE START STEALING, PEOPLE TRYING TO GRAB A STOP.
AND I'M SORRY SIR, BUT YOU'RE, YOU'RE OUT OF TIME.
YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? THANK YOU.
THANKS FOR YOUR TIME MADAM CLERK, DID YOU NEED THE SPELLING OF HIS NAME? ARE YOU OKAY?
[00:20:01]
I HAVE IT, THANKS.DOES ANYONE ELSE WISH TO APPEAR BEFORE COUNCIL TONIGHT? ALRIGHT, AND NOW I WILL OPEN IT UP TO COUNCIL FOR ANY COMMENTS BACK DR.
I WANNA COMMENT ON A COUPLE OF TOPICS ACTUALLY.
UM, IN REGARD TO CITY ORDINANCE ARRESTS, I WOULD JUST POINT OUT THAT 2023 YEAR TO DATE WE'VE HAD 101 COMPARED TO 2022.
SO WE'VE INCREASED THE NUMBER OF CITY ORDINANCE ARRESTS BY 66% THIS YEAR.
I'M AWARE THAT SOME OF THE VIOLATIONS TOOK PLACE DURING THE COVID PANDEMIC AND WE HAVE PROVIDED SIGNIFICANT GRACE TO INDIVIDUALS ON A LOT OF DIFFERENT ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS DURING THAT PANDEMIC.
AND SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE, UM, CITY STAFF TO THINK ABOUT WAYS THAT INSTEAD OF ARRESTING PEOPLE AND BRINGING THEM TO MACON COUNTY JAIL FOR NON-VIOLENT OFFENSES THAT WE USE THINGS LIKE NOTICE TO APPEAR.
IN REGARDS TO, UM, DISCUSSION OF SEQUESTRATION, UH, I CERTAINLY AGREE WITH MS. ROSENBERGER THAT WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW C O TWO PIPELINES, UH, IN THE CITY OF DECATUR.
AND I'LL USE AN ECONOMIC ARGUMENT FOR WHY WE SHOULDN'T.
UM, WHEN C O TWO IS SEQUESTERED, IT ENTERS PORE SPACE AND THE PORE SPACE UNDER THE CITY IS A FINITE RESOURCE.
UH, THUS DECATUR SHOULD OPTIMIZE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES THAT SEQUESTRATION BRINGS, GIVEN THE LIMITED PORE SPACE THAT WE HAVE.
SO WHEN COMPANIES LIKE WARWICK CARBON SOLUTIONS AND INOVA FEED AND LG CHEM DECIDE TO RELOCATE TO DECATUR AND THEY BRING WITH THEM JOBS THAT IS A MUCH MORE, UM, POWERFUL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY THAN A C O TWO PIPELINE TO PUT THINGS INTO PERSPECTIVE WOLF CARBON SOLUTIONS ESTIMATES, THEY'LL BE BRINGING 12 MILLION METRIC TONS OF C O TWO ANNUALLY.
THE NUMBER OF JOBS THAT ARE GONNA BE CREATED, THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY TAX REVENUE THAT'S GONNA BE CREATED IS MINIMAL TO THE CITY OF DECATUR.
WARWICK CARBON SOLUTIONS IS PLAYING TO SEQUESTER 2 MILLION TONS OF CARBON DI OXIDE, OKAY? 2 MILLION VERSUS 12 MILLION.
THEY'RE GOING TO BRING IN ABOUT A THOUSAND CONSTRUCTION JOBS AND TWO DOZEN PERMANENT JOBS AND SEQUESTER 90% OF THE C O TWO THAT THEY PRODUCE.
AND SO FROM THE PERSPEC, FROM AN ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE, IT IS NOT INDICATORS BEST INTEREST TO HAVE A C O TWO PIPELINE.
ARE THERE OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL AT THIS TIME? GO AHEAD.
I WANNA, ONE, I WANNA THANK, UM, THOSE CITIZENS WHO CAME IN TONIGHT TO STRESS YOUR, UH, YOUR OPINIONS AND YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS AND FEEDBACK TO THE COUNCIL.
WE'RE HERE TONIGHT FOR A DISCUSSION.
SO, UH, NO FINAL DECISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE, UM, AND ANYTHING IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL AT THIS POINT.
BUT WE DO NEED THE FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY ON WHAT YOU FEEL AND WHAT YOU DON'T FEEL.
NO DECISION IS GONNA BE EASY DECISION ON A, A HOT ITEM LIKE THIS.
THERE'S NO, NOT GONNA BE ANY, ANY WINNERS AND ANY LOSERS.
SOME EVERYBODY'S GONNA, SOMEONE'S GONNA WIN, SOMETHING'S GONNA LOSE NO MATTER WHICH WAY YOU GO.
BUT WE DO APPRECIATE YOU COMING IN, AT LEAST I DO APPRECIATE YOU COMING IN AND, AND STRESSING, UH, YOUR, YOUR OPINIONS.
UM, I LISTEN TO THEM AND I DO PROCESS THINGS BASED ON WHAT I HEAR AND WHAT I RESEARCH AND FIND, UM, IN REGARDS TO THE, UM, COMMENT REGARDING THE, UH, CITIZEN'S ARREST.
HORN IS THAT MAYBE THAT WE DO LOOK AT, AT WAYS TO AVOID ARREST AT ALL POSSIBLE IF THERE'S OTHER MINIMAL WAGE WE CAN HANDLE.
NO, A SITUATION OF A NON-VIOLENT SITUATION, WHICH IT APPEARS THAT THIS MAY HAVE BEEN.
UM, I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT, UH, I KNOW THE INDIVIDUAL PERSONALLY.
PERSONALLY, UM, BUT WHEN I LOOK AT ANYTHING I LOOK AT, I WAIT
[00:25:01]
TO HEAR THE, THE FULL FACTS BECAUSE THERE'S TWO SIDES TO EVERY STORY.SO I ASK THAT THE CITIZENS THAT ARE HERE TONIGHT, THOSE ONLINE, UH, THOSE IN MY AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY, UM, THIS, THIS ALLOW, AND I'VE TALKED TO THE, TO THE INDIVIDUAL AND I'M SPEAKING ON WHAT I KNOW HE WANTS.
LET'S ALLOW THE SYSTEM TO PLAY THROUGH FOR THE FACTS TO BE DELIVERED IN BOTH SIDES TO GIVE THEIR VERSIONS.
AND THEN WE MAKE A DECISION ON WHETHER SOMETHING WAS DONE APPROPRIATELY OR INAPPROPRIATELY.
THAT'S HOW WE SHOULD HANDLE ANY SITUATION.
AND I'M ASKING THAT AS A COMMUNITY THAT THAT'S HOW WE HANDLE THIS SITUATION.
ARE THERE OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL?
[III. Approval of Minutes]
SEE NONE.LET'S MOVE ON TO APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2023.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 2ND, 2023.
ANY UNFINISHED BUSINESS? NONE.
MOVING TO NEW BUSINESS? SEE IF IT IS, IF THERE ARE NO OBJECTIONS FROM COUNSEL, I THINK THE MAJORITY OF THE AUDIENCE THAT IS HERE TONIGHT IS, UH, RELATED TO THE GAMING ISSUE.
IF WE, UH, COULD SWITCH FLIP-FLOP ITEMS TWO AND ONE, BEGINNING WITH ITEM TWO AND THEN MOVING TO ITEM ONE, I THINK THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THOSE FOLKS THAT CAME OUT THIS EVENING.
EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT? OKAY.
[2. Discussion Item: City Code Chapter 52, Alcoholic Liquor]
WE WILL START WITH ITEM TWO, DISCUSSION ITEM, CITY CODE, CHAPTER 52, ALCOHOLIC LIQUOR, AND FOR THE CITIZENS WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, WE'LL HAVE SOME DISCUSSION HERE AND THEN, UH, BRING YOU UP FOR YOUR THREE MINUTES OF, OF COMMENTS.MR. WRIGHTON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, YOU'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR SEVERAL MONTHS AND IT WAS A COUNCIL INITIATIVE.
UH, AND, UH, I WANT TO STRESS THAT, UH, THIS IS, THIS HAS BEEN AN ACTIVITY IN COMPROMISE BECAUSE NOT ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FELT THE SAME WAY ABOUT DIFFERENT PROVISIONS.
AND, UH, AND SO STAFF HAS DECIDED TO TAKE MORE TIME AND YOU'VE ACCOMMODATED THAT BY, UH, ADDING ADDITIONAL TIME TO THE MORATORIUM SO THAT YOU CAN BE SUFFICIENTLY DELIBERATIVE ABOUT THAT.
BUT, UH, I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH ALL 11 ITEMS THAT ARE IN THE, UH, TRANSMITTAL MEMO.
UH, YOU CAN READ THEM FOR YOURSELVES.
I BELIEVE THAT THESE ARE THE 11 ITEMS THAT ARE SUBSTANTIVE REVISIONS THAT YOU SPOKE ABOUT, THAT, THAT THE INTERNAL COMMITTEE DEALT WITH, THAT YOU GOT FEEDBACK FROM IN, IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT WAYS.
AND IN EACH OF THESE 11 ITEMS, I'VE, I'VE, UH, LISTED HERE HOW THE DRAFT ORDINANCE, IT IS BEFORE YOU HAS BEEN PREPARED.
AND, UH, THIS IS NOT AN ACTION ITEM, IT'S A DISCUSSION ITEM AS, AS THE MAYOR HAS ANNOUNCED.
AND SO IT'S, IT'S MY DESIRE THAT YOU PROVIDE, UH, CLARITY, UH, FOR HOW YOU WANT THIS TO MOVE FORWARD IN THE WAY THAT IT'S PRESENTED HERE, UH, OR WITH SOME AMENDMENTS, UH, SO THAT WE CAN BRING THIS ITEM BACK TO YOU IN NOVEMBER FOR FINAL PASSAGE IN ADOPTION.
SO, MR. WRIGHTON, ARE YOU WANTING US TO GO THROUGH THE 11 ITEMS FOR CLARITY, OR DO YOU FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE THAT CLARITY OR ARE THERE SPECIFIC ONES THAT YOU WE WILL OPEN IT UP TO DISCUSSIONS ON, ON ALL OF THE REVISIONS, BUT SO, SO I WOULD SAY THAT BASED ON MY INTERVIEWS WITH EACH OF YOU, SOME, SOME SEVERAL TIMES AND THE FEEDBACK THAT YOU'VE GIVEN ME, I BELIEVE THAT THE WAY THAT I PUT THESE 11 TOGETHER REFLECT WHERE THERE IS A MAJORITY OF SUPPORT FOR EACH OF THESE 11 ITEMS. UM, AND SO WE DON'T NEED TO GO THROUGH EACH ONE OF THEM UNLESS YOU WANT TO.
BUT, UH, WHAT I WOULD REALLY LIKE COUNSEL TO DO IS, IS TALK ABOUT WHERE, UH, MAYBE IT DOESN'T EXACTLY CONFORM WITH WHAT YOU WANT OR IF, IF THERE'S OTHER REVISIONS THAT SOMEHOW, DESPITE ALL THE TIME WE SPENT ON IT THAT WE, THAT WE SOMEHOW MISSED.
SO THAT YOU CAN, I WANNA LEAVE THIS ITEM WITH CLARITY
I'M NOT SURE I'M A HUNDRED PERCENT CLEAR ON HOW WE'RE GOING TO APPROACH THIS, BUT, UH, I'M GONNA START WITH THE LIQUOR COMMISSIONER WHO'S PROBABLY CLOSER TO THIS THAN ANY OTHER.
IF YOU'VE GOT, YOU WANNA OPEN IT UP WITH SOME COMMENTS, PAT.
UH, I APPRECIATE THE CITY MANAGER.
THIS WASN'T HIS, UH, ONE OF THESE GOALS, BUT HE'S TRYING AS, AS YOU MENTIONED, TRIED TO, TO GET EVERYBODY HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT THE SITUATION.
UH, ONE OF THE THINGS, AND I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE, UM, WE HAVE BUSINESSES, RESTAURANTS, BARS, AND OTHER THAT ARE REALLY, UH, VIDEO PARLORS.
WHEN I WAS ON THE COUNCIL BEFORE, UH, I THINK THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL MEMBERS WANTED TO SLOW DOWN THE GROWTH OF, UH, UH, VIDEO GAMING.
AS I'VE MENTIONED BEFORE, UH, DECATUR IS NUMBER TWO IN THE STATE WITH THE MOST
[00:30:01]
VIDEO GAMING MACHINES, NOT COUNTING, UH, CITIES THAT HAVE, UM, UH, GAMBLING CASINOS.UH, SPRINGFIELD IS NUMBER ONE.
AND, UH, WE, WHAT IS WAGERED IN, UH, SPRINGFIELD WITH, WITH ABOUT A HUNDRED.
NOW, THIS IS BASED ON LAST, UH, YEAR'S DATA.
UH, THEY HAVE PROBABLY 127 MORE MACHINES THAN, THAN WE DO.
AND WE MATCH THEM, UH, ALMOST TO THE DOLLAR OF WHAT IS WAGERED AS MENTIONED.
UH, WE DID DO A SURVEY, UH, AND ASK PEOPLE, YES, BUSINESS PEOPLE HAVE A OPINION, BUT THERE'S ANOTHER MAJORITY OF THE, OF THE, UH, COMMUNITY THAT WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UM, A SLOW DOWN IN THE GROWTH OF VIDEO GAMING.
UM, BUT WHEN, WHEN BUSINESSES COME INTO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AND SAY THEY'RE GONNA OPEN UP A, A RESTAURANT, FIRST THING THEY SAY, OH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE VIDEO GAMING.
NOT THE BEST CHICKEN, NOT THE BEST HAMBURGERS.
UH, YOU GO INTO A RESTAURANT BUSINESS, IT'S A RESTAURANT, IT'S NOT A VIDEO PARLOR.
SO, UM, I'M OPEN, I COMPROMISE, UH, A LOT OF MY COLLEAGUES THAT WERE STRONG, UH, ON AGREEING WITH ME ON THINGS, UH, SLOWING DOWN.
AND NOW, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY'VE KIND OF CHANGED.
SO I WANT TO HEAR, UH, BUT WHATEVER WE DO, IF WE WATER DOWN SOME OF THE SUGGESTIONS THAT THEN I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ONE COUNCIL MEMBER SAY, WELL, WHY DON'T WE DO SOMETHING ABOUT SLOWING DOWN VIDEO GAMING? YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.
SO I'M OPEN, I'LL COMPROMISE, BUT WE NEED TO, IF, IF THERE'S A WAY TO DO IT, IT'S JUST LIKE THE, UM, HEALTH DEPARTMENT.
AND IT'S THE SAME WITH THE CITY.
WE HAVE BUSINESSES THAT SEEM TO THINK THEY COULD GET BY WITH NOT FOLLOWING OUR ORDINANCES.
YOU DON'T DO THAT WITH THE, UH, HEALTH DEPARTMENT OR THEY'LL CLOSE YOU DOWN.
SO THE CITY, UH, WILL WORK WITH EVERYBODY AS LIQUOR COMMISSIONER, I'VE TRIED, I'M VERY LENIENT WHEN I HAVE TO, BUT WHEN I HAVE BUSINESSES COME IN THREE TIMES FOR A HEARING, UH, A UH, LIQUOR HEARING, THEY'RE NOT FOLLOWING THE RULES AND I HAVE TO PULL THEIR LIQUOR LICENSE, WHICH MEANS THEY LOSE THEIR VIDEO GAMING.
SO YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW THE RULES, WHETHER IT'S HERE OR SPRINGFIELD OR BLOOMINGTON OR THEY'LL DO THE SAME.
AND FROM THE, UH, WHAT I'VE HEARD IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS, A LOT OF CITIES IN CENTRAL ILLINOIS HAVE ALSO COME DOWN ON SLOWING DOWN VIDEO, UH, GAMING, UH, PARLORS.
AND A LOT OF TIMES THEIR, THEIR FEES ARE SO MUCH HIGHER THAN WHAT DECATUR HAD, HAS HAD.
COUNCILMAN CULP, I KNOW THAT, UH, FORMER LIQUOR COMMISSIONER JERRY DAWSON HAD REACHED OUT TO YOU AND MR. DAWSON COULD NOT BE HERE THIS EVENING, BUT YOU HAVE A MESSAGE FROM HIM THAT YOU WANTED TO SHARE.
I LIKE MANY OF US, WE'VE TALKED TO THE CITIZENS AND THE BUSINESS OWNERS AND WE'VE TALKED TO PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEMBERS AND LIQUOR COMMISSIONERS AS WELL.
AND I TALKED TO MR. DAWSON, UH, WHILE HE WAS ON THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE LIQUOR COMMISSIONER, AND I'M GONNA READ A BRIEF EMAIL FROM HIM AND THEN I'LL FOLLOW UP WITH MY OWN CONCERNS AS WELL.
AS A FORMER LIQUOR COMMISSIONER AND COUNCILMAN, I'D LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE POSSIBLE CHANGES TO LIQUOR LICENSE REGARDING VIDEO GAMBLING.
SINCE I'M UNABLE TO ATTEND TONIGHT'S MEETING IN PERSON, I WOULD HOPE THAT THIS COUNCIL PLEASE CONSIDER GRANDFATHERING ALL CLASS A OR TAVERN LICENSES FROM ANY REGULATIONS IN RELATIONS TO PERCENTAGES.
WE KNOW THAT STATE OF ILLINOIS LEGALIZED VIDEO GAMBLING FOR THE TAX REVENUE, BUT THEY ALSO WANTED TO GIVE A HAND TO TAVERNS, WHICH WERE CLOSING AT A VERY HIGH RATE DUE TO VARIOUS FACTORS.
I KNOW BECAUSE I WATCHED SEVERAL OF OUR LOCAL TAVERNS, SOME OF WHICH HAD BEEN OPERATING IN DECATUR FOR MANY DECADES, CLOSED DOWN WITH THEIR LICENSES, PUT INTO A LOTTERY BEFORE LEGALIZED GAMBLING.
THE ONLY BIDS FOR THESE CLOSING TAVERN LICENSES WERE CONVENIENCE STORES THAT ONLY WANTED THEIR PACKAGED LIQUOR LICENSES, WHICH ACCOMPANIED THE CLASS A TAVERN LICENSES TAVERNS LIKE THE LONE OAK AND ESKER, ALONG WITH MANY OTHERS, COULD NO LONGER MAKE A PROFIT.
THE STATE OF ILLINOIS SAID THAT THIS NEW LEGALIZED VIDEO GAMBLING WOULD HELP THESE TAVERNS STAY OPEN WITH THE NEW REVENUE.
THE CITY OF DECATUR COUNCIL AND STAFF WITH MYSELF INCLUDED, LET VIDEO GAMBLING GET OUTTA CONTROL.
THE FIRST BUDGET AFTER LEGALIZED GAMBLING OR GAMING HAD ONLY 50,000 BUDGET REVENUE.
SO IT WAS CLEAR TO, NO ONE KNEW AT THE TIME HOW MUCH THESE MACHINES WOULD BE GENERATING THE TAVERNS THAT WERE NEVER THE PROBLEM.
IT WAS THE NEWLY LICENSED RESTAURANTS THAT WERE NOTHING MORE THAN A GAMBLING PARLOR.
BY THE TIME WE KNEW IT WAS GETTING TO BE A PROBLEM, IT WAS TOO LATE.
[00:35:01]
WHEN WE INTRODUCED THE PARLER LICENSE TO MAKE THESE ESTABLISHMENTS PAY INCREASED FEES.SO THEY DIDN'T KEEP UP, KEEP A PLANE FOR RESTAURANT LICENSES WHEN WE ALL KNEW THAT THEY WERE NOT RESTAURANTS.
NOW IT'S PROPOSED TO PUT PERCENTAGES ON CLASSICAL LICENSES, WHICH I REPEAT SHOULD NOT BE, SHOULD BE GRANDFATHERED.
OWNERS OF CLASSICAL LICENSES ARE LOCAL WITH THEIR PROFITS STAYING LOCAL.
THE EAST PARLORS OWNED BY OUT OF TOWN STATE CORPORATIONS ARE SOME OF THE ONES WITH THE HIGHEST VOLUME.
AND THOSE MONIES LEAVING OUR COMMUNITY NEVER TO BE REINVESTED IN DECATUR.
WE ARE TARGETING THE WRONG BUSINESSES.
THE FOCUS SHOULD BE ON THE TRUE POKER PARLORS AND NOT THE TAVERNS.
PLEASE DON'T MOVE THE GOALS GOALPOSTS ON THESE ESTABLISHED BARS.
JUST A FOLLOW UP TO THIS, I DID MEET WITH ONE BUSINESS OWNER AND HAD A CLASS A LICENSE HAS BEEN OBEYING THE, THE CLASS A REQUIREMENTS.
BUT IF WE WERE TO ASK HIM TO HAVE A PERCENTAGE COME OTHER FROM, FROM, OTHER THAN GAMING HIS STRUCTURE, HIS, THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE ABILITY THAT HE'S IN DOESN'T ALLOW FOR ANY COOKING AT ALL.
SO THAT'S WHERE I FIND A KIND OF A, WE'VE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND EVEN WITH THE FEES, UH, TRYING NOT TO DISRUPT THE BUSINESS PLAN OF SOME OF THESE, BUT WHEN I VISITED THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION, THEY HAVE NO NOTHING ELSE IN THEIR BUILDING WHERE THEY COULD GENERATE THIS PERCENTAGE.
SO I DO SUPPORT WHAT MR. DAWSON'S ASKING, AND HE DOES HAVE A HISTORY AS WELL AS OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS WHEN THIS STARTED TAKING EFFECT.
SO I THINK HE BRINGS UP GOOD COMMENTS, BUT EVEN STRUCTURALLY BY THE BUSINESS ITSELF, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO MEET THE NEW DEMANDS SHOULD THIS BE APPROVED.
SO I WOULD ASK THAT WE GRANDFATHER ALL CLASS A LICENSES AS WELL.
WE'VE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND TRYING TO MEET EVERYBODY ELSE'S BUSINESS PLAN.
I THINK WE JUST NEED TO GO A LITTLE STEP FURTHER AND, AND THAT'S ALL I HAD TO ADD TO THIS LETTER.
THANK YOU COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY, IT'S JUST KIND OF CONVENIENT 'CAUSE I'M GOING DOWN THE LIST HERE.
UM, I'VE SHARED THIS PUBLICLY BEFORE, UM, AND I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO SHARE IT AGAIN.
I COME AT THIS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY, UM, BECAUSE, UM, I WAS AT A STRATEGIC PLANNING MEETING FOR THE, UH, PARK DISTRICT OVER IN THE GARFIELD SCHOOL AREA BECAUSE THERE WAS TO BE A JOINT PARK DISTRICT CITY, UM, UH, COLLABORATION IN THAT AREA.
AFTER THE MEETING, THERE WERE FOUR OR FIVE WOMEN WHO LIVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WHO PULLED ME ASIDE AND SAID, WE WANNA TALK TO YOU ABOUT VIDEO GAMING.
UM, WE ARE REALLY TIRED OF VIDEO GAMING IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE BEEN TARGETED, WE'RE VIDEO GAMING IS CONCERNED.
WE ARE TIRED OF OUR NEIGHBORS, UM, ALWAYS TAKING EVERY LAST TIME THEY HAVE AND PUTTING IT INTO A GAMING MACHINE IN HOPES OF, UM, HAVING A BIG WIN.
AND WE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE CITY CONTINUES TO DO THIS TO US.
SO THAT'S REALLY THE PERSPECTIVE THAT I COME FROM.
UM, THE CITY MANAGER IS CORRECT.
WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS.
WHAT IS HERE TONIGHT IS HIS BEST EFFORT OF TRYING TO TAKE THE VARIED OPINIONS OF SEVEN DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND PUTTING IT DOWN ON PAPER
SO FOR ME, UM, THE FACT THAT I LOOK AT GAMING FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE IS PROBABLY DIFFERENT THAN THE WAY ANYBODY ELSE, MY COLLEAGUES HERE LOOK AT IT.
AND SO FOR ME, HAVING NUMBER THREE HERE THAT PROHIBITS VIDEO GAMING IN CLASS, IN THEATERS AND CLASS K TO ALLOW THAT TO BE THERE WHEN THERE IS ENOUGH VIDEO GAMING IN WHAT OUR DEFINED DOWNTOWN BUS BUSINESS DISTRICT IS, IS, UM, FOR ME A PLUS.
AND I ALSO THINK TAKING A LOOK AT IT, UM, FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF YOU CAN FIND SOMEWHERE TO GAME IN DECATUR, AND IF YOU CAN'T FIND SOMEWHERE TO GAME IN DECATUR, I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO GIVE YOU WHAT'S SITTING ON MY NOSE.
UM, MY INTEREST IS NOT ALLOWING ANY FURTHER EXPANSION OF GAMING.
SO IF WE WERE TO CAP WHERE WE ARE TODAY, UM, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
I BELIEVE I'M THE ONLY PERSON WHO WAS ON THE COUNCIL.
PAT, YOU WEREN'T ON WHEN WE PASSED THIS, WERE YOU? OH, YOU WERE, YES.
SO PAT AND I WERE THE ONLY ONES THAT, THAT WERE ON WHEN THIS HAPPENED.
AND I'VE SAID THIS A FEW TIMES, UM, SO I APOLOGIZE IF I SOUND REDUNDANT, BUT HAD I UNDERSTOOD WHERE GAMBLING WOULD GO, I WOULD'VE FROM THE VERY BEGINNING
[00:40:01]
PUT IN A PERCENTAGE THAT YOU HAD TO BE 51% OF WHATEVER ELSE YOU WERE GOING TO BE.UM, SO THAT WE WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE THE PARLORS BECAUSE AS, AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, THIS WAS MEANT TO SHORE UP THE TAVERNS AND RESTAURANTS THAT HAD SUFFERED THROUGH, YOU KNOW, UM, WE'VE BEEN VERY STRICT ON DRUNK DRIVING, WHICH I FULLY SUPPORT.
YOU COULDN'T SMOKE IN BARS ANYMORE, THEN YOU HAD THE RECESSION OF OH 8, 0 9 AND IT WAS PUTTING BUSINESSES, LONGTIME BUSINESSES OUT OF BUSINESS.
AND SO IF THIS WAS A WAY TO HELP THEM, BUT WE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND EVEN THAT THESE PARLORS WERE POSSIBLE.
I MEAN, IT JUST DIDN'T, NO ONE TOLD US THAT THIS, THIS COULD HAPPEN.
UM, SO SHAME ON US FOR NOT KNOWING AND NOT HAVING A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WAS POSSIBLE IN OTHER COMMUNITIES.
BUT HERE WE ARE TONIGHT AND WE'RE LOOKING AT PUTTING SOME RESTRICTIONS OR MINIMUM, UM, PERCENTAGES ON BUSINESSES THAT HAVE GAMING THAT YOU'VE GOTTA BE, IF YOU'RE NOT A PARLOR, WHICH THOSE THINGS ARE JUST NEVER GONNA GO AWAY, WE'RE JUST KINDA STUCK WITH THEM.
SO WE'RE PUTTING A HIGHER STANDARD ON BUSINESSES THAT ARE ACTUALLY IN THE COMMUNITY AND CONTRIBUTING BACK INTO, INTO OUR COMMUNITY.
AND TO ME, WE SCREWED THIS UP.
WE HAD THE RULES AND WE'VE GOT BUSINESSES WHO FOLLOWED THE RULES, AND NOW WE'RE SAYING, YEAH, WELL, WE DON'T LIKE THE RULES BECAUSE IT ISN'T WHAT WE THOUGHT IT WAS GONNA BE.
SO WE'RE GONNA CHANGE THE RULES REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU'VE PUT INTO PLACE.
AND I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S FAIR TO THE BUSINESSES THAT, YOU KNOW, HAD THEIR BUSINESS PLAN AND THIS WAS PART OF IT, AND THAT'S HOW THEY'RE MAKING ENDS MEET AND MAKING THINGS HAPPEN.
AND GAMING'S NOT MY FAVORITE THING.
I ABSOLUTELY HATE THE ILLEGAL BANNER FLAGS THAT WE CAN'T MANAGE TO PICK UP, UM, EVEN THOUGH THEY VIOLATE A CITY ORDINANCE.
UM, BUT, AND I THINK THAT MAKES IT WORSE, BUT I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO THOSE BUSINESSES THAT WE'RE CHANGING THE RULES THIS FAR INTO THE GAME.
SO CHUCK, SO OBVIOUSLY, UH, WE'RE TRYING TO CAP GAMING.
UM, AND, AND I'M FOR THAT TOO.
AND I WILL JUST TELL YOU A STORY.
ONE NIGHT I WAS AT A BAR AND I SAW A GUY TAKE FOUR $100 BILLS AND STICK ALL FOUR IN THIS MACHINE.
AND MAYBE THAT'S COMMON OCCURRENCE AROUND TOWN, I DON'T KNOW, BUT IT SURE STRUCK ME AND I THOUGHT, THIS GUY DOESN'T NEED TO BE PUTTING FOUR $100 BILLS IN THIS MACHINE.
SO WHEN I SAW THAT, YOU KNOW, I JUST, IT, IT STUCK WITH ME.
SO I, I DO, I WOULD LIKE TO CAP GAMING.
UM, I DON'T WANT IT TO AFFECT THE CURRENT BUSINESSES.
UM, WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE A SITUATION WHERE PEOPLE ARE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF US.
WE SET OUT RULES AND THEY'RE SKIRTING THE RULES.
AND ME PERSONALLY, I DON'T LIKE IT WHEN PEOPLE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF ME.
I KNOW WHEN PEOPLE DO AND I DON'T LIKE IT AND PEOPLE ARE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE CITY AND I DON'T LIKE IT.
AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO HURT PEOPLE THAT ARE OBEYING THE RULES.
AND SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW.
UM, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE A PERFECT RESOLUTION.
I'M FOR GRANDFATHERING IN, UH, THESE BUSINESSES, BUT THERE'S REPERCUSSIONS FOR THAT BECAUSE THERE, THERE'S, IT'S JUST NOT GONNA BE PERFECT NO MATTER WHAT WE DO.
WE'RE GONNA BE STUCK IN A BAD SITUATION.
UM, I MENTIONED THAT I DON'T WANNA PUT GOOD, UH, BUSINESSES OUTTA BUSINESS, BUT I ALSO WANNA BRING UP, AND I JUST WROTE DOWN THE TAXES THAT THE BUSINESSES ARE ALREADY PAYING.
OKAY? THEY'RE PAY, THEY'RE GONNA PAY A PUSH TAX, UH, I BELIEVE, WHAT IS THEIR FIGURE NOW? 1.8 MILLION THAT WE'RE GONNA BRING IN THE CITY? NO, 4.1 MILLION INTO THE CITY THIS YEAR ON IF THE PUSH TAX GOES THROUGH, OKAY, NOT COUNTING THE PUSH TAX, BUT WE'RE, IT'S SOMEWHERE BETWEEN ONE AND A HALF AND $2 MILLION APPROXIMATELY THAT WE'RE GONNA BRING IN TO THE CITY.
SO WE'RE GETTING, WE'RE GONNA GET THE PUSH TAX, WE'RE GONNA GET THE 1.8 MILLION ROUGHLY TERMINAL FEES.
AND ALSO, UH, SOME OF THE PLACES THAT ARE ACTUALLY FOLLOWING THE RULES, WE GET FOOD AND BEVERAGE TAX OFF THAT AS WELL.
SO I'M NOT REALLY IN FAVOR OF RAISING ANYBODY'S TAXES.
THEY'RE ALREADY PAYING ENOUGH.
PEOPLE ARE IN BUSINESS TO MAKE MONEY, OKAY? THEY'RE NOT IN BUSINESS TO GIVE THE CITY MONEY.
SO I DO FEEL THEY'RE PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE IN TAXES AS IT IS.
AND SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO STRIVE FOR IS TO TRY TO GRANDFATHER EVERYBODY IN TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY AND THEN CUT IT OFF.
AND I WOULD THINK ANYBODY HERE THAT OWNS A BUSINESS THAT IS, THAT HAS VIDEO GAMING, I DON'T THINK YOU WANT ANY MORE VIDEO GAMING.
WHY DO YOU WANT MORE COMPETITION?
SO I DON'T THINK CAPPING IS A PROBLEM.
SO SHOULD I ASK THAT LATER? GO AHEAD.
NOW, I GUESS, UH, THE QUESTION I HAD, UH, CITY MANAGER, IN YOUR OPINION, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF
[00:45:01]
WE HAD NO PERCENTAGE OF FOOD? WHAT, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN YOUR OFF THE CUFF? WHAT DO YOU THINK WOULD HAPPEN IF WE HAD NO PERCENTAGE, UH, OF FOOD IN THESE ORDINANCES OR THESE, UM, LICENSES? THE THRESHOLD IS NOT A PERCENTAGE OF FOOD.IT'S A PERCENTAGE OF ANY BUSINESS REVENUE FROM SOME SOURCE OTHER THAN VIDEO GAMING.
UM, IF YOU, I SUPPOSE THAT IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY THRESHOLD AT ALL, THEN YOU RISK MORE OF WHAT HAS ALREADY STARTED TO HAPPEN.
AND THAT IS THAT ESTABLISHMENTS THAT ARE NOT PARLORS BECOME PARLORS, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT CALLED PARLORS.
THEY HAVE A TAVERN LICENSE, BUT THEY'RE EFFECTIVELY A PARLOR.
THEY HAVE A RESTAURANT LICENSE, BUT THEY'RE EFFECTIVELY A PARLOR.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF YOU, IF YOU TOOK IT COMPLETELY OFF WITH, WITH NO ADDITIONAL GUARDRAILS BECAUSE WE ARE SEEING COMMERCIAL GRADE KITCHENS GOING IN, BUT THEY'RE NOT MAKING ANY FOOD.
IT'S, IT'S JUST THE GAMES YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT.
SO THAT, THAT IS WHERE THE THRESHOLD RUNS IN.
BUT FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM NUMBERS THAT THE, THE FINANCE PEOPLE HAVE PULLED, THERE ARE FOUR BUSINESSES THAT ARE NOT HITTING THE 40% THRESHOLD.
SO TO ME, GRANDFATHERING IN FOUR AND CALLING IT A DAY, I WOULD HOPE WOULD NOT CAUSE ADDITIONAL PROBLEMS DOWN THE ROAD.
BUT I DON'T KNOW, THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION.
IT WAS JUST, I WONDERED WHAT IT WOULD BE LIKE.
THE FUTURE OF DECATUR IS NOT GAMBLING, AND MY MAJOR CONCERN IS I DON'T WANT GAMBLING TO HARM OUR CITIZENS.
AND RIGHT NOW, THE PER CAPITA GAMBLING LOSS IS GREATER THAN $650 PER YEAR.
THE HIGHEST OF ANY MUNICIPALITY IN THE STATE, EIGHT GAMBLING CLEARLY IS CONNECTED TO ADDICTION, CRIME AND BANKRUPTCY.
AND NONE OF THOSE SOCIETAL CAUSE HAVE EVER BEEN MEASURED IN THIS CITY.
AND SO IT'S NOT EVEN CLEAR THAT GAMBLING IS A NET POSITIVE FOR THE CITY AND ITS CITIZENS SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES LIKE FORSYTH.
THEY DON'T EVEN ALLOW GAMBLING.
THEY HAVE SOME OF THE HIGHEST REVENUE GENERATING ESTABLISHMENTS IN OUR AREA.
SO THE ECONOMIC ARGUMENT THAT WE NEED GAMBLING IS TENUOUS AT BEST.
I'LL REMIND, UH, MY COLLEAGUES ABOUT A SURVEY THAT WAS CONDUCTED IN WHICH 787 RESIDENTS COMPLETED A FIVE QUESTION SURVEY.
AND IN ADDITION PROVIDED 465 COMMENTS, WHICH WE HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO READ AND THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY.
AND THOSE COMMENTS ARE NEGATIVE TOWARD GAMBLING.
AND IN FACT, AS I'VE ASKED THE CITY STAFF TO DO, I THINK WE SHOULD OPEN UP THAT SURVEY AGAIN.
I AM CONFIDENT THAT THE RESULTS WILL BE CONSISTENT, BUT AS A REMINDER, 85% OF RESPONDENTS BELIEVE THERE ARE TOO MANY GAMBLING ESTABLISHMENTS IN THE CITY, 85%.
AND I'M CONFIDENT THAT THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED IN THIS ORDINANCE WILL NOT ONLY CAP THE NUMBER OF GAMBLING ESTABLISHMENTS, BUT WILL REDUCE THEM OVER TIME.
76% OF RESPONDENTS INDICATED THAT THE CITY SHOULD NOT ISSUE GAMBLING LICENSES TO ESTABLISHMENTS THAT MAY NOT BE ABLE TO STAY OPEN WITHOUT IT.
THIS IS CRITICAL BECAUSE WE TALK ABOUT, UM, THE IMPACT OF A 40% CAP OR A 50% CAP, BUT THE REALITY IS THE CITIZENS DO NOT SUPPORT ISSUING GAMBLING LICENSES TO ESTABLISHMENTS THAT MAY NOT BE ABLE TO STAY OPEN WITHOUT IT.
IT IS RIDICULOUS THAT THE CITY OF DECATUR HAS A WASH AND WIN WHERE YOU CAN GAMBLE, DO LAUNDRY AND DRINK ALCOHOL, AND THAT IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A DISTRESSED NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAVE COFFEE SHOPS THAT YOU CAN HAVE GAMBLING, WE HAVE GAS STATIONS
[00:50:01]
WHERE YOU CAN GAMBLE.I, I THINK SOMEHOW WE HAVE ACCEPTED THE FACT THAT THIS IS NORMAL AND IT ABSOLUTELY IS NOT.
63% OF RESPONDENTS INDICATE THAT THE PRESENCE OF VIDEO GAMBLING DISTRACTS OR DISRUPTS THEIR EXPERIENCE.
THAT IS TO SAY THAT THE BUSINESSES THAT WE ARE SAYING WE NEED TO SUPPORT MAY ACTUALLY BE NEGATIVELY IMPACTING THE EXPERIENCE OF CONSUMERS AND CUSTOMERS.
AND SO IT IS PLAUSIBLE, PERHAPS EVEN LIKELY THAT GAMBLING IS A NET NEGATIVE FOR CITY REVENUE AND THE IMAGE OF OUR CITY.
AS IT PERTAINS TO THE 11 ITEMS THAT ARE IN THE MEMO, THE NUMBER FIVE IS THE ONE THAT I WOULD ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO CHANGE.
IT SAYS THAT ANY ESTABLISHMENT HOLDING A V LICENSE MUST OBTAIN AT LEAST 40% OF THEIR TOTAL BUSINESS REVENUES FROM NON-GAMING SOURCES.
THAT ABSOLUTELY SHOULD BE 50% OR MORE, ABSOLUTELY SHOULD BE 50% OR MORE WITH THE, UM, WITH THE CAVEATS THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE FOR CLUBS OR PARLORS.
CITIZENS SHOULD NOT HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER THEY'RE WALKING INTO A LAUNDROMAT OR A CASINO, WHETHER THEY'RE WALKING INTO A GAS STATION OR A CASINO, WHETHER THEY'RE WALKING INTO A COFFEE SHOP OR A CASINO.
COUNCILMAN COOPER, IS THERE ANY MORE TO SAY?
UM, FIRST I WANNA ASK A QUESTION TO, UM, COUNCILMAN MCDANIELS, UM, ON THE, ON THE THE LATEST, UM, RECOMMENDATION THAT THAT'S JUST COME ACROSS REGARDING, UM, GRANDFATHERING IN CLASS A.
CAN YOU JUST GIMME A LITTLE BIT, UH, WHERE YOU ARE WITH THAT AND IF FOR AGAINST AND WHY? WELL, IF WE GRAND, IF WE GRANDFATHER EVERYBODY IN, AGAIN, THERE'S ONLY FOUR BUSINESSES ACCORDING TO THE, OR THE, THE DATA THAT WILL BE, UM, HURT.
BUT IF WE IMPLEMENT THIS, SOME OF THESE, UH, RESTAURANTS OR, OR UH, BARS, WHATEVER THEY HAVE WILL HAVE A YEAR, IF I'M CORRECT, CITY MANAGER TO UH, BRING IN ADDITIONAL MERCHANDISE THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO A PRODUCT BE ABLE TO BRING THAT UP.
SO AGAIN, IT SOUNDS LIKE EVERYBODY IS DOING, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST, UH, 40% OR MORE THAN FOUR BUSINESSES.
SO, UH, IF WE WANNA SOLVE THE PROBLEM GRANDFATHERING IN SOME OF THESE BUSINESSES THAT ARE REALLY JUST PARLORS IS, IS, UM, UM, IS NOT GONNA WORK.
AND AGAIN, I KNOW PEOPLE HAVE SAID, WELL JUST PICK ON THE ONES THAT AREN'T DOING IT.
THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY IN A YEAR, UH, WHEN IF, IF WE PASS THIS, THIS PORTION OF THE, OF THE ORDINANCE TO BRING, UH, TO GENERATE ADDITIONAL REVENUE IN OTHER SOURCES WITHIN THEIR, UH, BUSINESSES.
SO IF I'M HEARING YOU CORRECTLY, YOU WOULD BE, YOU WOULD BE, YOU WOULD BE AGAINST GRANDFATHERING IN THE FOR, IS THAT CORRECT? EXACTLY.
ONE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE, AND MAYBE IT'S TO THE ATTORNEY, UM, I I I, I'M NOT INDICATING THAT I'M ONE WAY OR THE OTHER AS FAR AS THE GRANDFATHERING ISSUE SINCE IT JUST CAME UP.
SO I'M GONNA THINK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
BUT, UM, IN THE EVENT THAT WAS TO PASS, UM, WOULD THERE BE A WAY, UM, SO NO ONE WOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT IN THE FUTURE OF, UM, NOT ALLOWING ANYBODY ELSE TO GET INTO THE SAME SITUATION THAT THOSE FOUR WOULD BE IN? SO WE, WE HAVE FOUR RIGHT NOW, BUT I MEAN, I GUESS I'M ASKING IS THERE A WAY, IS THERE A WAY FOR THAT FOUR TO INCREASE MORE THAN FOUR? IS THERE A WAY TO PREVENT THAT? WELL, AGAIN, THAT WOULD, STATE MANAGER WAS GONNA MAKE A COMMENT,
[00:55:01]
UH, MAYBE I WAS GONNA MAKE SOME COMMENTS ANYWAY BASED ON WHAT ALL YOU'VE SAID, AND I'LL TRY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION IN THE PROCESS.UM, I I REALLY THINK THAT YOU HAVE TRIED, UH, HARD, UH, TO FIND THAT MIDDLE PATH BETWEEN ACHIEVING YOUR POLICY OBJECTIVE OF REDUCING VIDEO GAMING WITHOUT BEING TOO ONEROUS ON LOCAL BUSINESSES.
AS COUNCILMAN CULP SAID, THE THE REVISIONS HAVE DROPPED THE THE $2,000 V LICENSE AND, AND MADE SEVERAL OTHER CONCESSIONS THAT THAT ACKNOWLEDGED THAT.
UM, UH, WHAT I'VE HEARD AS THE SEVEN OF YOU HAVE HAVE SPOKEN, AND I APPRECIATE ALL THAT FEEDBACK, IS THAT WITH ONE EXCEPTION, THERE'S NO CHANGES THAT DID YOU WANNA MAKE IN THESE 11.
UH, THE ONE CHANGE THAT WAS SUGGESTED BY COUNCILMAN UH, HORN WAS THAT ITEM FIVE BE CHANGED SO THAT IT'S A 50% THRESHOLD INSTEAD OF A 40% THRESHOLD.
I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS, UM, AS AS I TRIED TO RECORD THE RESULTS, THE MAJORITY OF YOU FAVORED 40%.
IF THAT IS AN ERROR AND IT YOU WANT IT TO BE 50%, THEN PLEASE INDICATE THAT THIS EVENING.
SO THAT I, SO THAT I KNOW MOVING FORWARD.
OTHER THAN THAT, UH, I DON'T, I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY OF YOU SAY WELL MAKE RADICAL CHANGES IN NUMBER 11, EXCEPT WITH REGARD TO THE ISSUE THAT COUNCILMAN CULP AND MAYOR MOORE WOLF AND, UH, COUNCILMAN KUHL MADE AND, AND POTENTIALLY COUNCILMAN COOPER ABOUT THE, UM, ABOUT MAYBE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THERE ARE SOME OF THESE BUSINESSES THAT HAVE, ARE FAR BEYOND THE THRESHOLD.
AND, AND WHAT CAN WE DO WITH, WITH THEM? UM, I WANT TO CORRECT THE NUMBERS JUST A LITTLE BIT.
UH, THEY'LL HAVE SEVEN MONTHS, ASSUMING THAT YOU ADOPT IN NOVEMBER, THEY'LL HAVE ABOUT SEVEN MONTHS TO ADJUST THEIR BUSINESS PLANS BECAUSE THE, THE THRESHOLD REQUIREMENT WOULD BEGIN IN ON JULY 1ST OF OF 2024.
UM, THE, WE'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK INTERNALLY AS STAFF TO TRY TO IDENTIFY BOTH WITH NUMBERS PROVIDED BY THE GAMING COMMISSION, WHICH ARE ONLINE AND PUBLIC TO EVERYBODY, AND INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, WHICH IS NOT ONLINE AND WHICH IS NOT AVAILABLE TO EVERYBODY 'CAUSE IT'S PROPRIETARY BUSINESS INFORMATION AS TO WHICH BUSINESSES, UM, WOULD BE IN VIOLATION OF THE THRESHOLD BASED ON THEIR LICENSE.
UM, PS WHICH ARE PARLORS AND CS, WHICH ARE CLUBS IN THIS VERSION OF THE ORDINANCE ARE EXCLUDED AND THEY CAN HAVE, UH, VIDEO GAMING WITHOUT REGARD TO A THRESHOLD.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF BUSINESSES THAT ARE OVER THE THRESHOLD, BUT ONLY SIX ACTUALLY, NOT FOUR, SIX, UH, ARE ARE PAST THE THRESHOLD OF THOSE SIX FOUR ARE TAVERNS.
IN OTHER WORDS, THEY HAVE A CLASS A LICENSE, THE OTHER TWO ARE RESTAURANTS.
AND I WOULD ARGUE THAT IT WAS, THAT IF IT'S AN, FOR A TAVERN TO EVOLVE INTO A PARLOR IS ONE THING FOR A RESTAURANT TO EVOLVE INTO A PARLOR IS SOMETHING ELSE.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE CITY COUNCIL'S INTENTION.
SO HOW DO WE ACHIEVE WHAT COUNCILMAN CULP AND, AND KUHL AND SUGGESTED, YOU COULD SAY, WELL, IN ADDITION TO HAVING EXEMPTED CLASS P AND CLASS C FROM MEETING THE THRESHOLD REQUIREMENT, LET'S DO ALL THE A'S TOO.
I, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE THEN ALL THE TAVERNS, ALL OF THEM, NOT JUST THE FOUR THAT ARE PAST THIS, UH, WOULD BE ABLE TO BE, WOULD, WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE TAVERNS, EXCUSE ME, WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE PARLORS REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEIR, UH, THEIR LICENSE DESIGNATION IS.
YOU COULD FOCUS JUST ON THE FOUR, WHICH I THINK IS PROBLEMATIC, UM, BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY SOME OTHER TAVERNS THAT SEEM TO BE MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION.
A SIMPLER APPROACH, ALTHOUGH PROBLEMATIC TOO MAYBE IS JUST TO SAY, OKAY, OF THOSE FOUR, WHY DON'T WE JUST RECOGNIZE WHAT'S REALLY OUT THERE? AND THAT IS THAT THEY'RE REALLY PARLORS AND JUST GIVE THEM PARLOR LICENSES FOR PARLOR LICENSES.
I MEAN, THOSE ARE ALL, THOSE ARE DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO ACHIEVE WHAT I THINK COUNCILMAN CULP AND KUHL AND MAYBE COOPER AND THE MAYOR ARE TALKING ABOUT, WHICH IS TO SAY, LET'S LET THESE DO IT, BUT DRAW THE LINE AND NOT LET ANY OTHERS PROCEED.
SO I GUESS THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS THAT I'D LIKE TO HAVE COMMENT AND ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION ON, BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE TWO ISSUES THAT STILL AREN'T IN AGREEMENT.
I THINK COUNCILMAN COOPER STILL HAD SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTS HE WANTED TO MAKE BEFORE YOU WERE DOING ALL OF THAT.
AND WE ALSO WANNA HEAR FROM THE CITIZENS THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
SO MR. COOPER, THE FLOOR IS YOURS.
I I I ONLY HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION.
UM, ON ONE OF THE, THE ITEMS IN THE, UM, PROPOSAL ITEM NUMBER, UH, 15, UH, TOILETS, THE LANGUAGE HAS BEEN CHANGED TO READ ALL LICENSED PREMISES RE REGARD REGARDLESS OF CLASS OR CATEGORY EXCEPT FOR TEMPORARY AND CATERING LICENSE AND SHALL HAVE SANITARY TOILETS MAINTAINED IN CLEAN AND SANITARY CONDITION.
IT USED TO INDICATE THAT YOU NEED TO HAVE A ONE FOR MALE AND ONE FOR FEMALE RESPECTIVELY.
IS THERE A REASON WHY THAT WAS CHANGED FROM A MALE AND A FEMALE? IS THERE A PARTICULAR REASON WHY THAT WAS CHANGED TO BRING IN CONFORMANCE WITH ILLINOIS LAW REGARDING NEW CONSTRUCTION? SO WOULD, WOULD THAT BE NEW? SO THIS WOULD BE JUST FOR THOSE THAT THAT WOULD OPEN UP NEW.
[01:00:01]
INVOLVED IN THE DRAFTING.I DON'T KNOW IF AMY W KNOWS THAT OR NOT, IF THIS WAS, UM, ONE OF THE CHANGES OR HOW IT GOT THERE.
UM, AND WHETHER IT ONLY APPLIES TO NEW CONSTRUCTION OR NOT.
GOOD EVENING, COUNSEL AND MAYOR.
UM, THIS BRINGS IT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLUMBING CODE, UM, AS WELL AS WITH MS. MORLAND STATED ILLINOIS STATE LAW, WHICH ONLY REQUIRES UNISEX BATHROOMS. RESTROOMS, UM, THE ORDINANCE WOULD NOT REQUIRE THAT OLD BATHROOMS HAVE TO HAVE BOTH AND NEW BATHROOMS ONLY HAVE TO HAVE ONE UNISEX.
IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD COVER BOTH OLD AND NEW.
SO IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A MALE IN A FEMALE BATHROOM, YOU'RE ABLE TO, BUT THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT UNDER OUR CITY CODE WOULD BE FOR ONE BATHROOM.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? OKAY.
THEN, UH, SHOULD THE LANGUAGE NOT SAY SANITARY TOILETS? SHOULD IT JUST SAY SANITARY TOILET? I APOLOGIZE.
SO YOUR QUESTION IS, SHOULD IT SAY A SINGULAR TOILET AS OPPOSED TO MULTIPLE TOILETS? WELL, I THINK THAT'S GONNA BE DEPENDENT UPON THE PLUMBING CODE ON THE BUSINESS, WHAT IS REQUIRED UNDER THE PLUMBING CODE.
IF THEY'RE ONLY REQUIRED TO HAVE ONE TOILET WITHIN THE BUSINESS, THEY WOULD ONLY BE REQUIRED TO HAVE ONE.
IF THE BUSINESS MODEL IS SUCH THAT THE PLUMBING CODE REQUIRES MORE THAN ONE TOILET IN THE BUSINESS, THEY'D BE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THAT PLUMBING CODE.
OKAY, BUT HOW DOES THAT RELATE TO THE STATE CODE OF HAVING A UNISEX? WELL, I'M NOT TALKING SPECIFICALLY THAT THERE'S A TOILET THAT SAYS MALE AND A TOILET THAT SAYS FEMALE.
I'M TALKING ABOUT WITHIN THE BATHROOM HOW MANY SEATS SOMEBODY HAS TO SIT ON TO UTILIZE THE RESTROOM OR HOW MANY STALLS A SINGULAR BATHROOM HAS TO ENTER INTO.
I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S THE QUESTION YOU'RE ASKING.
I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
IF IT'S ALL RIGHT WITH COUNSEL, I'D LIKE TO INVITE THOSE THAT, UH, SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, TO HAVE THEIR MOMENTS AND THEN WE WILL CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION.
UM, MR. SPES, DID YOU HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTS YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE YOU HAVE AN ADDITIONAL THREE MINUTES? WELL, AFTER LISTENING TO WHAT I JUST HEARD, UM, I'M LOOKING DOWN THE ROAD A LITTLE FARTHER THAN THAT.
UH, I KNOW YOU DON'T WANT IT TO BE A GAMBLING TOWN, DAVID, BUT, AND I DON'T THINK THAT IT WILL BE.
I THINK THIS HAPPENS JUST LIKE THE ILLINOIS STATE LOTTERY, WHEN THEY INTRODUCED THAT AND THAT PUBLIC DID THAT.
EVERYBODY WAS PLAYING IT, LOSING THEIR MONIES AND DOING ALL THAT.
AND THEN IT, IT FLATLINED, IT WENT DOWN.
AND I THINK THAT THE GAMING WILL DO THE SAME THING.
UM, THE REASON, AND ALSO THE REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE I THINK SCOTT'S GROUP IS DOING A GOOD JOB IN GETTING MORE BUSINESSES HERE, MORE THINGS FOR THE PEOPLE TO DO TO SPEND THEIR MONEY ELSEWHERE.
BECAUSE AS OF RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, THE CUSTOMERS I GET, THEY SAY THERE'S NOTHING ELSE TO DO IN DECATUR.
SO WE COME DOWN HERE TO HAVE FUN, WE GAMBLE, BOOM, BABOOM.
SO BY HIM BRINGING MORE BUSINESSES HERE, GIVING THEM MORE OF A VARIETY OF PLACES TO SPEND THEIR MONEY, HAVE FUN, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE WANTING TO DO.
I, MY PLACE IS A A, IT GENERATES A WHOLE LOT OF SENIOR CITIZENS AND YEAH, THEY DON'T WANT TO BE AROUND ALL THOSE KIDS WHILE THEY'RE GAMBLING.
THEY WANT TO BE IN A PLACE THAT'S ALMOST LIKE A MINI CASINO.
SO THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, THE PARLORS ARE SO FAVORED TO GO TO RATHER THAN A RESTAURANT OR A BAR.
THEY DON'T WANT TO GO TO THE BARS BECAUSE THE ELEMENTS AT THE BAR ARE NOT SOMETIMES SAFE TO THEM.
YOU KNOW, LIQUOR DRINKING AT MY PLACE, THEY DON'T DO VERY MUCH LIQUOR DRINKING.
THEY JUST GET FREE POPS, FREE CHIPS, CANDIES, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A, A NICE SETTING FOR THEM.
AND THAT'S WHERE THEY LIKE TO GO AT THESE PARLORS AND PLAY IF THEY FEEL SAFE THERE.
UM, I ALSO WANT TO BEG THE DIFFERENCE WITH YOU ON THE FEES.
UM, I KIND OF CHECKED AROUND ON THE
[01:05:01]
SURROUNDING TOWNS, THE CITIES AND OUR FEES ARE WAY MORE THAN THEIRS.AND I, I GOT IT DOCUMENTED ON WHAT THEY CHARGE FOR LIQUOR LICENSE AND ALL THAT.
I THINK THE, THE HIGHEST ONE IS CHAMPAGNE AND THERE'S $4,200 FOR THEIR LIQUOR LICENSE.
THEY DON'T HAVE, SO TO SPEAK, RECOGNIZE GAMING PARLORS.
THEY JUST GIVE A CERTAIN, WELL, CERTAIN LIQUOR LICENSE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE GAMES.
WE'RE THE ONLY ONES I THINK THAT HAS THE P LICENSE FOR THE PARLORS.
SO, I MEAN, OURS RIGHT NOW IS HIGH ENOUGH.
THE 6,000 IS, IS WAY MORE THAN ENOUGH.
UM, AND TO BLAST JUST THE PARLORS.
WELL, AGAIN, WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN, JUST LIKE YOU GUYS DIDN'T KNOW.
WE JUST, YOU BROUGHT THE IDEA TO US AND WE TEAMED UP WITH YOU INVESTED OUR MONEY AND WE WON.
I AM ONE OF THE FOUR THAT HAVE BEEN SPOKEN OF.
I'M CARL MINCH, CO-OWNER OF LINDY LOUS IN SOUTH SHORES.
UH, WE DO HAVE A CLASS A LICENSE.
UH, WE'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS SINCE 2013 AS A SMALL TAVERN.
UH, WE'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS FOR OVER 10 YEARS WITH LOCAL OWNERSHIP.
WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN COMPLIANT WITH THE REGULATIONS THAT STIPULATED WHEN WE FIRST OPENED AND WERE LICENSED OUR BUILDINGS.
WE'VE INVESTED OVER A HALF MILLION DOLLARS IN, IN, IN OUR BUILDING.
WE'RE CONTINUALLY COMPLIMENTED.
WE'VE WON AWARDS FOR ALL OF OUR LANDSCAPING.
UH, THE COMMUNITY CONTINUES TO TELL US HOW NICE IT LOOKS.
WE HAVE GREAT LOOKING FACILITIES.
UH, IN 2012 WHEN THE LOCAL TAVERNS AND RESTAURANTS WERE CLOSING FROM REDUCED ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION AND D U I CONCERNS THE STATE OF ILLINOIS AND THE CITY OF DECATUR ALLOWED TO START A VIDEO GAMING FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING OTHER REVENUE SOURCES THAN JUST THE SALE OF ALCOHOL.
WITHOUT THE GAMING, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CONTINUE OUR OPERATION OF, WE'LL BE FORCED TO CLOSE THE NEW CITY COUNCIL REGULATIONS REQUIRING AT LEAST 40% OF THE REVENUE FOR NON-GAMING SOURCES WILL SHUT US DOWN BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ABLE TO MEET THE 40%.
WE ALSO OPERATE TWO OTHER LOCATIONS, LULU'S PIZZA, ONE ON NELSON AND ONE ALSO IN SOUTH SHORES.
THEY BOTH HAVE CLASS G LICENSES.
WE ARE COMPLETELY AND FULLY COMPLIANT WITH THOSE LICENSES.
WE HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THE PERCENTAGES WITH THOSE.
WE ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A RESTAURANT, FULLY RESTAURANT AT THOSE FACILITIES.
WE WOULD ASK CITY COUNCIL TO GRANDFATHER EXISTING CLASS A LICENSES IN WITH THE NEW REGULATIONS.
WE HAVE NEVER BEEN ADVISED TO CHANGE OUR CLASS A LICENSE BASED ON OUR REVENUE SOURCES BECAUSE OF VIDEO GAMING.
THE P LICENSE DID NOT COME OUT UNTIL SEVERAL YEARS AFTER WE HAD A CLASS A LICENSE.
WE'VE ALWAYS OPERATED UNDER A CLASS A.
THE CITY COUNCILS WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE LOCAL OWNERSHIP, BUT THE NEW REGULATIONS WILL ELIMINATE OUR LOCALLY OWNED A ESTABLISHMENT.
CITY COUNCILS WOULD ALSO LIKE TO RESTRICT THE EXPANSION OF FUTURE GAMING, BUT THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS WILL ELIMINATE OUR CURRENT BUSINESS.
THE NEW REGULATIONS WILL, WILL ALSO ENSURE THAT THE CLOSURE OF THE GAMING, OR WILL ENSURE THE CLOSURE OF THE GAMING NUMBERS WILL NOT DECREASE, BUT WILL ONLY WITH OUR CLOSURE.
THE GAMING NUMBERS WILL NOT DECREASE.
THEY WILL ONLY GO TO THE LARGER OUT OF TOWN OWNERSHIP GROUPS AND ELIMINATE JOBS FOR OUR EMPLOYEES.
THE CITY OF DECATUR WILL NOT LOSE ITS CUT OF GAMING, BUT IT WILL LOSE THE JOBS THAT PEOPLE COUNT ON.
WE'RE CURRENTLY OPEN APPROXIMATELY 120 HOURS EACH WEEK.
THE CLOSURE OF LINDY LS WILL CAUSE THE LOSS OF SEVERAL FULL AND PART-TIME JOBS.
THE CLOSURE OF L OF LINDY LS COULD ALSO CAUSE THE CLOSURE OF LULUS FOR WHICH 25 OR 30 PEOPLE COULD LOSE THEIR JOBS.
WE PROPOSE THAT AN AMENDMENT TO NEW REGULATIONS ALLOW
I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR TO ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION ON THE ITEMS. UM, DR HAD ASKED FOR A 50%, UM, MINIMUM.
UH, IS THERE SUPPORT FOR THAT OR MR. MCDANIEL? JUST CLARIFICATION UNDER OUR PRESENT, UH, UH, ORDINANCE, UH, RESTAURANTS HAVE TO DO 50% OF THEIR BUSINESS TO KEEP A LIQUOR LICENSE, RIGHT? THEY HAVE TO DO 50% FROM FOOD AND NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, AND THEY WOULD STILL HAVE THAT REQUIREMENT IN ADDITION TO WHATEVER THRESHOLD YOU WOULD APPROVE HERE WITH REGARD TO VIDEO GAMING.
[01:10:03]
UH, SO GOING BACK TO THE 50% REQUIREMENT THAT DR.HORN RECOMMENDED, IS THERE ANY SUPPORT FOR THAT? I'M NOT SEEING THAT.
SO I THINK THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL WOULD BE, UM, WITH THE 40% THRESHOLD.
UM, AND I'M NOT SURE THAT, UH, MR. COOPER HAS MADE HIS MIND UP ON GRANDFATHERING OR DO YOU NEED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THROUGH THE NEXT, WE WON'T BE VOTING ON THIS UNTIL THE FIRST, PROBABLY THE FIRST MEETING IN NOVEMBER.
SO WE, WE DO HAVE ADDITIONAL TIME FOR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, UH, FROM STAFF.
UM, I DON'T REALLY HAVE A A GOOD SENSE AS FAR AS WHO IS IN FAVOR RIGHT NOW OTHER THAN I KNOW PAT'S NOT IN FAVOR OF IT.
IS THERE A WAY WE CAN FIND OUT HOW MANY ARE IN FAVOR OF GRANDFATHERING VERSUS HOW MANY, IF NOT, I MEAN, IT'S JUST FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES, COUNCILMAN KULA HAS ASKED FOR SOME CLARIFICATION.
GRANDFATHERING IN WHAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT THAN MOVING THESE CLASS A TO CLASS P AND OPENING? WE, WE HAVE A LIMIT ON CLASS P RIGHT NOW.
WE HAVE CAPTURED CA SO WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE ACTION TO UNC CAP IT AND MOVE AND THEN CAP IT AGAIN.
IS THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GRANDFATHERING IN? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE COUNCILMAN CULP? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE THINKING? OR ARE WE JUST GONNA KEEP THEM CLASS A AND LET THEM DO WHAT THEY'RE DOING? WELL, MY, MY INITIAL, UM, THOUGHT WAS TO GRANDFATHER THE FOR CLASS A THAT WE HAVE QUESTION ABOUT IF CLASS P IS AN OPTION AND CITY STAFF THINKS THAT'S A BETTER AVENUE, I I'M OPEN FOR THAT TOO.
MY BIGGEST THING IS THESE FOLKS BEEN OBEYING THE RULES SET BY CLASS A AND I DON'T WANT TO GO IN AND CHANGE THE RULES AND CHANGE THEIR BUSINESS PLAN, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JOBS.
PAT, REMEMBER, CLASS P'S ARE NON-TRANSFERRABLE.
SO ONCE SOMEBODY CLOSES THEIR BUSINESS, THAT THAT P CANNOT BE TRANSFERRED.
SO THE VALUE OF THE VALUE OF THE BUSINESS COULD BE JEOPARDIZED.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, PAT? YES.
I GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE OWNERS OF THOSE BUSINESSES HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT THAT WOULD BE MY NEXT QUESTION.
WELL, WE MAY NEED TO, UM, TAKE ADDITIONAL TIME THEN IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS TO, TO HEAR IF THAT IS A MORE VIABLE ACTION.
I, AND SINCE THIS IS, YOU KNOW, STILL PRETTY FLUID, MR. COOPER, UH, PAT ON YOUR LAST RESPONSE, NOTHING PROHIBITS THE COUNCIL, HOWEVER, THOUGH, FROM CH CHANGING THAT.
BUT THAT WOULD BE WELL, NO, THE COUNCIL CAN DO, BUT AGAIN, THAT'S THE REASON WE PUT, UH, UH, PUT THAT INTO EFFECT, UH, THAT PARLORS ARE NON-TRANSFER, UH, LICENSE ARE NON-TRANSFERRABLE.
AND UH, THAT BRINGS UP THE SUBJECT OF, LIKE MR. SPES WAS SAYING, YOU KNOW, WHY DO WE CHARGE AS MUCH AS WE DO FOR PARLORS? UH, WHEN WE, UH, PARLORS DO NOT CREATE, THEY HAVE TO SERVE LIQUOR.
THEY CAN I GUESS GIVE IT AWAY, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, BUT THEY'RE NOT CREATING ANY FOOD AND BEVERAGE TAXES COMPARED TO A RESTAURANT OR A REGULAR BAR.
SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A, A HIGHER FEE ON, UH, THAT WE PUT A HIGHER FEE ON PARLOR'S LICENSE.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY.
SO IF THEY WERE ALLOWED TO MOVE TO A CLASS P, UM, THEN THAT DOES, IT ALLOWS THEN FOR EXPANSION OF GAMBLING, UNLESS YOU GO BACK AND YOU CAP OR REDUCE THE LICENSE THAT THEY HELD.
AND SO MY GOAL HERE IS NO EXPANSION.
AND SO ADDITIONAL WORK WOULD NEED TO BE DONE IF THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL AGREES FOR THAT.
AND THE CLASS P LICENSE IS FAR MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE EXISTING LICENSE THAT THEY ARE HOLDING NOW THAT, THAT'S JUST THE STATEMENT.
SO IS COUNSEL BASICALLY SAYING THAT WE HAVE A LITTLE MORE LEGWORK TO DO TO SEE IF THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE FOUR BUSINESSES BECAUSE THEY MAY NOT WANT TO MOVE IN THIS DIRECTION? IS THAT, CAN WE GET SOME FEEDBACK, MR. WRIGHTON, FROM THOSE FOUR THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED? YEAH, THERE'S THREE WEEKS BETWEEN, UH, THIS EVENING'S MEETING AND YOUR NEXT MEETING.
WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING IS THAT THE 11 ITEMS ARE ALL FINE, BUT THAT WE CONSIDER DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR DEALING WITH THE FOUR, NOT THE SIX, BUT THE FOUR THAT ARE A'S OPERATING REALLY AS A PARLOR.
WHETHER OR NOT, UM, GIVING THEM A P CONSTITUTES AN EXPANSION IS, IS A, IS AN ARGUABLE POINT, I THINK BECAUSE, BECAUSE THEY ARE, UH, I MEAN IF THEY'RE, IF THEY'RE PARLORS,
[01:15:02]
UM, BUT IF THEY'RE A'S BUT THEY'RE REALLY PARLORS, THEN A PARLOR IS A PARLOR IS A PARLOR.AND, AND, AND SO IT, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE QUESTION IS WHAT'S THE BEST MECHANISM TO ACHIEVE WHAT I THINK THE COUNCIL WANTS, WHICH JUST TO FREEZE THINGS.
AND, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT I HEAR ALL, ALL OF YOU SAYING.
I DON'T CONSIDER MOVING SOMEBODY THAT'S ACTING LIKE A PARLOR TO AN ACTUAL PARLOR.
WHAT I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THEN IS THAT LEAVES AN AVAILABLE LICENSE IN THE CLASS THAT THEY HELD, WHICH MEANS THAT IF YOU DID NOT REDUCE THAT CLASS BY ONE, YOU WOULD BE ALLOWING SOMEONE ELSE TO COME IN.
IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED EXPANSION.
AND SO IF WE WERE TO INCREASE THE PARLORS BY FOUR, WE SHOULD DECREASE THE A'S BY FOUR.
SO ARE THERE MAJOR, WE DO HAVE LIKE A REALLY FULL AGENDA TO CONTINUE.
WE'VE GOT A LOT MORE POINTS, BUT, UM, FOR THE MOST PART, AND I WILL GET TO YOU COUNCILMAN HORNE, UM, EVERYBODY ELSE GOOD WITH THE DIRECTION WE'RE GOING? I'M SEEING, OKAY, DR.
HORNE, DID YOU HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENT? WELL, FOR THE RECORD, I AM STRONGLY OPPOSED TO GRANDFATHERING IN CLASS A LICENSES OR ADDING CLASS P LICENSES.
BANKRUPTCY AND CRIME ARE NOT BASED ON WHERE THE GAMBLING TAKES PLACE.
ADDICTION COST, JOBS, CRIME RUINS, FAMILIES.
WE HAVE GOT A GAMBLING PROBLEM IN THE CITY OF DECATUR, AND I THINK YOU CAN SUM IT UP IN THE WORDS OF THE DEVELOPER OF, UH, ESTABLISHMENT WHERE YOU CAN DO LAUNDRY, GAMBLE, AND DRINK ALCOHOL IN THE SAME LOCATION.
THIS IS THE DEVELOPER'S QUOTE, POPULATION DECLINES IN THE CITY.
AN AREA REQUIRE REACTION FROM RETAILERS.
END QUOTE AND FURTHER STATES QUOTE, UNDER DIFFICULT POPULATION CIRCUMSTANCES, WE HAVE BEEN WILLING TO STAY ENGAGED AND RESPOND TO CHANGING NEEDS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT.
TO BE CLEAR, SLOT MACHINES ARE NOT AN INVESTMENT FOR CITIZENS.
AND GIVEN THAT DECATUR IS ONE OF THE POOREST CITIES IN ILLINOIS, IT IS REASONABLE TO ASSUME THAT A LARGE AMOUNT OF THE GAMBLING REVENUE IS FROM POOR INDIVIDUALS THAT LIVE IN BLIGHTED NEIGHBORHOODS.
WHAT'S BEING DISCUSSED HERE IS ESSENTIALLY
OKAY, AND WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON BACK TO MR. WRIGHT.
ARE YOU CLEAR? YOU LOOK LIKE I'M CONFUSING YOU.
UNLESS COUNSEL HAS ANY OTHER DIRECTIONS THAT THEY WANNA MAKE.
WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO ITEM ONE, WHICH IS DISCUSSION ITEM.
OKAY, WE'LL GIVE IT A SECOND FOR A FEW PEOPLE TO EXIT THE CHAMBERS.
CAN'T IMAGINE THEY DON'T WANNA STAY FOR THE PROPERTY TAX DISCUSSION.
[1. Discussion Item: 2024 Property Tax Levy & Aggregate Expenditure/Revenue Analysis]
DOWN TO THE LAST COUPLE PEOPLE LEAVING THE CHAMBER.SO WE ARE MOVING TO ITEM ONE, DISCUSSION ITEM, ANOTHER NON-ACTION ITEM TONIGHT, 2024, PROPERTY TAX LEVY AND AGGREGATE EXPENDITURE REVENUE ANALYSIS.
MR. WRIGHT MAYOR COUNSEL, UH, OUR STAFF IS STILL WORKING DILIGENTLY ON PUTTING TOGETHER THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR F Y 24.
UH, BUT AT THIS JUNCTURE IN THAT PROCESS, HISTORICALLY THE STAFF HAS BROUGHT TO THE CITY COUNCIL SEVERAL DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR PROPERTY TAX LEVY, UH, WHICH HAS TO BE PREPARED AND ADOPTED, UH, BEFORE THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR FOR 2024.
I'VE, UH, I'VE NEVER REALLY BEEN COMPLETELY COMFORTABLE WITH THE WAY THAT WE BRING YOU THE PROPERTY TAX LEVY BECAUSE I THINK THAT YOU EVALUATED IN A VACUUM.
AND, UH, SO WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO DO IS EXPAND THE CONVERSATION A LITTLE BIT, NOT TO GO INTO THE, INTO THE NITTY GRITTY LINE ITEM, DETAILS OF THE BUDGET BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE IT AND WE'RE NOT READY TO DO THAT YET.
BUT IN TERMS OF GENERAL REVENUE PLANNING, UH,
[01:20:01]
THE PROPERTY TAX IS ONE COMPONENT OF THE OVERALL GENERAL GOVERNMENTAL EXPENSES OF THE, OF THE CITY.AND SO I WANTED TO PUT IT IN THE CONTEXT OF, OF SOME RECOMMENDED, UH, ALTERNATIVE REVENUES FOR THE GENERAL FUND AND, AND BASICALLY SUGGEST THAT, UH, THAT YOU TAKE A CERTAIN OPTION WITH THE PROPERTY TAX AND THEN LINK THAT WITH SOME OTHER REVENUES SO THAT WE CAN, UH, ACHIEVE A, A BALANCED BUDGET MOVING FORWARD.
THE CITY HAS BEEN FORTUNATE TO HAVE IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, SEVERAL MAJOR INDUSTRIES MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT LOCATING IN DECATUR.
UM, THE INVESTMENT THAT THEY WILL MAKE WILL TAKE A WHILE TO GET ON THE TAX ROLLS.
THE PEOPLE THAT THEY EMPLOY WILL TAKE A WHILE TO BE HOUSED AND TO BE GENERATING ECONOMIC ACTIVITY IN RETAIL AND, AND OTHER WAYS IN OUR COMMUNITY.
UM, AND AS A RESULT, SOME OF THE, A LOT OF THE INVESTMENT THAT WILL CREATE THAT TAX BASE AND WILL, SOME OF WHICH WILL COME TO THE CITY, IS STILL A COUPLE OF YEARS AWAY.
AND IN A SENSE, WE SORT OF HAVE TO BUILD A BRIDGE TO 2027 WHEN ALL OF THOSE FEATURES ARE ON THE, UH, ARE ON THE TAX ROLLS.
AND SO THE EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE WE PREDICT, AND THIS IS NOT JUST A STAFF ANALYSIS, WE'VE, UM, THE C F O HAS WORKED CLOSELY WITH THE COUNTY AND I, AND WE THINK WE'RE PRETTY CLOSE ON WHAT THE E A V IS GONNA BE.
IT'S GONNA BE IN THAT 11 TO 12% RANGE.
THAT'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT INCREASE OVER WHAT IT'S BEEN IN IN PREVIOUS YEARS WHEN IT WAS CERTAINLY NOWHERE NEAR THAT AND SOMETIMES IT WAS GOING IN THE NEGATIVE DIRECTION.
AND SO WHAT MANY TAXING BODIES DO IS THEY INCREASE THEIR LEVIES IN, IN AN, IN AN AMOUNT THAT IS PROPORTIONAL WITH THE INCREASE IN THE EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE.
UM, PROPERTY TAXES ARE NOT POPULAR TAXES, BUT, UM, WE, WE RELY ON THEM FOR, FOR FIVE FUNCTIONS, UH, FOUR OF THEM.
REALLY THE KEY FUNCTIONS, THE THE MUNICIPAL BAND IS, IS NOT A, IS NOT A MAJOR FUNCTION AT ALL.
UH, MOST OF THE MONEY GOES TO PAY FOR PUBLIC SAFETY PENSIONS, AND ANOTHER PORTION OF THE, OF THE TAX LEVY GOES TO PAY FOR GENERAL FUND DEBT RETIREMENT.
AND ANOTHER, ANOTHER PIECE OF THE PIE GOES TO THE PUBLIC LIBRARY.
AND, UH, AND THE DEMANDS, ESPECIALLY ON, ON PUBLIC SAFETY, PENSIONS HAVE GROWN SIGNIFICANTLY EVERY YEAR, USUALLY IN THE AGGREGATE IN EXCESS OF, OF WELL IN EXCESS OF A MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR IN TERMS OF THE INCREASES.
AND, AND, AND THAT MEANS THAT IN ORDER TO KEEP THE PROPERTY TAX EVEN REASONABLY LEVEL, THEN THOSE INCREASES HAVE TO BE CARVED OUT OF OTHER PORTIONS OF THE GENERAL FUND.
AND WE CHOSE TO DO THAT WITH OUR EYES WIDE OPEN DURING PANDEMIC BECAUSE, WELL, BECAUSE IT WAS PANDEMIC
AND WE'RE NOW AT A POINT WHERE I'M, I'M GONNA RECOMMEND THAT WE, UH, UH, TAKE THE 7%, THE, THE LOWEST OF THE THREE OPTIONS, STILL WELL BELOW THE E A V AND THEN LINK IT WITH SOME ADDITIONAL, UH, REVENUE ENHANCEMENTS IN THE GENERAL FUND IN ORDER TO GET THE GENERAL FUND WHERE I THINK IT, IT IS STRONGEST, STRONGEST, NOT ONLY IN TERMS OF JUST MEETING OUR EXPENSES BECAUSE WE, WE AREN'T THAT FAR OFF, BUT, UH, FROM HOW HAVING BALANCE.
BUT, UH, RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE BALANCE IN, IN A WAY THAT INCLUDES THE SPECIAL PROJECTS RESERVE THAT I KNOW COUNCIL WANTS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE IN ORDER TO, TO BE, UH, TO MAKE A DECISIVE DIFFERENCE IN SOME OF THE, UH, HOUSING AND OTHER, UM, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES THAT WE'RE GONNA NEED TO BE DOING MOVING FORWARD.
UH, WE HAVE, UH, UH, CAPITAL REPLACEMENT ITEMS THAT JUST KEEP COMING UP YEAR, YEAR OVER YEAR.
THIS LAST YEAR IT WAS THE MUNICIPAL SERVICE CENTER ROOF AND THE LIBRARY ROOF.
AND NEXT YEAR WE, WE NEED TO DEAL WITH, WITH PARKING DECKS AND SOME OTHER SIMILAR SORTS OF, OF, UM, OF, OF CAPITAL REPLACEMENTS THAT JUST COME UP EVERY EVERY YEAR.
UM, THE MAYOR, UH, REMEMBERS BETTER THAN I DO.
THE, WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE, UH, WHEN WE HAVE DEFERRED MAJOR CAPITAL, ESPECIALLY ROLLING STOCK, UH, AND, AND, AND SEEING WHAT THAT HAPPENS.
IN ORDER TO KEEP UP, WE NEED TO MAKE SOME CHANGES THAT WE HAVE DEFERRED FOR, FOR SEVERAL YEARS.
AND SO, UH, RUBY AND I HAVE PUT TOGETHER THESE, THESE OPTIONS FOR PROPERTY TAXES, WHICH, WHICH FOLLOW, I THINK IT TOWARDS THE END OF THE, UM, IT'S NOT TOWARDS THE END, IT'S TOWARDS, IT'S, I THINK IT'S RIGHT AFTER, MAYBE IT'S RIGHT AFTER THE MEMO OR IT'S AFTER THE PIE CHARTS, IT'S RIGHT AFTER THE PIE CHARTS.
THE, THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS ARE.
BUT I WANT YOU TO SEE THESE OPTIONS, LIKE I SAID, IN THE CONTEXT OF, OF THE ENTIRE GENERAL FUND BUDGET.
AND, UH, I'VE ALSO RECOMMENDED SOME, UH, SOME SPECIFIC REVENUE CATEGORIES FOR YOU TO CONSIDER IN THE GENERAL FUND.
I'D LIKE TO FOCUS IN ON ONE IN PARTICULAR.
I MEAN, THE, THE, THE STREAMING TAX AND THE, AND THE STORAGE, UH, ITEM ARE, I THINK ARE FAIRLY SELF-EXPLANATORY.
BUT I WANNA FOCUS IN A LITTLE BIT ON THE BUSINESS LICENSE OF STRATEGY.
THE CITY LICENSES BUSINESSES GENERALLY, WITH SOME EXCEPTIONS, BUT GENERALLY THOSE THAT THE STATE LAW ALLOWS US TO DO, SUCH AS PLACES OF AMUSEMENT AND LIQUOR LICENSE
[01:25:01]
ESTABLISHMENTS AND HOTELS AND CERTAIN OTHER ONES.WHAT WE DON'T DO AND WHAT WHAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO DO AS A HOME RURAL CITY IS HAVE A GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE FOR EVERY ANYBODY WHO IS IN BUSINESS.
NOW, I PROPOSE SOMETHING ONLY NOMINAL, UH, AND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY FROM THOSE NOMINAL FEES WOULD NOT BRING IN THAT MUCH.
IT'S, I MEAN, COUNCIL HAS MADE IT FAIRLY CLEAR THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO CREATE IMPEDIMENTS TO, TO BUSINESS IN TERMS OF SOME OF THE FEES THAT, THAT WE CHARGE.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE DISCOVERED IN PART FROM OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH, UH, WITH A COMPANY THAT DOES A LOT OF THE EXTERNAL AUDITING, ESPECIALLY FOR LIQUOR LICENSES AND, AND A FEW OTHERS THAT PERFORM THESE SORTS OF BUSINESS AUDITS IN OTHER CITIES IN DOWNSTATE ILLINOIS, IS THAT THERE IS, THERE ARE SEVERAL BUSINESSES THAT ARE JUST OPERATING UNDER THE RADAR THAT, UM, AREN'T PAYING PROPERTY TAX ARGUING BY, BY USING AN ADDRESS THAT'S OUTSIDE THE CITY SOMEHOW, OR NOT FILING THEIR ILLINOIS BUSINESS TAX WITH, WITH D O R AND, AND COLLECTING, UH, SALES TAXES, EVEN IN ONE CASE A BUSINESS NOT CHARGING MOTOR FUEL, FUEL TAXES.
AND SO WHAT'S WHAT'S IMPORTANT, I THINK, IS NOT THAT WE INCREASE FEES, IT'S NOT, AND, AND I GAVE YOU A COPY OF, OF ALL THE FEES YOU HAD ASKED FOR THAT LAST YEAR, AND IT WAS A GOOD REQUEST, WE SHOULD HAVE THAT.
BUT I THINK YOU'LL SEE IN MOST OF THOSE FEES IS THAT MOST OF THEM ARE FOR, ARE FOR TRANSACTIONS WE NEED TO TRACK.
IT'S VERY, IT'S NOT REALLY ABOUT THE MONEY OF THOSE FEES, IT'S BECAUSE WE NEED TO COME AND LOOK AT SOMETHING OR, OR VERIFY SOMETHING OR HAVE CERTAIN DATA.
THERE'S, UM, BUT WHAT HAVING A BUSINESS LICENSE DOES IS MAKES US, IT GIVES THE CITY THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, DO YOU HAVE A BUSINESS LICENSE NUMBER? SO THAT IF YOU'RE, SO THAT, THAT WAY THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE KNOWS THAT YOU SHOULD BE CHARGING SALES TAXES IF YOU ARE A RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT, UM, IS THE BUSINESS CITED IN THE CITY IF IN FACT THE CITY IS, UH, IS IF IT'S IN THE CITY AND, AND SO FORTH.
AND, AND WHAT AS OF OUR HAS, HAS TOLD US IS THAT CITIES SIMILARLY SITUATED CAN, UH, ARE, ARE MISSING CERTAIN AMOUNTS OF REVENUE.
SO IT'S NOT A MATTER OF INCREASING ANY FEES, IT'S A MATTER OF EQUALLY APPLYING ALL THE FEES SO THAT IT'S FAIR ACROSS THE BOARD.
SO THE REASON THAT I RECOMMEND A BUSINESS LICENSE STRATEGY IS FIRST BECAUSE OF THAT FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS, AND EVERYBODY SHOULD BE PAYING THE, THE SAME FEES AS EVERYBODY ELSE, AND NOT, NOT TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO, TO RUN UNDER THE RADAR AND NOT PAY IT.
THE SECOND REASON RELATES TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION STRATEGY, AS WE SAW WITH THE WALRUS BUILDING AND, AND SOME OTHERS BUILDINGS, THAT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, I'M ONLY TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS NOW, SOMETIMES, UH, MANY TIMES ARE GOING UNINSPECTED FOR YEARS BECAUSE THEY HAPPEN TO HOUSE A BUSINESS THAT IS NOT ONE OF THE ONES THAT HAS, HAS, HAS TO HAVE A LICENSE FROM US.
AND SO THERE'S NO LEGAL REASON, THERE'S NO ORDINANCE REASON FOR US TO BE IN THOSE BUSINESSES TO CONDUCT THE SAFETY INSPECTIONS AND TO NOTICE THAT A BUILDING HAS, HASN'T BEEN TUCK POINTED IN FIVE DECADES AND, AND MIGHT BE, MIGHT BE HAVING STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS AS A RESULT OF THAT.
SO IT, UH, IT SERVES THOSE TWO PURPOSES TOGETHER.
UM, I PROVIDED SOME ANALYSIS, SOME, SOME REVENUE ESTIMATES OF IT.
IT WOULD TAKE US A WHILE TO, TO RAMP UP TO IT, BUT, UH, I, I RECOMMEND OPTION ONE THAT THE, THE 7% ON PROPERTY TAXES, BUT ONLY IF IT'S LINKED WITH SOME OF THESE OTHER REVENUE IDEAS.
AND IF WE'RE NOT ABLE TO, IF YOU'RE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH MOVING SOME OF THOSE, THEN PERHAPS WE WOULD LOOK AT THE ALTERNATIVE, UM, OPTION FOR PROPERTY TAXES.
UM, BUT I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE HISTORICALLY, YOU KNOW, WANTED TO KEEP PROPERTY TAXES AS LOW AS POSSIBLE.
SO LET, LET ME OFFER THAT AS A STARTING POINT.
I GUESS MY STARTING POINT IS HOW MUCH DO WE NEED? BECAUSE QUITE HONESTLY, GOVERNMENT CAN SPEND AS MUCH AS IT CAN GET ITS HANDS ON.
THERE'S ALWAYS MORE TO BUY, MORE TO DO MORE TO THINGS THAT WE, YOU KNOW, JUST BECAUSE WE CAN.
SO I, I APPRECIATE THE LOWER, UM, GOING FOR THE LOWER AMOUNT BECAUSE I MEAN, WE CAN SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, AND WE'VE BEEN VERY BLESSED IN RECENT YEARS THAT WE'VE HAD A LOT OF MONEY COMING IN, WHICH WE KNEW WOULD COME TO AN END AT SOME POINT, BUT WE JUST, I, THAT, THAT'S ONE OF MY QUESTIONS.
AND ON THE BUSINESS LICENSE FEE, DO WE HAVE A STAFF FOR THAT? IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE ADDED A WHOLE LOT OF THINGS IN RECENT YEARS THAT WE EXPECT STAFF TO DO AND DO AND DO.
AND, AND MEANWHILE, I, I DON'T, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE AUDIT IS HIRING A COMPANY AND DOING THAT.
THE COMPANY THAT GOES AROUND AND LOOKS AT THIS, BUT WHO'S GONNA DO ALL THIS? SO THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE GOOD QUESTIONS.
IN THE E EXCUSE ME, IN THE MEMO I MENTIONED THAT THE, THAT I'M RECOMMENDING THAT WE COME UP WITH REVENUE EQUIVALENT OF ABOUT TWO TO $3 MILLION A YEAR.
I MENTIONED THAT A COUPLE OF PLACES.
IN ANSWER TO YOUR FIRST QUESTION, THE, UM, NEED FOR ADDITIONAL STAFF, WHETHER IT'S, UH, OUTSOURCED TO THE COMPANIES THAT WE USE NOW, OR INSOURCED, UH, WITH, WITH AN EMPLOYEE IS TRUE.
UH, AND, UH, WE HAVE NOT INCLUDED ANY ADDITIONAL STAFF ON IT BECAUSE I WASN'T SURE IF COUNCIL WAS, WAS WILLING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH A BUSINESS, UH, LICENSE STRATEGY, WHICH I RECOMMEND, THEN YOU ARE CORRECT THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE AT LEAST ONE NEW, NEW STAFF PERSON.
BUT IT WOULD MORE THAN, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE REVENUE ANALYSIS, IT WOULD MORE THAN
[01:30:01]
PAY FOR ITSELF.THE BUDGET IS PUT TOGETHER WITH, UH, NO CHANGES NET NO, NO NET CHANGES IN STAFFING ON THOSE POSITIONS THAT ARE SUPPORTED BY THE GENERAL FUND, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S JUST THE CONSERVATIVE AND, AND PRUDENT THING TO DO.
WE ARE LOOKING AT HAVING TO ADD SOME, CHANGE SOME STAFF IN THE, IN THE WATER FUND TO DO THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT WORK THAT WE'VE, UH, RAMPED UP TO DO AND TO DEAL WITH, UH, WITH, UH, LEAD ABATEMENT IN WATER LINES.
BUT THOSE POSITIONS ARE SUPPORTED BY THE, BY THE WATER FUND.
I'M VERY KEEN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CONTROL PERSONNEL EXPENSES IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR, FOR EXACTLY THESE FISCAL REASONS.
AND MY, MY OTHER CONCERN IS PUTTING, AND, AND I, I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM.
I, I UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE, BUT I DON'T WANT SOMEBODY TO CHOOSE TO NOT DO A BUSINESS INDICATOR AND TO DO IT JUST OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE ADDED FEES AND THE ADDED, UM, INSPECTIONS AND THE OTHER THINGS THAT GO ALONG WITH IT.
SO I JUST DON'T, I, I DON'T WANNA HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT, BUT I WILL STOP DOMINATING.
I, I AGREE THAT IT SHOULDN'T BE, AND, AND THAT'S WHY THE, THE FEE SHOULD BE NOMINAL.
UH, AND, AND, AND WHY, BUT IT'S MORE THAN ABOUT THE FEE, SCOTT.
IT'S ABOUT PEOPLE WHO COME INTO YOUR BUSINESS AND INSPECT IT AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY'RE IN YOUR BUSINESS.
AND WE DON'T WANNA APPEAR THAT WE'RE ANTI-BUSINESS.
NO, BUT WE ALSO WANNA BE EVEN ACROSS THE BOARD AND TREAT EVERYBODY THE SAME.
BUT THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE TO FACE THAT IN FORSYTH, PAT.
DO WE NOT ALREADY HAVE A PERMIT, UH, UH, DEPARTMENT WHERE WE HAVE STAFF, WE HAVE A BUSINESS LICENSE DEPARTMENT, WHICH, UH, NOT A DEPARTMENT, BUT A DIVISION OF THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT.
UM, AND, UH, UM, THAT'S PROBABLY WHERE I'D HOUSE THIS PERSON.
UM, I HAVEN'T FIGURED, HAVEN'T THOUGHT THROUGH ALL OF THE, ALL OF THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR, FOR HOW TO, HOW TO STAFF IT AND WHERE TO STAFF IT, BUT I WANT IT TO BE IN A LOCATION THAT WAS EASILY ACCESSIBLE BY FOLKS.
UM, LIKE OUR CURRENT BUSINESS LICENSE OFFICE IS, OKAY, UH, MAYOR AS FAR AS, UH, THE PERMITS, OTHER CITIES, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, HAVE PERMITS.
AND THESE ARE, IF WE WANNA CLEAN UP OUR COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, WE, WE A LOT OF CONCENTRATE ON, ON OUR INNER CITY HOUSING, BUT WE'VE GOT A LOT OF BUSINESSES THAT ARE NOT, BUT KEEPING UP.
OKAY? SO IF WE WANT TO
SO, YOU KNOW, I'M IN FAVOR OF THAT.
ANOTHER QUESTION I DON'T LIKE, NOBODY LIKES PROPERTY TAX.
HOW LONG, HOW MANY YEARS HAVE WE TAKEN? WE'VE KEPT OUR, UH, PROPERTY TAX AS FLAT AS WE CAN.
WE DIDN'T RAISE AS MUCH AS THAT WE NEEDED TO FUND, UH, WHAT WE HAVE TO FOR THE POLICE AND FIRE, UH, UH, DEPARTMENT.
AND HAVE WE NOT TAKEN, UH, MONEY OUT OF OUR GENERAL FUND TO MAKE UP FOR THE SHORTFALL YOU HAVE.
AND, UH, WE'VE BEEN VERY TRANSPARENT ABOUT THAT, THAT, UM, IN, IN TIMES OF PANDEMIC WHEN WE WERE TRYING TO REALLY HOLD THE LINE, UH, THAT, THAT WE WOULD, THAT WE WOULD TAKE IT OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND RESERVE.
AND, AND I REMEMBER SAYING I THINK EVERY SINGLE YEAR THAT WE DID THAT, I UNDERSTAND WHY COUNCIL WANTS TO DO THAT.
AND, AND, AND THAT'S PRUDENT AND APPROPRIATE, BUT WE CAN'T KEEP DOING THAT.
IT'S NOT A SUSTAINABLE STRATEGY.
WELL, THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING, BUT IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE THAT, LONG BEFORE THAT, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, MIGHT WANNA LOOK INTO THAT.
BECAUSE WHEN WE WERE ON THE, WHEN I ON THE COUNCILS BEFORE, THAT'S WHAT WE DID.
AND THAT WAS WAY BEFORE THE PANDEMIC.
BUT, UH, UH, SO, SO THE, THE FIRST STRATEGY THAT THE, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT ALL OF THEM 'CAUSE SOME OF THE STRATEGIES PREDATE ME, BUT THE, UM, THE COUNCIL WAS FACED WITH THE PROBLEM OF DEALING WITH PRINCIPALLY PUBLIC SAFETY, PENSIONS ALL BEING ON THE LEVY.
AND SO PRIOR TO MY AR ARRIVAL HERE, THE COUNCIL AND THE THEN FINANCE, UH, DIRECTOR DEVELOPED A STRATEGY, IF YOU CAN CALL IT THAT, WHEREBY OUR ENTERPRISE FUNDS WERE TREATED AS IF THEY WERE PRIVATE BUSINESSES THAT PAID TAXES.
AND THOSE ARE CALLED PILOTS, PIPE PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES.
SO ALREADY ABOUT 25% OF THE COST OF THOSE PENSIONS IS BEING BORNE BY THE WATER AND SEWER FUND.
UM, AND A, A AS A WAY OF TAKING THE LOAD OFF OF, OF THE GENERAL FUND.
AND, UH, UH, DOING ANY MORE THAN THAT IS, IS CERTAINLY NOT RECOMMENDED AND WOULD'VE VIOLATE THE, THE PRINCIPLES IN WHICH THE PILOT WAS SET UP IN THE FIRST PLACE.
AND SO IT'S, LIKE I SAY, IT'S NOT SUSTAINABLE.
WE HAVE TO EITHER FIND ALTERNATIVE REVENUES FOR IT OR PUT IT ON, PUT IT ON THE PROPERTY TAX.
UM, YOU KNOW, UH, THE PUSH TAX IS STILL IN THE COURTS AND THE ESTIMATE IS THAT IT'S $4 MILLION PLUS THAT WOULD BE COMING TO THE CITY ANNUALLY.
WE HAD DISCUSSED INITIALLY WHEN WE WERE MOVING FORWARD WITH APPROVING A PUSH TAX ORDINANCE THAT WE WOULD PUT IT TOWARD COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION, BUT IT'S A LOT MORE MONEY THAN I HAD ANTICIPATED.
WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO SPLIT THAT
[01:35:01]
AND DO HALF OF IT TOWARDS COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION AND HALF OF IT TOWARD THE PENSION? SO IT GIVES US SOME RELIEF? THE SHORT ANSWER, MAYOR, TO YOUR QUESTION IS YES.UM, BUT LET ME ADD A COUPLE OF QUALIFIERS BECAUSE THIS, UH, CASE HASN'T BEEN DECIDED.
I MEAN, IT'S BEEN DECIDED BY THE DISTRICT COURT AND BY THE APPELLATE COURT, BUT NOT BY THE SUPREME COURT, ASSUMING THAT THE SUPREME COURT AFFIRMS THE DECISION OF THE LOWER COURTS, UM, THEY STILL HAVE TO SORT OUT WHAT THE, UM, WHAT THE COLLECTION AND DISPERSAL SCHEME IS.
THE FACT THAT IT'S A HOME RULE AUTHORITY, I DON'T THINK IS IN DOUBT THE QUESTION OF, OF HOW THE, BECAUSE THEY CAN'T ALLOW THE, THE BUSINESS OWNER TO PAY THE TAX PAY, THE PUSH TAX IT, THE PUSH TAX HAS TO BE PAID BY THE, BY THE PUSHER,
AND SO THE, THE MECHANISM FOR COLLECTING THAT IS MAY INFLUENCE.
I MEAN, WE, WE'VE MADE SOME CALCULATIONS BASED ON SOME GOOD WORK BY OUR FINANCE, UH, STAFF AS TO HOW MANY WAGERS ARE MADE EVERY YEAR INDICATOR.
UM, BUT IF THE, IF THE, IF THE METHODOLOGY THAT'S EVENTUALLY SETTLED ON BY THE GAMING COMMISSION CHANGES, IT COULD CHANGE HOW MUCH MONEY WE GET.
UM, THAT SAID, UH, I BELIEVE THAT THE FUNDS CAN BE USED FOR ANY GOVERNMENTAL PURPOSE THAT YOU WOULD DIRECT, WHETHER IT'S REVITALIZATION OR PENSIONS OR STREETS, UH, WHAT WHATEVER YOU WOULD DECIDE.
MR. COOPER, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP.
UH, COUPLE COUPLE QUESTIONS HERE.
UM, CITY MANAGER, UM, ON THE BID, ON THE LICENSE FEE, WHAT, WHAT'S THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT THE FUNDS WE WERE, YOU THINK WE WILL RECEIVE ON THE CURRENT ONES THAT IF THAT WAS GO INTO EFFECT FROM THE FEES ITSELF? IT'S DE MINIMIS.
I THINK WE ESTIMATE LESS $35,000 SOMETHING.
IT'S NOT THAT MUCH MONEY FROM THE FEES ITSELF.
WHAT'S SIGNIFICANT IS, IS THAT IN THE PROCESS OF HAVING YOU VERIFY THAT YOU HAVE AN ILLINOIS BUSINESS TAX LICENSE AND, AND VERIFY YOUR, YOUR LOCATION, THAT RESULTS IN US FINDING PLACES WHERE YOU'RE NOT PAYING THE OTHER TAXES.
FOOD AND BEVERAGE TAXES, PROPERTY TAXES, SALES TAXES THAT YOU SHOULD BE PAYING, UH, SO THAT YOU'RE ON A, ON A EQUAL FOOTING WITH OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE CITY.
SO IT FOLLOW UP WITH THAT, YOU SAY 35,000, OBVIOUSLY YOU DON'T HAVE, YOU DON'T HAVE THE EMPLOYEE TO, UM, MONITOR IT AT THIS POINT.
WE WILL BE PAYING AN EMPLOYEE MORE THAN 35,000 TO COME IN AND MONITOR SUCH A, SUCH, SUCH, SUCH, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WORTH THE, UH, THE OVERALL EFFORT, UH, 'CAUSE YOU'RE ALMOST GONNA BE PAYING THE EMPLOYEE WHAT YOU'RE GONNA BE BRINGING IN.
SO IS IS IT WORTH THAT WITH, UM, THE NEGATIVE NEGATIVENESS THE CITY WOULD GET FROM BUSINESSES WANTING TO COME TO DECATUR JUST TO PAY THAT PARTICULAR FEE? CO COUNCILMAN COOPER, I, I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT MAKING MYSELF CLEAR.
THE, THE AMOUNT FROM THE FEE ITSELF FROM THE BUSINESS LICENSE FEE WOULDN'T BE THAT SIGNIFICANT.
BUT WE ESTIMATE THAT TAXES IN ALL THOSE OTHER CATEGORIES WHERE THEY'RE, WHERE THEY'RE BEING UNDER, UNDER COLLECTED WOULD BE IN THE RANGE OF $700,000.
AND SO THAT'S WHY IT WOULD JUSTIFY, UM, YOU KNOW, ONE EMPLOYEE TO HELP WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE TASKS.
I THINK THERE'S A DISCUSSION A WHILE BACK, MAYBE JUST ONE-ON-ONE OR WHATEVER.
I THINK YOU'VE MENTIONED IT OR SOMEONE HAS MENTIONED IT BEFORE, UM, INSTEAD OF GOING THIS ROUTE, 'CAUSE I, I, YOU KNOW, DECATUR'S NOT KNOWN WELL FOR BEING FRIENDLY TO BUSINESSES.
UM, AND I DON'T THINK THIS, THIS IS GOING TO GONNA HELP, HELP US, UM, GOING FORWARD.
UM, THERE WAS TALK ABOUT THERE'S A LOT OF INDIVIDUALS WHO WORK IN DECATUR BUT DON'T ACTUALLY LIVE IN DECATUR, BUT THEY, THEY DRIVE IN EVERY DAY AND EVERY WEEK AND WORK SEVERAL HOURS IN DECATUR.
AND, UH, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE NAME OF THAT PARTICULAR FEE, BUT MAYBE WHAT ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR FEE BEING, BEING LOOKED AT AS A POSSIBILITY VERSUS, UM, THE BUSINESS TYPE FEE? COUNCILMAN COOPER, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS SOMETIMES CALLED A COMMUTER TAX, UM, FOR, IT'S SOMETHING THAT CHICAGO HAS LOOKED AT, UM, AND EVEN CHICAGO, WHICH OPERATES BY A SORT OF A DIFFERENT SET OF MUNICIPAL RULES, UM, THAT ARE DISTINCT FROM ALL OTHER MUNICIPALITIES IN THE STATE HAS HAD TROUBLE WITH THAT.
UM, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY OTHER MUNICIPALITIES IN THE STATE THAT HAVE A COMMUTER TAX AND, AND I'M NOT SURE THAT IT'S LEGALLY, UM, ALLOWED.
UM, AND IT WOULD HAVE TO BE ENFORCED BY ASSESSING THE EMPLOYER, YOU KNOW, AND AND COMPELLING THE EMPLOYER TO, UM, TO FIND OUT WHERE EACH OF THEIR EMPLOYEES LIVES AND ON A BASIS OF THAT, COLLECT THE FEE FROM THEM.
SO IT'S LEGALLY PROBLEMATIC AND IT'S OPERATIONALLY PROBLEMATIC.
UM, ALTHOUGH I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THE PHILOSOPHY OF IT, WHICH IS THESE PEOPLE COME INTO DECATUR EVERY DAY, THEY, THEY USE OUR SERVICES, THEY USE OUR ROADS, SHOULDN'T THEY PAY A FEE AS WELL? I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT.
UH, BUT I THINK THAT BOTH LEGALLY AND, AND OPERATIONALLY, WE HAVE SOME SIGNIFICANT HURDLES WITH IT THAT, I WAS GONNA SAY LONG BEFORE I WAS ON THE COUNCIL, BUT I WAS COVERING FOR THE TRIBUNE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AND, UH, WE WERE INFORMED, THE CITY WAS INFORMED BY OUR LARGE CORPORATIONS.
THERE WAS NO WAY THEY WERE GONNA DO THAT.
[01:40:01]
GONNA MONITOR WHERE EVERYBODY WAS SLEEPING.OTHER COMMENTS, MS. GREGORY? JUST A FEW COMMENTS.
IT HAS BEEN SINCE 2015, SINCE THE CITY COUNCIL INTENTIONALLY RAISED PROPERTY TAXES.
SO, UM, I CAN REMEMBER IT BECAUSE I'D BARELY BEEN HERE A YEAR AND WE RAISED EVERYTHING THAT HAD A DOLLAR SIGN ATTACHED TO IT.
IT WAS DI THEY WERE DIFFICULT DECISIONS.
SO I WANNA BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
WHILE TEXTING BODIES ALL AROUND US HAVE FILLED THE VOID, UM, I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THE PREMISE OF THIS DISCUSSION.
I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE REALLY CONSIDERED THEM IN THE VACUUM.
I THINK FOR ME, THE LAST SENTENCE OF THE FIRST PARAGRAPH REALLY RAISES SOME YELLOW FLAGS.
AND THAT IS RATHER, PROPERTY TAXES SHOULD BE STUDIED WITHIN THE CONTENT CONTEXT OF THE CITY'S OVERALL FINANCIAL CONDITION, WHICH I AGREE WITH A HUNDRED PERCENT FUTURE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS.
AND THAT'S WHERE I START GETTING A LITTLE CONCERNED.
I THINK WE KNOW WHAT SOME OF OUR OBLIGATIONS ARE, BUT REALLY IT'S IN THE, UM, DEF YOU WOULD HAVE TO DEFINE THAT.
IT COULD BE DEFINED MANY, MANY WAYS.
UM, AND THEN SPECIFIC MUNICIPAL ACTIVITIES FUNDED BY PROPERTY TAXES FOR ME, UM, I THINK IT GOES BACK RIGHT TO THE BEGINNING OF WHAT THE MAYOR SAID, WHICH IS, WHAT IS IT THAT WE INTEND TO DO BASED ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN THAT WE JUST RECEIVED IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS? HOW DOES IT TIE INTO THE BUDGET AND WHAT ARE THE NEEDS AND BASED ON THE NEEDS THAT THIS COLLECTIVE BODY AGREES WITH, THAT'S THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT WE NEED.
AND SO FOR ME, IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO SAY TODAY, A I GOTTA HAVE X AMOUNT OF INCREASE AND SOMEONE'S GONNA SAY TO ME FOR WHAT? AND THESE THREE THINGS THAT YOU'VE LISTED HERE COULD BE DEFINED A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS.
AND SO I, UM, I WILL WITHHOLD MY DIRECTION UNTIL AFTER WE SEE A BUDGET.
UH, MR. WRIGHTON, SORRY IF I MISSED THIS, BUT THE ONE THAT YOU INITIALLY RECOMMENDED IN TERMS OF A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE WAS THE 7% INCREASE OPTION.
COULD YOU REMIND ME THE PARALLEL BETWEEN THAT 7% INCREASE AND WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR, WHICH WAS BASICALLY WE INCREASED THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY TAX, TOTAL PROPERTY TAX COLLECTED BASED ON NEW GROWTH, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.
SO IS THAT STRATEGY, WHAT IS THE 7% INCREASE? UM, RUBY, WHY DON'T YOU HELP ME OUT WITH THIS A LITTLE BIT.
THE, UM, I THINK THE ANSWER TO THE, TO THE QUESTION IS, UH, WHY DON'T YOU GO UP TO THE PODIUM? UM, IS NOT, NOT EXACTLY FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS WHEN THE EAVS WERE MOVING VERY SLOWLY, UM, WE BROUGHT TO YOU A STRATEGY THAT YOU ENDORSED THAT SAID, RATHER THAN JUST ZERO CHANGE, WE WILL AT LEAST CAPTURE THE ADDITIONAL VALUE THAT COMES FROM ANNEXATION AND THE ADDITIONAL VALUE THAT COMES FROM NEW PERMITS AND NEW CONSTRUCTION, BECAUSE THAT'S APPROPRIATE.
I MEAN, ISN'T THAT WHAT WE'RE ALL WORKING FOR IS TO ADD THESE SORTS OF THINGS TO OUR TAX BASE.
THAT'S WHY WE DO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, THAT'S WHY WE DO ANNEXATION AND SO FORTH.
SO LET'S CAPTURE THAT, BUT NOT CAPTURE ANYTHING ELSE.
AND SO IT WOULD BE ACCURATE TO SAY THAT THESE, THAT NONE OF THESE OPTIONS REFLECT THAT EXACT OPTION, ALTHOUGH THE 7% ONE COMES THE CLOSEST TO IT.
WOULD THAT BE ACCURATE, RUBY? IT WOULD, UH, A LARGE PART, UH, GOOD EVENING, UM, COUNCIL AND MAYOR, THE, UM, A LARGE PART OF THE GROWTH THIS YEAR IS ACTUALLY DUE TO, UM, PROPERTY, UH, INCREASES.
THIS IS A QUADRI LINEAL YEAR SO THAT THE COUNTY CAN INCREASE, UM, TAKE TIME TO INCREASE HOW MUCH PROPERTY HAS INCREASED OVER TIME.
AND SO THEY SPEND MORE TIME LOOKING AT EQUALIZATION THIS YEAR.
AND SO, UM, I JUST CALCULATED THAT, UM, JUST A SECOND.
SO ABOUT 21% IS, UH, MORE LIKELY THE, THE GROWTH IN TOTAL OF THE INCREASE.
SO, UH, OF THE INCREASE THAT WE HAVE THIS TIME, UH, FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT, UH, LA FOR THIS YEAR IN THE TAXES, IT WENT UP 7%.
FOR NEXT YEAR IT'S PROJECTED TO GO UP 11 TO 12%.
UM, AND OF THE INCREASE FOR THE COMING YEAR OF THE, UH, 21%
[01:45:01]
OF THAT INCREASE IS DUE TO, UH, WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT ANNEXATIONS AND GROWTH.AND, BUT A LARGE PERCENT OF THAT INCREASE, THE 11 TO 12% IS REALLY DUE TO THE INCREASE IN PROPERTY VALUES.
WHAT, WELL, PERSONALLY I, I'D LIKE TO SEE AN OPTION WHICH DOES WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR AND THE YEAR BEFORE.
AND, UM, I I WOULD JUST SAY THAT IN A CITY THAT IS FACING POPULATION DECLINE IN A CITY THAT HAS THOUSANDS OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE CURRENTLY RENT AND MORTGAGE DISTRESSED, IT IS DIFFICULT TO SEE HOW INCREASING PROPERTY TAXES WILL REVERSE THE CITY'S TRAJECTORY.
IN FACT, I I WOULD ARGUE THAT IT WILL IMPEDE MANY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION EFFORTS BECAUSE INDIVIDUALS MAY NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD THE INCREASED COSTS.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US DO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'VE DONE, UH, IN THE PAST TWO YEARS.
IF THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE SUCH AN OPTION, I'M HAPPILY BE WILLING TO PREPARE IT.
I DID NOT ASK, I DID NOT PREPARE IT THIS TIME BECAUSE, UM, FIRST AND FOREMOST, BECAUSE THE, THE, THE PRESSURE ON GENERAL GOVERNMENTAL REVENUES IS REACHING THE POINT THAT IT CAN'T BE SUSTAINED BECAUSE OF THE PENSIONS AND OTHER THINGS.
AND THE SECOND PLACE IS, THE SECOND REASON WHY I THINK THAT THESE OTHER ALTERNATIVES ARE MORE APPROPRIATE IS THAT I FUNDAMENTALLY DISAGREE WITH THE CONCLUSIONS THAT MR. HORN JUST STATED.
UM, UH, THE, THE VAST MAJORITY, OR AT LEAST A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF THESE DISTRESSED PROPERTIES AREN'T PAYING PROPERTY TAXES ANYWAY.
OR THEY HAVE, OR THEY HAVE A COMBINATION OF, UM, OF, UH, EXCLUSIONS AND, AND ADJUSTMENTS TO THEIR EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE, UH, THAT, THAT BRING THE TAXABLE VALUE WAY DOWN FAR AND AWAY.
THE MAJORITY OF PROPERTY TAXES PAID IN DECATUR ARE PAID ON COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES ANYWAY.
UM, SO NO, I I DON'T BELIEVE THAT, UH, AN INCREASE LIKE 7% FALLS DISPROPORTIONATELY ON, ON THOSE, ON THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS, NOR DO I BELIEVE THAT IT SERVES AS, AS A NEGATIVE OR, OR AN IMPEDIMENT TO, TO THE GOALS THAT WE'VE BEEN PURSUING IN, IN, IN REVITALIZATION.
IN FACT, WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING THE LAST YEAR HAS IN, HAS IN FACT BEEN THE OPPOSITE, UH, PROPERTY VALUES INCLUDING IN THE, UH, DISTRESSED NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE, HAVE GONE UP.
UH, PROPERTIES THAT WEREN'T CONSIDERED REHAB ARE, ARE CONSIDERED HABITABLE.
SO I MEAN, POSITIVE THINGS ARE HAPPENING IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT ANY OF THESE, WELL, I MEAN THE, I MEAN THE, THE EVERYTHING IN IT OPTION WOULD, MIGHT HAVE SOME NEGATIVE IMPACT, BUT I, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE OPTIONS, THE, THESE TWO MIDDLE OPTIONS THAT WE'VE OFFERED TO YOU WOULD HAVE THE, THAT EFFECT.
UM, RE RECENTLY I'VE HAD TO TAKE OVER BILL PAYING DUTIES FOR MY MOM, AND MY MOM, UH, HAS HER HOUSE IN A DIFFERENT STATE AND HER HOUSE IS VALUED SUBSTANTIALLY MORE THAN MY HOUSE IS.
AND SHE PAYS PROPORTION, PROPORTIONATELY SIGNIFICANTLY LESS IN PROPERTY TAXES THAN I PAY.
AND SHE GETS MORE SERVICES SUCH AS GARBAGE AND RECYCLING PICKUP AS PART OF HER PROPERTY TAXES.
I HAVE HEARD NOTHING BUT CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPERTY TAXES, UM, AND HOW HIGH THEY ARE IN ILLINOIS.
AN INDICATOR PREFER NOTHING BUT CONCERN ABOUT THAT.
I'M SURE PAT WILL CORRECT ME AT A LATER DATE IF I AM, UH, WRONG, BUT I BELIEVE THERE'S ABOUT 6,500 HOUSEHOLDS IN DECATUR THAT ARE CURRENTLY RENT OR MORTGAGE DISTRESSED.
NOW, WHEN YOU INCREASE PROPERTY TAXES, IT'S HARD TO SEE HOW THOSE AREN'T GOING TO BE PASSED ON TO RENTERS AND HOW THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE DIFFICULT, MORE DIFFICULT FOR INDIVIDUALS TO PAY.
SO, BUT I, I'M GONNA LEAVE THAT TOPIC FOR JUST A SECOND AND TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF GENERAL BUSINESS AND LICENSE FEES.
UM, $10, $25 OR $50 FEE DEPENDING UPON THE BUSINESS.
I CAN'T SEE HOW THAT'S AN ONEROUS FEE FOR ANY BUSINESS AT $10 AN HOUR.
THAT'S LESS THAN ONE HOUR OF PAYING MINIMUM WAGE.
SO IF THE BUSINESS IS GONNA GO BANKRUPT FOR A $10 FEE, I THINK IT'S GOT OTHER ISSUES.
[01:50:01]
BUSINESS LICENSE FEES DO IS THEY CREATE TAX COLLECTION EQUITY.RIGHT NOW THERE'S SOME BUSINESSES THAT ARE PAYING THEIR TAXES AND THERE'S OTHER BUSINESSES THAT ARE NOT PAYING THEIR TAXES.
AND SO THIS WILL CREATE AN EQUALIZED PAYING FEE PLAYING FIELD FOR ALL OF THE BUSINESSES.
IN ADDITION, THIS ALLOWS FOR A BUILDING INSPECTION ELEMENT WITHIN A LICENSE.
UM, IT HASN'T BEEN TOO LONG AGO WHERE A BUILDING SIMPLY COLLAPSED ON A MAJOR LOCAL ROAD AND SHUT THE ROAD DOWN.
COULD WE HAVE PREVENTED THAT IF WE HAD A BUSINESS LICENSE FEE, AN INSPECTION, WE'VE HAD ENTITIES WHERE BUILDINGS HAVE CAUGHT FIRE OR EXPLODED, WOULD AN ANNUAL INSPECTION HAVE PREVENTED THAT? I DON'T LOOK AT THIS AS A ONEROUS THING ON BUSINESSES.
I SEE THIS AS PROTECTION FOR THE CITIZENS OF DECATUR.
AND SO I'M HIGHLY, HIGHLY SUPPORTIVE OF A BUSINESS LICENSE FEE.
AND THEN I KNOW WE HAVEN'T GONE OVER THESE, BUT, UH, BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, SOME OF THE OTHER OPTIONS THAT YOU PROPOSE, I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHAT EXTENT THEY'RE DONE ELSEWHERE, HOW COMMON THEY ARE IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.
BUT I I WANTED TO GO BACK TO THE PUSH TAX PROCEEDS FOR JUST A MINUTE.
IF MY RECOLLECTION IS CORRECT, THE PUSH TAX IS A 1 CENT FEE PER PUSH, PER SPIN, 1 CENT FEE.
IF YOU ARE ESTIMATING $4 MILLION, IF MY MATH IS CORRECT, THAT IS 400 MILLION PUSHES OF SLOT MACHINES INDICATOR EVERY YEAR, WELL OVER A MILLION PUSHES OF SLOT MACHINES.
OKAY, SO DOES YOUR CALCULATOR GO THAT HIGH OR DO YOU JUST DO THAT IN YOUR HEAD WITH SOME LONG, I'M JUST, JUST ASKING FOR A FRIEND.
SO I I AM JUST POINTING OUT THAT, UH, PRE OUR PREVIOUS CONVERSATION ABOUT WHETHER WE'VE GOT A GAMBLING PROBLEM INDICATOR, IF THERE ARE 1 MILLION PUSHES ON AVERAGE IN THE CITY OF DECATUR EVERY DAY WE HAVE A GAMBLING PROBLEM.
COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY, YOU HAD ANOTHER COMMENT A WHILE WHILE BACK.
I, YEAH, AND I REMEMBER IT TOO.
SO FOR THOSE OF US WHO HAVE BEEN FORTUNATE TO HAVE THE VALUE OF OUR PROPERTY GO UP, AND THIS IS JUST A CAUTIONARY STATEMENT, FIRST PEOPLE OUT WITH THEIR HANDS, IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED, WERE YOU HOME INSURANCE COMPANY? SO, UM, I JUST AM REALLY NOT INTERESTED IN THE CITY BEING THE SECOND PERSON STANDING IN LINE TO, UH, SEE A PAYMENT ON THE PAPER, INCREASED VALUE OF MY HOME.
THE SECOND THING THAT I WANNA TALK ABOUT IS THE PUSH TAX.
UM, I LOOK AT THAT A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY.
SPENT TOO MUCH TIME IN SPRINGFIELD, I GUESS.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE IT, WE ALSO DON'T HAVE A DISTRIBUTION FORMULA, SO I, I'M NOT BANKING ON ANY OF THAT MONEY.
IF WE GET IT, WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE AMOUNT AND HOW WE WANNA SPEND IT, BUT FOR ME, THAT DOESN'T EVEN COME INTO PLAY IN THE FORMULATION OF THIS BUDGET.
COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY, I AGREE WITH YOU AND THAT'S WHY IN THE LIST OF THE REVENUES I LISTED SOME AS SHORT TERM MEANING FOR CONSIDERATION IN 2024 AND LONG TERM MEANING THOSE FOR CONSIDERATION AND MAYBE AS EARLY AS 25 OR LATER, DEPENDING ON OTHER VARIABLES THAT WE CAN CONTROL AND CLEARLY PUSH TAX BELONGS IN THAT LATTER CATEGORY, AND THAT'S HOW I'VE IDENTIFIED IT.
SO WE ARE CERTAINLY NOT ANTICIPATING OR, OR EXPECTING OR ASKING YOU TO EVALUATE, UH, ANY PUSH TAX REVENUES FOR THE 2024 BUDGET COUNCIL MCKEEL.
WELL, WE DIDN'T HAVE A, UH, TREASURER'S REPORT, SO I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION.
WHERE ARE WE ON OUR GENERAL FUND? HOW MANY DAYS? UH, WE WANT 90 DAYS, BUT WE WERE ABOVE THAT AT ONE POINT.
UM, BUT PART OF THE ANSWER TO THAT IS THAT WE HAVE NOT, UH, ALLOCATED ALL THE EXPENSES.
SO, UM, WITH THAT, THERE IS STILL EQUIPMENT, UH, THAT WE'LL BE BUYING AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
WE GET OUR TAX, UH, REVENUE IN JULY, SO WE HOLD OFF ON BUYING EQUIPMENT.
SO EVEN THOUGH WE'RE AHEAD, UH, IN THE NUMBER OF DAYS OF CASH, UH, THAT'S ALSO BECAUSE WE AREN'T BUYING AS MUCH EARLIER IN
[01:55:01]
THE YEAR.SO WE DEFINITELY DO HAVE THE 90 DAYS, BUT UH, THE EXCESS IS NOT NECESSARILY, UH, EXCESS IN, IN TOTAL, UH, AT THE END OF THE YEAR BECAUSE ONCE WE PAY FOR SOME OF THE THINGS AT THE END OF THE YEAR, UH, THAT BALANCE WILL GO DOWN SOME, THE SHORT VERSION OF WHAT RUBY SAID IS WE'LL BE AT AROUND 90 DAYS AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
AND BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE 2, 2 50 A DAY IS WHAT YOU CALCULATE.
IS THAT CORRECT? SO IF WE WERE AHEAD 12 DAYS AND WE HAD 102 DAYS, WE WOULD HAVE YOUR 3 MILLION.
UM, UH, YOU HAD LISTED ALL THOSE FEES.
THERE ARE SEVERAL PAGES OF FEES.
MY SUGGESTION, I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE A SYSTEM, UH, BUT I WONDER IF THESE FEES NEED TO BE LOOKED AT EVERY THREE YEARS.
I'M, I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN BY BY SYSTEM.
NO, WE PUT IN THE FEES AND THEN WE JUST FORGET ABOUT IT UNTIL WE RAISE THEM AGAIN.
EACH, EACH, EACH FEE HAD LIKE A DATE WHEN IT WAS LAST LOOKED AT.
SOME WERE LOOKED AT THIS YEAR, SOME WEREN'T LOOKED AT FOR SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS.
I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE NEED SOME TYPE OF POLICY JUST TO LOOK AT THESE FEES EVERY THREE YEARS AS AN EX.
I'M JUST MAKING IT UP, BUT, SO, UM, LAST YEAR, I BELIEVE IT WAS COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY ASKED THAT WE HAVE, UH, A SCHEDULE.
SO YOU COULD LOOK AT IT IN ITS TOTALITY.
AND ALTHOUGH THIS IS STILL NOT THE EXACT FORMAT THAT I'M PROBABLY GONNA USE FOR THE, UM, FOR THE BUDGET APPENDIX, I BELIEVE ALL THE INFORMATION THAT YOU'LL NEED IS THERE.
IT NOT ONLY SHOWS THE, UM, THE THE SECTION AND CHAPTER NUMBER IN OUR CODE, IT ALSO TELLS YOU THE LAST TIME THE COUNCIL TOOK ACTION ON IT.
UM, AND I WOULD SAY THAT THERE ARE SOME OF THESE, NOT A LOT, BUT SOME OF THESE THAT MAYBE COULD BE DONE AWAY WITH IF WE HAD A GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE.
BECAUSE, BECAUSE IN GENERAL, AND YOU CAN SEE THIS IN ONE OF THE PIE CHARTS ON REVENUE, THESE BUSINESS FEES REALLY DON'T AMOUNT TO THAT MUCH REVENUE FOR THE GENERAL FUND.
WE CHARGE THEM BECAUSE IT'S A, IT'S A MECHANISM TO, TO, UH, THAT SIMPLY ACCOMPANIES THEIR ASKING US TO LOOK AT PLANS, REVIEW THEIR BUILDING, UH, PROCESS A A, A ZONING PERMIT, HOOK UP A WATER LINE.
AND SO IT, THE, THE FEES DON'T GENERATE THAT MUCH MONEY, BUT THEY GET US INTO A BUSINESS IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS DONE LEGALLY.
AND IN THE CASE OF BUSINESS LICENSE FEES ALSO TO COLLECT, UH, REVENUES IN, IN AN EQUITABLE FASHION.
SO WE WILL HAVE THIS APPENDIX FOR YOU IN THE RECOMMENDED BUDGET IN, IN ANOTHER FORM THAT I THINK WILL ENABLE YOU TO, UH, DO EXACTLY WHAT I THINK, UM, YOU AND COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY HAD INTENDED.
AND THAT IS LOOK MORE SYSTEMATICALLY AT UPDATING THESE.
UM, AND SINCE THEY'RE GROUPED BY DEPARTMENT, AS YOU GO THROUGH IN YOUR STUDY SESSIONS AND REVIEW EACH DEPARTMENT, YOU CAN PROBABLY ASK, YOU KNOW, ABOUT THE, THE PUBLIC WORKS FEES OR THE FINANCE FEES BECAUSE YOU'LL HAVE THIS APPENDIX AND ABLE TO ASK ABOUT IT.
MAYOR, LEMME JUST SAY THAT, UH, AS, AS YOU HAVE ANNOUNCED AT THE BEGINNING, THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM AND SO THERE'S, THERE'S NO, UH, ACTION TO BE TAKEN, BUT I, I WANTED TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION ITEM BOTH BECAUSE WE'VE, WE'VE ALWAYS DONE SOME DISCUSSION OF PROPERTY TAXES AT THE END OF OCTOBER, BUT ALSO TO, TO MAYBE GIVE HEADS UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL BEFORE WE GO INTO BUDGET NEXT MONTH ABOUT SOME OF THE LARGER REVENUE EXPENDITURE OFFSET ITEMS. AND I THINK WE'VE DONE THAT.
I I CERTAINLY ACCEPT, UH, COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY'S CHALLENGE THAT OKAY, SHE'LL CONSIDER THIS, BUT SHE WANTS TO SEE THE BUDGET THAT IT'S, UH, THAT IT'S, AND WHAT IT'S GONNA GO TO PAY FOR.
UH, BUT, UH, I I STILL THINK IT'S IMPORTANT EXERCISE TO TO TO SORT OF SEE SORT OF AN EARLY GLIMPSE OF THINGS AND, AND I WOULD VALUE YOUR, YOUR COMMENTS BACK AS WE CONTINUE ON THESE ITEMS AS WE CONTINUE TO PREPARE THE BUDGET FOR DISTRIBUTION IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS.
JUST HAD A COUPLE MORE COMMENTS.
UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE READY TO WIND DOWN.
TWO HOURS IN AND WE'RE STILL ON ITEM TWO.
I WOULD, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I THINK I WOULD FAVOR THAT GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE FEE, BUT IT'S JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.
IT'S, IT'S CATCHING THE CHEATERS, THE P THE RULE BREAKERS IS WHAT IT IS.
AND I'LL PUT SOME HUMOR INTO THIS.
THIS IS LIKE OUR, OUR TENNIS LEAGUES.
WE HAVE SO MANY RULES THAT IT TURNS PEOPLE OFF.
WHY? BECAUSE YOU MAKE ONE RULE AND THEN SOMEBODY SKIRTS IT, AND THEN YOU GOTTA MAKE ANOTHER RULE AND ANOTHER RULE AND ANOTHER RULE AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN EVERYBODY THROWS THEIR HANDS UP GOVERNMENT, YOU KNOW, OR TENNIS LEAGUES.
IT'S JUST YOU'RE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND, AND NOT LET PEOPLE SKIRT THE RULES.
OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY, I THINK WE ARE GOOD TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.
[3. Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of a Crime Prevention Surveillance Trailer for the Decatur Police Department]
SO MOVING ON TO ITEM THREE.RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF A CRIME PREVENTION SURVEILLANCE TRAILER FOR THE DECATUR POLICE DEPARTMENT MOTION.
THE RESOLUTION DO PASS AND BE ADOPTED.
SECOND, MR. WRIGHTON, ACTING CHIEF HURST, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GIVE A SUMMARY CLIFF NOTES? YES, I AGREE.
UM, SO WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS I'M GONNA ASK FOR APPROVAL TO PURCHASE A MOBILE
[02:00:01]
SURVEILLANCE UNIT.IT'S, UM, IT'LL GIVE US A BETTER ADVANTAGE FOR DEALING WITH THE POP-UP PARTIES THAT WE'VE DEALT WITH THE LAST SUMMER.
AND IT'LL ALSO BE A NICE FEATURE TO ADD TO OUR PLANNED EVENTS LIKE FARM PROGRESS AND, UH, THE FUTURE BOAT RACES DOWN ON THE LAKE.
I THINK THIS LOOKS REALLY COOL.
SO YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN TESTING IT FOR A COUPLE MONTHS? YES, WE UH, WE WE TESTED IT FOR A COUPLE WEEKS, YES.
UH, IT'S AN APP-BASED PROGRAM AND YOU CAN SIT AND WATCH IT ON YOUR PHONE AND THEN THAT WAY IT GIVES YOU A LITTLE BETTER PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT'S GOING ON ON THE STREET ON A CERTAIN EVENT.
MR. K, ANY QUESTIONS? IS ONE ENOUGH? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
UH, SPRINGFIELD JUST RECENTLY PURCHASED SIX AND THEY'RE UTILIZING THOSE.
THE ANSWER TO THAT IS WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED IT IN MULTIPLE PLACES IN THE FUTURE.
MAYOR, I'M CERTAINLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
WHEN I FIRST CAME ON THE COUNCIL, I BROUGHT THIS UP, THAT WOULD, UH, A UNIT COULD BE MOVED AROUND IN, IN AREAS.
SO AFTER HOW MANY YEARS? I'M GLAD TO SEE THIS.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS, CHUCK OR MR. COLP? I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE TRYING TO BE FRUGAL.
UM, MY SUGGESTION IS WHILE WE'RE EVEN DISCUSSING IT, I WOULD ASK COUNSEL TO CONSIDER MAYBE TWO OF THESE.
'CAUSE AT ANY TIME FOR AN ACTIVE SCENE, THESE CAN BE USEFUL AND I HATE TO PULL IT AWAY FROM A FARM PROGRESS OR SOMEWHERE WHAT'S ALREADY SET UP.
AND AT LEAST YOU HAVE ONE THERE THAT'S AVAILABLE.
AND THE PRICE IS RIGHT FOR WHAT'S BEEN PROVIDED LATELY.
THE INITIAL PURCHASE IS BEING FUNDED THROUGH THE DORIS TURNER GRANT.
MR. WRIGHT, DO WE HAVE ADDITIONAL MONIES AVAILABLE? SHOULD THE COUNCIL WANNA BUY TWO TOYS? WE JUST TALKED ABOUT BUDGET LIMITATIONS FOR HOW LONG? MAYOR
UM, I, I WOULD IN, IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET WITH, UM, MY, MY REQUEST IS THAT YOU APPROVE THIS ITEM AND WE'LL TAKE A LOOK.
THAT GOOD WITH EVERYBODY? HOW LONG WILL THAT TAKE? WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU AT ONE OF THE NOVEMBER MEETINGS.
I NEED TO TALK TO THE CHIEF SOME MORE ABOUT IT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ISSUE? SEEING NONE, COUNCILMAN COOPER? AYE.
[4. Ordinance Amending Zoning Ordinance - Section XXX Zoning Board of Appeals]
AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 30 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MOTION THAT THE ORDINANCE TO PASS AND BE ADOPTED.MR. WRIGHT, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
THIS AMENDMENT OF SECTION 30 OF THE CODE IS TO MAKE IT EASIER TO GET A QUORUM.
UM, UH, WE'VE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE Z B A AND A COUPLE OF OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
THIS ONE JUST DEALS WITH THE Z B A.
IT REDUCES A QUORUM REQUIREMENT JUST TO A SIMPLE MAJORITY.
ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? SAY NONE.
[5. Resolution Accepting Grant from the Illinois Housing Development Authority's Strong Communities Program Round 2]
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GRANT FROM THE ILLINOIS DE ILLINOIS HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES, STRONG COMMUNITIES PROGRAM.MOTION THAT THE RESOLUTION TO PASS AND BE ADOPTED.
SECOND, MR. RYAN MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
THIS IS A COMPANION ITEM WITH THE ONE THAT FOLLOWS IT.
WE RECEIVED A $337,000 GRANT FROM IDA.
UM, AND UH, SO THIS IS, THIS ITEM IS THE GRANT AGREEMENT AND THE SECOND ITEM IS THE AGREEMENT FOR ITS ADMINISTRATION WITH THE CENTRAL ILLINOIS LAND BANK AUTHORITY.
UH, PAT, YOU CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW THE MONEY'S GONNA BE USED.
UH, SO THE MONEY'S GONNA BE USED TO, UH, JUST EXPAND OUR ABANDON TO REHAB PROGRAM, WHICH WE'LL PARTNER WITH THE CENTRAL ILLINOIS LAND BANK AUTHORITY TO DO RIGHT NOW.
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? SEEING NONE.
COUNCILMAN HORNE? AYE, COUNCILMAN KUHL.
[6. Resolution Authorizing Agreement between City of Decatur, IL and Central Illinois Land Bank Authority to Operate Strong Communities Program Round 2]
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF DECATUR, ILLINOIS, AND CENTRAL ILLINOIS LAND BANK AUTHORITY TO OPERATE STRONG COMMUNITIES.MOTION THAT THE RESOLUTION DO PASS AND BE ADOPTED.
[7. Resolution Authorizing an Agreement with Jimmie Soules Bird Repelent Company for Downtown Bird Control]
AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH JIMMY SEWELL'S, BIRD REPELLENT COMPANY FOR DOWNTOWN BIRD CONTROL.SECOND, MR. WRIGHT, I'M DEFERRING THE MYSTERY OF BIRD REPELLENT TO, TO MR. NEWALL.
NOW THIS MYSTERY REALLY IS A MYSTERY.
IT'S A SECRET, UH, MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL.
THIS IS, UH, COME BEFORE THE, UH, CITY COUNCIL FOR THE LAST MANY YEARS AND IT WORKS VERY WELL.
AND YOU DON'T KNOW THE SECRET.
[02:05:01]
THAN WHAT THE SECRET IS FOR MR. NEWELL? SEEING NONE, COUNCILMAN COOPER? AYE.[8. Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of the Bid for the Purchase of a Pavement Breaker from Midwest Equipment MFG.]
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF THE BID FOR THE PURCHASE OF A PAVEMENT BREAKER FOR MIDWEST EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURING MOTION THAT THE RESOLUTION DO PASS AND BE ADOPTED.MR. NEWELL, I, I GUESS YOU'RE GONNA TELL US ABOUT A PAVEMENT BREAKER.
I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER TO ADD UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OH, CHUCK, WE DO NOT NEED TWO OF THESE THOUGH, DO WE?
YEAH, THEY'RE REALLY EXPENSIVE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? SEEING NONE.
[9. Resolution Accepting the Bid and Authorizing the Execution of a Contract with Entler Excavation Company Inc. for the Old King's Orchard Garden, City Project 2023-05]
NINE RESOLUTION, ACCEPTING THE BID AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH ANTLER EXCAVATION COMPANY, INC.FOR THE OLD KINGS ORCHARD GARDEN CITY PROJECT.
GARDEN CITY PROJECT 2023 DASH OH FIVE.
MOTION AT THE RESOLUTION TO PASS AND BE ADOPTED.
THIS IS THE, UH, CONTRACT TO CLEAR THE BLOCK AND A HALF THAT, UH, YOU ALREADY ACTED ON AN AGREEMENT WITH GOOD SAMARITAN FOR.
UH, THIS WILL CHANGE THE FACE OF THIS SECTION OF, OF O K O, SO BE READY FOR THOSE CALLS.
UH, IT'LL BEGIN WITH TREE REMOVAL AND, AND THEN WE FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE THE, BASICALLY TILLING THE WHOLE THING UP AND, AND GETTING IT READY FOR AGRICULTURAL USE AND THEN PLANTING CLOVER IN IT.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNSEL? DR.
HORN? MR. WRIGHT? AND IS THERE PLAN FOR TREE REPLACEMENT? FOR THE TREES THAT ARE TAKEN DOWN, THERE'S NO PLAN FOR TREE REPLACEMENT IN THE OLD KINGS ORCHARD NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WE HAVE, AS YOU PERHAPS KNOW, RECEIVED A, A GRANT FROM U S D A FOREST SERVICE FOR MORE TREES IN, IN THE CITY IN GENERAL.
UH, AND THAT, UH, IN ADDITION TO THE INVESTMENT THAT THE CITY MAKES, UH, EVERY YEAR IN ITS TREE PROGRAM ANYWAY, SO THERE'S THERE, THERE'S NOT, THERE'S NOT AN ATTEMPT TO MAKE A ONE-TO-ONE OFFSET FOR THE TREES, BUT I THINK THAT OUR TREE PROGRAM WILL, WILL ACHIEVE THOSE ENDS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, MR. COOPER? UM, QUESTION, UH, COMMENTS.
UM, IN LOOKING AT THE INFORMATION THAT WE PROVIDED, UM, DEALING WITH THE ONE COMPANY LER EXCAVATING COMPANY, CORRECT.
AND THEY'RE MAKING PRETTY GOOD AMOUNT OF MONEY ON THIS PROJECT, BUT IT APPEARS THAT THEY'RE NOT DOING A LOT, UH, BEING SUCCESSFUL AS FAR AS UTILIZING MINORITY BUSINESSES IN THIS PROJECT.
UM, EVEN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THIS PROJECT IS GOING IN, IT WOULD'VE BEEN NICER TO HAVE A GOOD COMPLIMENT OF MINORITY EMPLOYEES BEING SEEN WORKING IN THE PROJECTS OF THE FOUR THAT HE HAS UNDER HIS SUPERVISION.
UM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, AND MAYBE SCOTT, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ARE AWARE, OR YOU MAY BE AWARE, HASN'T IN THE PAST THIS COMPANY BEEN FINED FOR NOT MEETING THE MINORITY REQUIREMENTS.
THEY, THEY HAVE NOT MET, THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN FINED.
THEY HAVE, UH, ANTLER HAS ALWAYS MET THE MINORITY HOURS REQUIREMENTS.
THE, UH, DIFFICULTY THEY HAVE RUN INTO IS, IS MEETING, WHICH, WHICH ALL OF THEM HAVE RUN INTO IS MEETING THE MINORITY, UH, BUSINESS ENTERPRISE.
UH, WELL, THEY'RE NOT REQUIREMENTS, BUT GOALS THE CITY HAS SET.
AND THOSE ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU NOW ON, ON, ON THIS DOCUMENT IS, IS THE GOALS THAT THEY HAVE, UH, TRIED TO ESTABLISH FOR THE, OR TRIED TO MEET FOR THE MINORITY BUSINESS ENTERPRISES? I GUESS MY CONCERN IS, UH, I KNOW A LOT OF THE COMPANIES USE THE SAME LINGUAL, BUT LOOKING AT, UM, WHO THEY CONTACTED FOR THE FOUR AREAS, UM, LOOK LIKE THE MAJORITY OF THE RESPONSES IS CALLED AND NO ANSWER.
THEY SAY THEY CALLED SOME AND THEY HAD NO ANSWER, BUT YOU NEVER KNOW WHO THEY CALLED.
UH, DID THEY CALL BACK? THEY JUST CALL ONE TIME, DIDN'T GET NO ANSWER.
UH, I THINK WE NEED TO REALLY NEED TO LOOK INTO MORE WITH THESE COMPANIES WITH GETTING MORE INFORMATION FROM THEM ON ACTUALLY THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY REALLY TRYING TO MEET, MEET OUR GOALS.
UM, UM, WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU SEE SO MANY CALL NO ANSWER AND THE MAJORITY IS THAT RESPONSE, THERE'S SOMETHING AMISS SOMEWHERE.
UM, AND, AND I REALLY THINK THAT WE NEED TO LOOK, REALLY LOOK IN THAT AREA, UH, WHETHER WE NEED TO SIGN A PERSON THAT, THAT, THAT DOES FOLLOW UP JUST ON THAT ITEM WITH COMPANIES.
BUT WE WE'RE NOT DOING A GOOD JOB AT ALL.
AND IT'S, IT'S HEART, IT'S HEARTENING
[02:10:01]
TO SEE IT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.AND IT'S NOT A ISOLATED THING.
I SEE IT WITH SO MANY RESPONSES THAT COME THROUGH.
AND THAT'S THE SAME RESPONSE FROM MOST ALL OF THEM CALLED NO RESPONSE.
UM, THEY INDICATED THEY SENT A PACKET BUT DIDN'T GET ANYTHING BACK.
DID THEY FOLLOW UP TO FIND OUT, DID THEY GET THE PACKET? IS THERE REASON WHY THEY DIDN'T SEND THE PACKET BACK? SO I JUST THINK THAT WE NEED TO, UH, THAT THE CITY DO MORE.
I THINK WE CAN DO MORE TO MAKE THESE COMPANIES MORE ACCOUNTABLE TO REALLY TRY TO MEET THE GOALS.
WE'RE PAYING THEM A LOT OF MONEY.
WE'RE PAYING THEM AN AWFUL LOT OF MONEY.
UM, AND THEY'RE GETTING, THESE COMPANIES ARE GETTING MEGA BUCKS FROM, FROM THE CITY TO DO PROJECTS IN, IN OUR CITY.
AND I'M NOT, AND I'M NOT CONCERNED NOT, I'M NOT SAYING THAT THEY'RE NOT DOING A GOOD PRO, THAT THE FINISHED PRODUCT ISN'T GOOD, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO GET THEM MORE INVOLVED WITH TRYING TO MEET OUR GOALS BECAUSE THAT ALSO AFFECTS OUR CITY IN A BIG WAY.
UH, IT AFFECTS, UH, OUR YOUNG KIDS WHO ARE COMING UP, ESPECIALLY THE MINORITY KIDS WHO ARE COMING UP AND GROWING UP.
IF THEY DON'T SEE ANYBODY OUT THERE WORKING, UH, ON PROJECTS, THEY'RE NOT GONNA WANNA GO INTO THAT IN THAT AREA.
SO THEY ALWAYS ASK, WELL, WE CAN'T GET ANY, ANY MINORITIES TO COME INTO THIS FIELD.
THEY DON'T SEE ANYBODY IN THAT FIELD.
UM, IT IS, IT IS ALMOST LIKE TEACHERS IN THE HIGH SCHOOL WHEN I WAS COMING UP, I HAD NO MINORITY TEACHERS.
IT'S GOTTEN BETTER, BUT THAT'S BECAUSE SOMEBODY DECIDED TO TAKE A STANCE AND, AND PUSH MORE RECRUITMENT AND MORE VISIBILITY AND GETTING AFRICAN AMERICAN TEACHERS INTO SCHOOLS.
SO THERE'S MORE TODAY, STILL NOT WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE, BUT IT IS MORE TODAY.
SO THE KIDS ARE WANTING TO GO IN THE, THE TEACHING FIELD.
SO WE NEED KIDS TO BE EXPOSED TO ACTUALLY WORKERS.
SO THEY DON'T WANT TO GO INTO THESE FIELDS.
THEN HOPEFULLY THE COMPANIES, SO THEY CAN ALSO ESTABLISH THEIR OWN BUSINESSES, HOPEFULLY ONE DAY IN THOSE FIELDS.
UM, AND COMPANIES CAN'T CONTINUE TO SAY, WE CAN'T FIND MINORITY WORKERS, WHICH I, I DON'T.
JUST SAYING TO ME HERE, 90% WE CALLED AND THAT'S IT.
THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT DOING IT.
MAYOR PAT, I'VE, I'VE ATTENDED OVER THE YEARS, THE STAFF, I'M GONNA DEFEND STAFF.
THEY'VE HELD MEETINGS WITH THE, UM, UH, SEMINARS TO TRY TO GET MORE MINORITY, UH, COMPANIES.
UNFORTUNATELY, DECATUR DOES NOT HAVE MAYBE ONE OR TWO MINORITY COMPANIES IN THE CONSTRUCTION IN THAT, BUT THEY'VE HELD SEMINARS AND I'VE BEEN TO 'EM, UH, OVER THE YEARS.
SO THEY, UH, THESE COMPANIES HAVE TRIED, UH, THESE COMPANIES HAVE COME TO THE, UH, MEETINGS.
UH, I KNOW WE BROUGHT BACK DOWN A, UH, GENTLEMAN FROM CHICAGO AND HE'S TALKED TO MINORITY BUSINESSES.
YOU NEED TO COMBINE 'CAUSE THEY'RE TOO SMALL TO TAKE ON PROJECTS.
IF THEY WOULD COMBINE WITH EACH OTHER, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE A BETTER CHANCE.
BUT HE HAS SAID THEY WON'T DO THAT.
BUT I'M GONNA SAY THERE HAS BEEN ALL KINDS OF SEMINARS, UH, OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS THAT I'VE ATTENDED.
I APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR STATEMENTS THERE, COUNCILMAN.
UM, BUT OTHER CITIES AROUND US, CHAMPAIGN, SPRINGFIELD, THEY GET MINORITY VENDORS TO DO WORK PROJECTS.
UM, SO I KNOW WE CAN GET MORE MINORITY VENDORS, EVEN IF THEY'RE NOT GOT COMPANIES HERE IN DECATUR.
'CAUSE THEY CAN BRING PEOPLE, THEY CAN BRING PEOPLE IN FROM OTHER CITIES TO WORK ON PROJECTS HERE IN DECATUR.
UM, AND I THINK THE, THE STATE LAWS ARE REALLY PUSHING THAT.
UM, THEY'RE MOVING TOWARDS, COMPANIES ARE GONNA HAVE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OR THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO BE GRANTED THE PROJECT, ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S MONEY FUNDS THAT ARE BEING GIVEN OUT OF SPRINGFIELD.
SO I JUST THINK THAT IT'S, WE CAN DO BETTER.
UM, NO, THERE'S ALWAYS CHANCE FOR BETTER.
I'M SAYING I THINK WE CAN DO BETTER AND WE MAY NEED TO LOOK AT INTERNALLY, WHAT CAN WE DO TO HELP GET THEM TO BE BETTER, TO DO BETTER.
MR. KEHL, JUST TWO QUESTIONS BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWERS TO THESE, SO MAYBE THEIR COUNCILMAN COOPER CAN ANSWER THEM OR ANYBODY.
IS THERE SUCH A THING AS A MINORITY BUSINESS DIRECTORY? AND THEN TWO, I GUESS YOU KIND OF ANSWERED THE QUESTION THAT THE STATE'S LOOKING AT IT, BUT WHAT IS THE RADIUS THAT WE GO OUT BEFORE YOU STOP AND STOP LOOKING? I, IS IT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF WE EVER ESTABLISHED THAT.
I THINK WE HAD DISCUSSION ON THAT, BUT DO WE, DO WE HAVE A RADIUS OF HOW FAR OUT WE WOULD GO? WE DO.
IT'S ACTUALLY LISTS 17 COUNTIES IN CENTRAL ILLINOIS.
AND AS LONG AS THE, UM, M B E BUSINESSES FROM ONE OF THOSE, UH, COUNTIES THAT IF YOU SAW IT ON A MAP, IT WOULD BE BUNCH OF COUNTIES IN CENTRAL ILLINOIS, UH, THEN, THEN THEY RECEIVE THAT M V E BENEFIT.
I, I WOULD SAY AS WELL, UM, THAT WE ARE IN, IN REHAB PROJECTS AND IN OTHER PROJECTS, UH, WE ARE GIVING MORE CONTRACTS TO, UH, AFRICAN AMERICAN BUSINESSES THAN EVER BEFORE,
[02:15:01]
UH, IN, IN THE CITY'S HISTORY.THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT WE CAN'T DO MORE.
AND I THINK THAT IT'S ALSO TRUE THAT SOME OF THE, NOW, NOW DEALING JUST WITH PUBLIC WORKS, BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHERE A LOT, NOT ALL, BUT A LOT OF THE M B E IS, IS, HAS TRADITIONALLY BEEN FOCUSED, IS ON PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS.
SOME OF OUR, SOME OF OUR CONTRACTORS ARE REALLY VERY DILIGENT ABOUT GOING AFTER, UM, M B E AND OTHERS GO THROUGH THE MOTIONS
AND, UH, UM, WE, IN THE, MY FOUR AND A HALF YEARS HERE, WE, WE HAVE MADE ONE, UH, PENALTY ASSESSMENT AGAINST ONE CONTRACTOR FOR REALLY, FOR CLEARLY VIOLATING THE RULES AND, AND, UH, UH, SO, SO THAT, THAT DOES HAPPEN.
UH, BUT, UM, IT'S, IT'S POSSIBLE TO MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AND COMPLY WITH ALL THE RULES WITHOUT REALLY MAYBE COMPLYING WITH THE SPIRIT AND, AND INTENT OF IT.
AND SO THAT'S WHY WE BROUGHT TO THE COUNCIL, I THINK TWO YEARS AGO, MAYOR A REVISION TO THE M B E ORDINANCES, WHICH ENHANCED IT EVEN MORE.
IT'S, IT'S WHY, UH, THROUGH THE C I C D AND THROUGH SOME OF THE OUTREACH OF OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, WE'RE, WE'RE INVESTING MORE IN, IN SMALL BUSINESSES.
UH, I THINK IN THE PUBLIC WORKS AREA IT'S A LITTLE BIT HARDER BECAUSE, UM, THEY HAVE TO MEET, UH, BECAUSE THESE PROJECTS ARE LARGE, AS YOU SAY, THEY HAVE TO BOND FOR THEM.
AND SOME OF THE SMALLER BUSINESSES HAVE DIFFICULTY, UH, BONDING IN THESE LARGE AMOUNTS.
AND SO WE ENCOURAGE THEM TO TRY TO BECOME AT LEAST SUBCONTRACTORS.
AND SO, UM, WE ARE ENCOURAGING THIS AT ALL THESE DIFFERENT LEVELS, WHICH ISN'T TO SAY THAT THERE AREN'T SOME OF, I MEAN, I WANT TO, I WANNA MENTION WHAT'S POSITIVE GOING ON WHILE STILL ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THERE'S TRUTH IN WHAT YOU SAY THAT THERE ARE SOME CONTRACTORS WHO MAYBE AREN'T AS DILIGENT IN COMPLIANCE AS THEY SHOULD BE.
UM, WE DO HAVE, UM, IN OUR IN TOWN WE DO HAVE, UH, TWO BLACK CHAMBER BUSINESS CHAMBER CONFERENCES IN TOWN.
SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO REFER THOSE, UM, CONTRACTORS THAT APPEAR TO BE HAVING DIFFICULTY TO REACH OUT TO THOSE, THOSE TWO, UH, AGENCIES TO SEE IF THEY CAN, YOU KNOW, RECOMMEND COMPANIES THAT THEY CAN CONTACT.
IN FACT, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID IS WITH, UH, THE GREATER DECATUR BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, UM, THEY AGREED TO, UH, HOST A WEB LANDING SITE FOR US SO THAT AS WE EXPLAIN ON OUR WEBSITE ALL THE CONDITIONS IN TERMS OF OUR M B E, AND THEY SAY, OKAY, GREAT NOW, BUT WHAT I REALLY NEED IS A LIST OF, OF MINORITY BUSINESSES.
WE DON'T WANT, I DON'T WANT THE CITY TO MAINTAIN THAT.
AND SO THE GREATER DECATUR BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SAID, WE'LL DO THAT WHEN WE SAID, GREAT, WE'LL MAKE THAT LINK FOR YOU.
SO IT'S, IT'S LITTLE THINGS LIKE THAT THAT I THINK OFTENTIMES DON'T GET NOTICED WHEN, WHEN JUST ONE CONTRACT LIKE THIS COMES UP AND WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR THEIR SUPPORT.
ANY FURTHER QUESTION? COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, MR. HORN? MR. NOLL, JUST TO CONFIRM, UM, THAT LER WILL BE ABLE TO MEET THE HOURS WORK REQUIREMENT.
I WILL NOT, UH, KNOW THAT TILL TOWARD THE END OF THE PROJECT, BUT, UH, THEY, THEY HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN THE PAST, I WOULD SAY CALL THE QUESTION PLEASE.
[10. Resolution Accepting the Bid and Authorizing the Execution of a Contract with Burdick Plumbing & Heating Co., Inc. for the William Street Pump Station Improvements Project, City Project 2022-17]
RESOLUTION, ACCEPTING THE BID AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH VERDICT PLUMBING AND HEATING COMPANY FOR THE WILLIAMS STREET PUMP STATION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, CITY PROJECT 2022 DASH 17.MOTION TO RESOLUTION TO PASS AND BE ADOPTED.
MR. NOLL, MAYOR I MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, THIS IS THE, UH, THE WILLIAM THE WILLIAMS STREET PUMP STATION IS OVER BY, UH, THE FIRE STATION OVER OFF OF WILLIAMS STREET AND, UH, 27TH STREET AREA THAT IS A, UH, A LARGE, UH, UH, INGROUND, UH, WATER TANK THAT, UH, ALLOW OR ENABLES US TO PUMP WATER TO THE NORTHEAST SIDE OF THE CITY.
THE PUMP STATION IS, IS OLD AS, UH, PAST ITS, UH, USEFUL LIFE.
AND, UH, THIS, THIS PROJECT IS, IS PART OF THIS THE, UH, WATER SUSTAINABILITY PROJECT.
PUT THE AIR BY C D M SMITH TO, UH, RE REHABILITATE THAT PUMP STATION.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. NEWELL? MR. HORN? MR. NOLL? IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I NOTICED THAT THE BID PRICE WAS APPROXIMATELY 15% OVER THE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE.
AND ONE THING THAT CAUGHT MY ATTENTION WAS THE COST OF THE SUBCONTRACTOR BID FOR ROOFING, WHICH WAS $225,000.
AND I AM CURIOUS AS TO WHY, UM, WE DECIDE TO USE ONE
[02:20:01]
CONTRACTOR FOR THE ENTIRE PROJECT AS OPPOSED TO ONE CONTRACTOR FOR THE ROOFING AND ONE CONTRACTOR FOR THE OTHER PROJECTS.AS I RECALL, UH, IT, IT'S USUALLY OUR PREFERENCE IF WE CAN, TO DO, TO DO THE PROJECTS UNDER ONE CONTRACTOR SO WE DON'T, SO THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE TO, UH, COORDINATE BETWEEN THEM.
NOW THERE IS THE, UH, UH, THERE IS SOMETIMES A POSSIBILITY OF, OF, UH, OF GETTING A BETTER, A BETTER PRICE IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORK THROUGH A PRIME CONTRACTOR.
THEY DIDN'T FILL AT THIS TIME THAT, THAT THE ROOF WAS GOING TO BE AS SUBSTANTIAL A PART TO KEEP IT SEPARATE FROM THE, THE PROJECT.
I HAVE A, IT, IT, YOUR EXPLANATION HELPS, BUT I, I DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN BY THAT BECAUSE AS FAR AS I KNOW, THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACTOR IS NOT IN THE ROOFING, UH, BUSINESS IN TERMS OF THEIR DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS.
AND THE ROOFER IS OUT OF SPRINGFIELD, I BELIEVE.
AND IT SEEMS TO ME THERE MIGHT BE LOCAL DECATUR COMPANIES THAT CAN DO COMMERCIAL ROOFING PROJECTS LIKE THIS AND THEY MAY BE LESS EXPENSIVE, WHICH WOULD, UM, WOULD MEAN THAT, UH, THAT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT IS BEING THE BID PRICE AND THE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE WOULD BE LESS.
I JUST, I SEE THAT WHEN I READ THIS, I, I THOUGHT THESE COULD BE TWO SEPARATE PROJECTS AND I WOULD'VE RATHER HAD A, A LOCAL ROOFING COMPANY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO BID ON THIS ONE.
WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT BURDICK'S, UH, BID PLAN WAS, BUT THEY, THEY NORMALLY SHOP LOCAL.
I MEAN, THAT, THAT IS, I I CAN'T SAY THAT THEY DID NOT, UH, UH, IN THIS, IN THIS INSTANCE, I WOULD SAY THAT, UH, WE HAVE SEEN THAT ROOFING ROOFING WORK HAS BEEN, UH, GONE THROUGH THE ROOF, SO TO SPEAK, RECENTLY BECAUSE OF, UH, SUPPLY LINE ISSUES AND IT, IT ROOFING IS VERY EXPENSIVE THESE DAYS.
ANY FURTHER COMMENT? CALL TO QUESTION PLEASE.
[11. Resolution Authorizing a Professional Engineering Services Agreement with Crawford, Murphy and Tilly, Inc. to Provide Construction Support Services for the William Street Pump Station Improvement Project, City Project 2022-17]
11 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CRAWFORD MURPHY AND TILLY INC.TO PROVIDE CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE WILLIAMS STREET PUMP STATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, CITY PROJECT 2022 DASH 17.
MOTION AT THE RESOLUTION TO PASS AND BE ADOPTED.
ANYTHING TO ADD? THIS IS THE ENGINEERING PROJECT ON THE SAME ITEM THAT YOU JUST APPROVED.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? SEEING NONE.
[12. Consent Calendar: Items on the Consent Agenda/Calendar are matters requiring City Council approval or acceptance, but which are routine and recurring in nature, are not controversial, are matters of limited discretion, and about which little or no discussion is anticipated. However, staff’s assessment of what should be included on the Consent Agenda/Calendar can be in error. For this reason, any Consent Agenda/Calendar item can be removed from the Consent Agenda/Calendar by any member of the governing body, for any reason, without the need for concurrence by any other governing body member. Items removed from the Consent Agenda/Calendar will be discussed and voted on separately from the remainder of the Consent Agenda/Calendar.]
TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR.WE NEED TO REMOVE ITEM G FROM CONSIDERATION.
UH, DOES ANYONE ELSE ON COUNCIL HAVE AN ITEM THAT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED? SEE NONE.
ITEM A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING, ACCEPTING THE STEP GRANT AWARDED TO THE DECATUR POLICE DEPARTMENT BY THE ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
ITEM B ORDINANCE ANNEXING TERRITORY 25 74 AND 25 70 SOUTH SHORES DRIVE.
ITEM C, RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACTION REGARDING UNSAFE STRUCTURES.
ITEM D, RECEIVING AND FILING OF MINUTES OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
ITEM E RESOLUTION APPROVING APPOINTMENT, DECATUR METROPOLITAN EXPOSITION AUDITORIUM AND OFFICE BUILDING AUTHORITY CIVIC CENTER BOARD ITEM F RESOLUTION APPROVING REAPPOINTMENT DECATUR METROPOLITAN EXPOSITION AUDITORIUM AND OFFICE BUILDING AUTHORITY CIVIC CENTER BOARD ITEM H RESOLUTION APPROVING AND DETERMINING THE NEED FOR CONFIDENTIALITY OF MINUTES OF CLOSED MEETINGS.
AND ITEM A RESOLUTION REGARDING HALLOWEEN TRICK OR TREE HOURS.
I NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ITEMS AS PRESENTED.
[VI. Other Business]
ANYONE ON COUNCIL HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS? PAT, YOU DON'T REALLY JUST SHORT.UH, I WANNA COMPLIMENT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
I SAW THE LATEST DATA ON TRAFFIC STOPS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WHICH WAS VERY GOOD SINCE THAT WHEN WE DID THE SURVEY FOR THE PUBLIC.
WHAT YEAR OR TWO YEARS AGO? UH, PUBLIC SAFETY SPEEDING AND THAT WAS ONE OF THEIR TOP PRIORITIES.
SO I WAS GLAD TO SEE THE RESULTS IN THAT.
TRY, UH, WEST MAINE IF YOU COULD
[VII. Recess to Closed Executive Session]
SEE NONE.WE NEED TO RECESS TO CLOSE EXECUTIVE SESSION.
[02:25:01]
RECESS TO CLOSE EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO TWO C FIVE THE PURCHASE OR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY FOR THE USE OF THE PUBLIC BODY.SEVEN AYES, NO NAYS, WE ADJOURNED TO CLOSE EXECUTIVE SESSION.
WE ARE BACK IN REGULAR SESSION AS SOON AS EVERYBODY SITS DOWN.
MOVING TO NEW VIS WHEN YOU HAVE MOVED TO, UM, RETURN.
RETURN TO, I THINK I DID THAT OPEN.
DOES SOMEBODY HAVE TO SAY YES? I THOUGHT WE DID THAT IN THERE.
[Resolution Authorizing Farmland Real Estate Purchase Pursuant to the Water Consultant's Recommendations]
NEW BUSINESS RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FARMLAND REAL ESTATE PURCHASE PURSUANT TO THE WATER CONSULTANTS RECOMMENDATIONS.THE RESOLUTION DO PASS AND BE ADOPTED.
MR. WRIGHTON, DO YOU NEED TO SAY SOME STUFF? SHORT, QUICKLY? UH, MAYOR AND COUNSEL, I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD, BUT BESIDES WHAT'S IN THE RESOLUTION, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO SAY? I'M JUST CURIOUS.
ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? UM, MS. MORLAND, DO I NEED TO READ ANYTHING INTO THE RECORD RESOLUTION? YEAH, YOU SHOULD GIVE A BRIEF, UM, OR AT LEAST ENOUGH DESCRIPTION SO THAT EVERY, IT'S CLEAR WHAT IT'S BEING, WHAT'S BEING VOTED ON.
UM, MAYOR, THE, THE RESOLUTION SAYS THAT THE REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AGREEMENT PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL HEREWITH BETWEEN PHIL MAYALL, TRUSTEE OF THE RALPH AND ALICE MAYALL TRUST IN THE CITY OF DECATUR, ILLINOIS, BE HEREBY RECEIVED AND PLACED ON FILE AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF APPROXIMATELY 82 ACRES IN DEWITT COUNTY, UM, FOR USE BY THE CITY'S WATER UTILITY.
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? MR. HORN? THE CITY NEEDS NEW WATER SUPPLIES FOR POTENTIAL NEW USERS.
UH, THIS PURCHASE IS LOW RISK TO THE CITY OF DECATUR AND HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE VERY HIGH IMPACT IN TERMS OF OUR FUTURE WATER SUPPLIES.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UH, QUESTION.
UM, DO WE NEED AN AMOUNT OR WOULD THAT COME BACK LATER? THE AMOUNT, THE AMOUNT'S IN THE, IT, IT, IT'S IN THE, IT'S NOT IN THE RESOLUTION, BUT IT'S IN THE AGREEMENT WHICH IS ATTACHED TO THE, UH, TO THE RESOLUTION IS $1.435 MILLION.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, COUNCILMAN COOPER? AYE.
NEED A MOTION TO ADJOURN? SO MOVE SECOND.