Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
City Council Minutes 2007 10-23-07
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE, KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS, HELD IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 800 GAME FARM ROAD ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2007. Mayor Burd called the meeting to order at 9:50 P.M and led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Clerk Milschewski called the roll. Ward I Leslie Present Werderich Present Ward II Golinski Present Plocher Present Ward III Munns Present Sutcliff Present Ward IV Besco Present Spears Present Also present: City Clerk Milschewski, City Treasurer Powell, Interim City Attorney Roth, City Administrator McLaughlin, Assistant City Administrator Olson, Finance Director Mika, Director of Public Works Dhuse, Police Lieutenant Schwartzkopt Director of Park & Recreation Mogle, Community Development Director Miller, Public Relations Officer Spies and City Engineer Wywrot. OUORUM A quorum was established. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS Mayor Burd asked the staff and guests to introduce themselves. She welcomed the guests and asked them to enter their names on the attendance sheet provided. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA Mayor Burd noted that it was requested that the audit results and the ordinance amending the liquor license be added to the consent agenda. Also, it was requested that a bill in the amount of $148.50 be removed from the bill list. She entertained a motion to approve the amendments to the agenda. So moved by Alderman Besco; seconded by Alderman Werderich. Motion approved by a viva voce vote. COMMITTEE MEETING DATES Public Works Committee 7:00 P.M., Tuesday, November 6, 2007 City Hall Conference Room Economic Development Committee 7:00 P.M., Tuesday, November 20, 2007 City Hall Council Chambers Administration Committee 7:00 P.M., Tuesday, November 6, 2007 City Hall Council Chambers Public Safety Committee 6:00 P.M., Tuesday, November 20 2007 City of Yorkville Conference Room PRESENTATIONS None. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anthony and Nicole Zangler Anthony and Nicole Zangler, petitioners, have filed an application with the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, requesting annexation and rezoning from Kendall County A -1 to United City of Yorkville R -1 One Family Residence District. The real property consists of approximately 5.7 acres, located at 96 Quinsey Lane, Kendall County, Illinois. Mayor Burd entertained a motion to go in to public hearing. So moved by Alderman Leslie; seconded by Alderman Spears. Motion approved by a viva voce vote. The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Citv Council — October 23. 2007 — Dan 2 Please see attached Report of Proceedings by Christine Vitosh, C.S.R from Depo Court Reporting Service for the transcription of this portion of the public hearing. Mayor Burd entertained a motion to close the public hearing. So moved by Alderman Spears; seconded by Alderman Leslie. Motion approved by a viva voce vote. CITIZEN COMMENTS Jeff Olson with James M_ Olson and Associates explained that he was a licensed surveyor and commented on the request for a variance at 212 Spring Street. He stated that there is no natural reason (such as a ravine, hill, etc) to prevent the structure from being moved. Andrew Bobbitt, Executive Director of the Fox Valley YMCA addressed the Council. He explained that when YMCA received a donation of land in Yorkville for a facility they were solicited by former Park & Recreation Director Laura Brown seeking concepts and proposals for public partnerships with the United City of Yorkville. The core focus of the project was recreation, aquatic and active adult centers. In 2006, former Mayor Prochaska suggested a partnership committee be developed to fully explore this idea. The committee was comprised of representatives from the City Council, the Park and Recreation Department and representatives of the YMCA. After months of meetings, the committee agreed to a pool partnership to present to the city. He has already presented the proposal to the Park Board and he requested consideration by the City Council. Mayor Burd suggested that this presentation be placed on the next Economic Development Committee agenda. Rita Nemchausky, 405 E. Spring Street, commented that she agreed with Mrs. Edwards's comments made during the Committee of the Whole meeting about the legality of the shed placement at 212 Spring Street however she supported the variance for it. Michael Keck, 406 Liberty Street, noted that he has lived across from Mr. Franklin for seven year and during that time, Mr. Franklin has done nothing but improve his property. He stated that he felt there is a "letter of the law" and a "spirit of the law" and he asked the City Council to consider the spirit of the law ^ and allow the variance. Dave Schmelzle, 207 State Street asked when grass would be planted at the homes effected by the street project. City Engineer Wywrot indicated that he would speak with the project director, Mark Landers from Smith Engineering and Park Director Scott Sleezer about the seeding. Mr. Schmelzle also had a concern about the storm sewer near his property that is covered by a manhole cover instead of an open grate. Mr. Wywrot explained that the manhole cover was temporary so that debris would not fall into the storm sewer during construction. He indicated that an open grate will be placed there in the future. Mr. Schmelzle asked the Council to consider time frames or benchmarks for future road programs. He stated there were none for this project and that it has been a long five months. Diane Pobol requested that the Council open the discussion regarding a second attorney to the public for their comments. CONSENT AGENDA 1. FY 06/07 Audit Results —approve the Independent Auditors Report from Wolf and Company for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2007, as presented (COW 2007 -36) 2. Ordinance 2007 -70 - Amending City Code Regarding Increasing the Number of Package Liquor Licenses — as presented (COW 2007 -37) Mayor Burd entertained a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. So moved by Alderman Werderich; seconded by Alderman Gohnski. Alderman Spears questioned if it should be noted that the consent agenda is amended because it was indicated that there may be changes to the audit. Attorney Roth suggested that the items be voted on separately rather than by consent agenda. Alderman Golinski withdrew his second; Alderman Werderich withdrew his motion. FY 06/07 Audit Results Mayor Burd entertained a motion to approve the FY 06/07 Audit Results and authorize the City Administrator to turn it in to Springfield, Illinois unless he receives concerns prior to the 30"' of the month. So moved by Alderman Werderich; seconded by Alderman Golinski. The Minutes of the Regular Meetine of the Citv Council — October 23, 2007 — Dage 3 Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -8 Nays -0 Spears -aye, Plocher -aye, Werderich -aye, Golinski -aye, Besco -aye, Leslie -aye, Sutcliff -aye, Munns -aye Ordinance 2007 -70 Amending City Code Regarding Increasing the Number of Package Liquor Licenses (COW 2007 -37) Mayor Burd entertained a motion to approve an ordinance amending Section 3 -3-4 -6 of Chapter 3(Liquor Control) of Title 3 (Business and License Regulations) of the United City of Yorkville City Code regarding increasing the number of package liquor licenses, as presented. So moved by Alderman Plocher; seconded by Alderman Spears. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -8 Nays -0 Werderich -aye, Golmski -aye, Besco -aye, Leslie -aye, Sutcliff -aye, Munns -aye, Spears -aye, Plocher -aye PLAN COMMISSION /ZONING BOARD OF APPEAL No report. MINUTES FOR APPROVAL A motion was made by Alderman Munns to approve the minutes of the Committee of the Whole meeting of October 9, 2007; seconded by Alderman Plocher. Alderman Spears requested that it be noted on page 4, second paragraph that Mayor Burd asked Mr. Falatos to meet with her privately the next day to discuss what could be worked out. A motion was made by Alderman Spears to approve the minutes of the Committee of the Whole meeting of October 9, 2007 as amended; seconded by Alderman Plocher. Motion approved by a viva voce vote. BILLS FOR APPROVAL A motion was made by Alderman Munns to approve the paying of the bills listed on the Detailed Board Report dated October 16, 2007 totaling the following amended amounts: checks in the amount of $1,188,896.73 (vendors); $252,391.77 (payroll period ending 10/13/07); for a total of $1,441,288.50; seconded by Alderman Gohnski. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -7 Nays -1 Munns -aye, Plocher -aye, Spears -nay, Sutcliff -aye, Werderich -aye, Besco -aye, Golinski -aye, Leslie -aye REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT Ordinance 2007 -71 Vacating a Portion of Sleepy Hollow Road COW 2007 -34 Mayor Burd entertained a motion to approve an ordinance vacating a portion of Sleepy Hollow Road, as presented, subject to final legal review. So moved by Alderman Plocher; seconded by Alderman Werderich. Attorney Roth noted that the ordinance will include a provision to maintain access to the Welles property. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -7 Nays -1 Plocher -aye, Werderich -aye, Golinski -aye, Besco -aye, Leslie -aye, Sutcliff -aye, Munns -aye, Spears -nay Amending Governing Ordinance Mayor Burd entertained a motion to approve an ordinance amending Ordinance 2007 -53. So moved by Alderman Plocher; seconded by Alderman Golinski. Mayor Burd asked for clarification on this item. She thought the Council was to decide if this ordinance should be sent back to the City Council for a vote rather than voting on it. The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Citv Council — October 23, 2007 — nage 4 City Administrator McLaughlin stated that his understanding after reviewing the state statute, the mayor is to required to report out the veto at a public meeting. This is the only action required tonight. He stated that if the Council wants to take action, a motion would be needed to reconsider the ordinance at a future meeting. Attorney Roth added that the appropriate action would be to make a motion to reconsider and once it is seconded there could be further discussion. If the motion to reconsider is approve, the matter will be place on the next City Council agenda for a vote. Mayor Burd reported that she vetoed the original ordinance and now it is back before the Council to determine if they would like to reconsider. A motion was made by Alderman Munns to reconsider the Governing Ordinance #2007 -69, an ordinance amending Ordinance 2007 -53; seconded by Alderman Golinski. Alderman Leslie asked if there has ever been, in the history of Yorkville, a veto. Mayor Burd stated that this is the first one. He commented that he felt it was very unfortunate that this matter has been vetoed. He stated that he has dealt with the division of the City Council in the past. He noted that Mayor Burd was an alderman at the time and probably the impetus to a large degree. He stated that he did not like feeling "robbed" of his vote. He supported reconsideration of the amendment to the ordinance however he felt that the vote will be 3 -5 again and this will create a dangerous precedent that will drive a wedge between the members of the Council. He pointed out that Mayor Burd never was chair of a committee and he felt this was a "big deal" for her. Mayor Burd interjected that it was not a big deal. Alderman Leslie went over the events that led to the amendment. He noted that he spends many hours a week with staff trying to get city business done and he felt that it was "Mickey Mouse bull crap"; who wants what and who doesn't get what. He stated that to come in and veto something takes the power away from the aldermen's vote. He reiterated that this set a dangerous precedent and he felt that Mayor Burd was remiss in using her veto power. He felt it was a wrong move that will draw division and that the mayor "shot a silver bullet" on an issue that doesn't make a bit of difference. He commented that her veto personally offended him. He stated that the Council was here to make policy and if they can't talk to one another and come to a consensus on something as simple as to who gets a liaison appointment it is wrong. He suggested that the veto be overturned, the amendment be discussed and a resolution be reached that appeases who ever needs to be appeased to move forward. He stated he did not support the veto and he asked that one of the three re mainin g aldermen support the reconsideration so that this matter could be resolved. Mayor Burd asked if anyone wanted to talk for the veto; anyone who supported the veto. There were no comments. Alderman Besco stated that he agreed with Alderman Leslie that the veto was not setting a good precedent. He noted that there are too many serious issues at hand and that this was not an important issue for the mayor to use her veto powers. He noted that the Public Works Committee worked out their liaisons amicably while they were waiting for a policy to be set. He did have an issue with the School Board appointment because he felt there may be a conflict of interest. He stated that the Council needs to work things out because they are working for the people of Yorkville. He noted that the members of the Council sacrifice a great deal of their time to represent the citizens. He felt it was out of line for the mayor to use veto powers on something so trivial. He suggested it was time for the members of the Council to "grow up ". Alderman Sutcliff stated that she felt it is ridiculous people can't get along but there are people on the Council `that want their way and will do anything to get it" and she felt that this was an extreme case of their trying to get their way. She felt the veto came from a "silly thing" and was the only way to stop things; the only way to make a stand for each alderman to have an equal say. She stated that each person on the Council was elected to represent their constituents and everyone is equal and not more important than the other. She didn't agree with using statutes to get your way or to get more power for personal reasons and she felt that things have gone too fair and should be stopped while it is minuscule and not important. Alderman Spears felt this issue was reflecting on her. She explained that Alderman Munns expressed a desire to represent the City at the School Board in an effort to monitor where the city's taxes were going however the mayor indicated that she wanted Alderman Sutcliff to hold the position. Alderman Spears discussed the appointment with Alderman Sutcliff and indicated Alderman Munns interest. Alderman Spears stated that Alderman Sutcliff told her that she felt Alderman Munns wanted the position because he does not want the city to expend funds to the school district. Also, recently there was a letter to the editor in the Kendall County Record from Alderman Sutcliff discussing the teacher's contract. Alderman Spears also noted that Alderman Sutcliff has been a substitute teacher for the Yorkville school district and she felt that this caused a conflict of interest. Because of these things, Alderman Spears was against Alderman Sutcliff as School Board liaison. Alderman Spears further noted that neither the mayor nor the The Minutes of the Resular Meetine of the City Council — October 23. 2007 — nage 5 other members of the Public Safety Committee have served as a chairman. She felt they were unaware of the added responsibilities and time the chairman incurs. Alderman Spears explained she read the Governing Ordinance and interpreted that the chairman was responsible for the appointment of the liaisons. She reminded the Council that the ordinance was written by Mayor Surd because she "got the shaft" by the former mayor who never being appointed her as a chairman. Alderman Spears stated that this fact was upsetting to her and Burd at the time and that the Council approved the Governing Ordinance because they saw things were unfair. Alderman Golinski stated that in the whole scheme of things this issue is trivial however he had a problem with the mayor saying one thing and then doing something completely opposite. He quoted the mayor from a previous meeting "This is not written in stone. This is City Council committees; your committees. What you do with it, what you make of it, how you get along with each other that's in your ballpark now because that is how I wrote the Governing Ordinance. I took the mayor out of it, good luck." Alderman Golinski stated that obviously that is not how the mayor really felt. He noted that the recommendation from the Administration Committee and the consensus of the City Council was to make a change which the mayor vetoed. He felt it was unprecedented and wrong. Alderman Munns read a statement (see attached) expressing his concern with the mayor's veto on the ordinance. He asked her to reconsider her veto and to save this privilege for an important issue that means something for runnin the city. Alderman Besco stated that he read the state statute on this and it was his understanding that the veto powers were limited to issue of public safety and the expenditure of city funds. He asked Attorney Roth if this was true. Attorney Roth explained that there are many statutes regarding vetoes and the one that is applicable indicates that any ordinance, resolution or appropriation motions are subject to veto. Alderman Werderich cautioned Aldermen Besco, Leslie, Munns, Spears and Golinski in assuming that every single vote in the future will be 5 -3 based upon party division. He took this as a personal affront because he looks at every single issue that comes before him and votes the way he thinks it should be voted on based on his electorate. He stated that if they think that he is going to vote because someone told him to vote one way or the other they are mistaken. Alderman Leslie hoped that the next vote the Council looks at on this matter goes 6 -2 or better. He hoped Alderman Werderich was smart enough to see that the long term impact the veto will have and would vote to reconsider. He noted that he has had conversations with Mayor Burd and knows the details that drove her to run for office and he supported and encouraged her to run for office. He also noted that he has been a "swing vote" on many issues. He stated that in the entirety of former Mayor Prochaska's term of eight years, he never exercised his right to veto. He noted that there were votes that Mayor Prochaska was dismayed with but he "took it on the chin ". He stated that the impact of a veto is not something the Council can come back from. He stated that if the veto is not overturned, it is a terrible precedent. He stated that he felt the mayor struggles with the personal details of individuals and that is what happened with the appointments. He asked her to reconsider her veto. Alderman Spears commented that while she was at the Illinois Municipal League Conference she asked other people if their mayor or village president had ever vetoed any decision made by the council or trustees. She stated only one person said yes and it was the mayor of Plano. Mayor Roberts' veto concerned the acquiring of a liquor license by the spouse of one of Plano's aldermen. He explained that none of the council wanted to vote against the spouse so he vetoed the ordinance. He told her he was thanked later for doing so. Alderman Spears felt that unfortunately Mayor Burd would not be thanked for her veto. She noted that the Council has become split once again; she felt it was being encouraged and she did not see an end in sight. Alderman Munns threw out the definition of veto "the power of one branch of government, the mayor, to reject the legislation of another, the city council ". He asked how many other things could the mayor veto; everything the Council brings up. The mayor stated that this was true. Mayor Burd commented that she saw a committee that had come to a decision by a majority vote that the chairman did not agree with. The ch airman refused to accept the decision, took it into her own hands to o back to the Council whole g as a w o e and have them vote as a group against her committee. The other aldermen who do not serve on this committee voted to make these committee members kowtow to the ch airman . She felt that this was the thing that divided the Council. The decision to disregard what the three aldermen voted on and change an ordinance to give power to the chairman goes against democracy and there is a precept to protecting the minority in our democracy. She felt that this is why veto power is given to mayors and she stated that she has no qualms about using it. She stated that she gave the three aldermen the chance to have some power where it was taken away. She felt that if this issue is not important, why change the ordinance. She stated that she did not feel it was a minor thing and she made The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Citv Council — October 23, 2007 — nage 6 it known she disagreed with the change. She stated she had the authority to veto so she did not see it as being any more divisive than the first vote. She commented that she was never "that upset" about not being a ch airman in the past because she is mayor. She did not feel the lack of being a chair was a big deal and she reiterated that it didn't bother her that much. Alderman Spears objected to the mayor's comments on not being a chair. She noted that Mayor Burd came to her after former Mayor Prochaska appointed Alderman Spears chairman of the Public Safety Committee and told her the only reason Alderman Spears was appointed was because she threatened a lawsuit against the former mayor because he was chauvinist. Mayor Burd ruled Alderman Spears out of order as her time to talk was up. Motion to reconsider approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -6 Nays -2 Gohnski -aye, Besco -aye, Leslie -aye, Sutcliff-nay, Munns -aye, Spears -aye, Plocher -aye, Werderich -nay CITY COUNCIL REPORT No report. ATTORNEY'S REPORT No report. CITY CLERK'S REPORT No report. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT No report. CITY ADMINISTATOR'S REPORT No report. FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No report. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS REPORT Director Dhuse reported that the contractor was re- installing the pump on Well #7 when a portion of the pump and motor fell down the well. They are in the process of checking the bolts and pipes. He stated he would report back to the Council as soon as he got an update. Administrator McLaughlin noted that any work done now will be at the contractor's expense. CHIEF OF POLICE'S REPORT No report. DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION'S REPORT Director Mogle reported that beginning tonight there will be a series of meetings with the Forest Preserve District to discuss the Hoover agreement. He noted that the Forest Preserve District has closed on the final parcel of Hoover. It has been some time since the agreements were written so the District contacted him to meet to discuss the fine points of the agreements and address some issues that need to be resolved. The Boy Scouts tenure is ending and the property will be under the control of the Forest Preserve District and the United City of Yorkville. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REPORT No report. COMMUNITY RELATIONS OFFICER'S REPORT No report. COMMUNITY & LIAISON REPORT No report. COMMITTEE REPORTS PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE REPORT No report. The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Citv Council — October 23, 2007 — na2e 7 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT Ordinance 2007 -72 Approving a Side and Rear Yard Setback Variance for 212 Spring Street (ZBA 2007 -34) A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to approve an ordinance approving a side and rear yard setback variance for 212 Spring Street; seconded by Alderman Plocher. Alderman Werderich apologized to Mr. Franklin because he was going to vote against the variance because there are rules to follow. He offered his assistance to Mr. Franklin if he moves the shed. Alderman Leslie explained that he has struggled with this issue. He noted that the structure was not permanent and he was not in favor of giving the homeowner the long -term opportunity of a permanent structure. He favored a condition to the ordinance which would specify the variance was for a non- permanent structure. Alderman Besco stated that he was not in favor of the variance and he too offered assistance to Mr. Franklin. He hoped the neighbors could get along better but commented that this was hard to ask since the City Council couldn't seem to behave themselves or get along. Alderman Munns commented that he was in favor of the variance since they have been granted in the past. Alderman Plocher stated he would decide based on the Ward III aldermen since they know what is best in their ward. He stated that he spoke with them earlier and he was going to vote with them. Alderman Golmski asked how the Ward III aldermen were voting. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -6 Nays -2 Munns -aye, Spears -aye, Plocher -aye, Werderich -aye, Golinski -aye, Besco -nay, Leslie -nay, Sutcliff- -aye Mayor Burd noted that Alderman Werderich voted in favor of the variance. He stated that he voted wrong; he wanted to vote against the variance. Attorney Roth noted that until the mayor declares the outcome of the vote an individual member who cast a vote in error can request an opportunity for a re- vote. He noted that the mayor did not confirm the vote so she can call for a revote. Mayor Burd called for a revote. Administrator McLaughlin clarified that the motion on the floor was to approve the ordinance granting the variance. He stated that if someone is not supportive of the variance they should vote no. Alderman Munns asked if this "re- reading" of a motion was going to occur for every ordinance. He stated that while it was after 11:00 p.m. this has never happened before. Administrator McLaughlin stated he was trying to avoid the vote being "goofed" up again. Attorney Roth re- stated the motion; it is to approve the variance. A vote in favor approves it and a vote of nay is against it. Re -call vote. Motion fails by a roll call vote. Ayes -4 Nays -3 Present -1 Besco -nay, Leslie -nay, Sutcliff -aye, Munns -aye, Spears - present, Plocher -aye, Werderich -nay, Golinski -aye Attorney Roth noted that the variance was denied because a 2/3's vote was needed for approval as the Zoning Board of Appeals had a negative recommendation for the variance. Alderman Munns asked why Attorney Roth was just informing the Council of this requirement. He stated that since the vote was changed the first time maybe it should be reconsidered. Alderman Golinski questioned which ordinance the council was approving; the original ordinance or the one with conditions. Attorney Roth stated that the only matter before the Council is the ordinance without conditions. Alderman Gohnski stated that there was an ordinance which had conditions regarding gutters, etc. that was in the Council's packet. Director Miller indicated that he drafted the ordinances; one with conditions and one without and both copies were in the City Council packets. Alderman Spears asked she could bring this up again for a vote since she voted present. Mayor Burd stated that the vote could not be changed because Attorney Roth announced the vote. Attorney Roth clarified that the mayor had to announce the vote. Mayor Burd stated that a motion could be made to The Minutes of the Regular Meetine of the Citv Council — October 23, 2007 — Mee 8 reconsider the variance at the next meeting and Attorney Roth clarified that it could be reconsidered at this meeting. A motion was made by Alderman Plocher to reconsider the ordinance; seconded by Alderman Munns. Motion to reconsider approved by a viva voce vote. Attorney Roth explained that once a matter is reconsidered, it is as if nothing happened at all. The Council is starting fresh. He reminded the Council that due to the negative recommendation by the ZBA, a 2/3s vote was needed for the variance to be approved. An abstention, present or pass is not a favorable vote. Alderman Spears asked for clarification that the structure is not permanent. Alderman Leslie stated that this is correct. He reiterated his suggestion to add a condition to the variance ordinance that a permanent structure would not be allowed. He stated that if this was added, he would support the variance. Attorney Roth stated that Alderman Leslie could make the motion as he sees fit. A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to approve an ordinance authorizing approving a side and rear yard setback variance for 212 Spring Street as presented, subject to final staff and legal review and as amended to add a non - permanent structure allowance only; seconded by Alderman Plocher. Attorney Roth clarified that the non - permanent structure is being treated as a legal, non - conforming use. This condition would not allow for improvements, enlargement of the structure, if it falls or burns down it can't be rebuilt, etc. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -6 Nays -2 Sutcliff- -aye, Munns -aye, Spears -aye, Plocher -aye, Werderich -nay, Golinski -aye, Besco -nay, Leslie -aye Ordinance 2007 -73 Approving and Authorizing the Execution of Development Agreement - Thomas Alarm Systems (PC 2007 -32) A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to approve an ordinance approving and authorizing the execution of a Development Agreement, as presented, subject to final staff and legal review; seconded by Alderman Munns. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -7 Nays -0 Abstain -1 Spears- abstain, Plocher -aye, Werderich -aye, Golinski -aye, Besco -aye, Leslie -aye, Sutcliff -aye, Munns -aye i Ordinance 2007 -74 Approving the Rezoning of Certain Property From Route 47 -2 to B -3 Zoning Classification - Thomas Alarm Systems (PC 2007 -32) A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to approve an ordinance approving the rezoning of certain property from R-2 to B -3 zoning classification, as presented, subject to final staff and legal review; seconded by Alderman Plocher. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -7 Nays-0 Abstain -1 Plocher -aye, Werderich -aye, Golinski -aye, Besco -aye, Leslie -aye, Sutcliff -aye, Munns -aye, Spears - abstain Resolution 2007 -54 Approving the Preliminary PUD Plat of Subdivision for the Fields of Westhaven Subdivision (PC 2007 -25) A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to approve a resolution approving the preliminary PUD Plan and Plat of Subdivision for the Fields at Westhaven Subdivision, as presented, subject to final staff and legal review; seconded by Alderman Plocher. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -6 Nays -0 Abstain -1 Present -1 Werderich -aye, Golinski -aye, Besco present, Leslie -aye, Sutcliff- -aye, Munns -aye, Spears- abstain, Plocher -aye The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Citv Council - October 23, 2007 - DaLye 9 Ordinance 2007 -75 Approving the Rezoning of Certain Property from R -1 to Estate District Zoning Classification - Welles Property (PC 2007 -33) A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to approve an ordinance approving the rezoning of certain property from R -1 to Estate District zoning classification (Welles Property), as presented, subject to final staff and legal review; seconded by Alderman Plocher. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -7 Nays -0 Abstain -1 Golinski -aye, Besco - abstain, Leslie -aye, Sutcliff- -aye, Munns -aye, Spears -aye, Plocher -aye, Werderich -aye Authorizing the Execution of an Amended and Restated Annexation Agreement (B & P Products) (PC 2007 -22) A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to approve an ordinance authorizing the execution of an amended and restated Annexation Agreement for the development known as B &P Properties, as presented, subject to final staff and legal review; seconded by Alderman Plocher. Alderman Spears commented that she was against the agreement due to the density of the development. Alderman Besco stated that the information in the agreement that was sign was wrong; the property to the north is zoned county AG -1. He stated that until this information is corrected he would vote against the amendment. He also was against the density. Alderman Werderich stated that there are rules regarding density and the density is higher than allowed. Alderman Leslie asked if there could be an opportunity for a redraft of the ordinance. Attorney Roth stated that the motion could be withdrawn and the matter tabled or it could be voted on reapproved with changes later. He suggested that if the Council was not ready to approve the ordinance the matter could be tabled. Administrator McLaughlin noted that if the Council wanted to reconsider the matter it would have stay over for one full meeting so that the public could be given notice. He suggested that the matter - be tabled and the petitioner be contacted with the suggested changes. Alderman Leslie agreed. A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to table the ordinance authorizing the execution of an amended and restated Annexation Agreement for the development known as B &P Properties; seconded by Alderman Plocher. Motion to table approved by a viva voce vote. Approving the Rezoning of Certain Property from R -1 to PUD Classification (B & P Products) (PC 2007 -22) A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to approve an ordinance approving the rezoning of certain property from M -1 to PUD zoning classification (B & P Products); seconded by Alderman Munns. Motion to table approved by a viva voce vote. Ordinance 2007- 76 Authorizing the Execution of an Annexation Agreement (Briguglio Property) (PC 2007 -19) A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to approve an ordinance approving the execution of an Annexation Agreement (Briguglio Property), as presented, subject to final staff and legal review; seconded by Alderman Besco. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -8 Nays -0 Sutcliff -aye, Munns -aye, Spears -aye, Plocher -aye, Werderich -aye, Golinski -aye, Besco -aye, Leslie -aye, Ordinance 2007- 77 Annexing Certain Territory to the United City of Yorkville (Briguglio Property) (PC 2007 -19) A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to approve an ordinance annexing certain territory to the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, as presented, subject to final staff and legal review; seconded by Alderman Plocher. The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Citv Council — October 23, 2007 — uam 10 Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -8 Nays -0 Munns -aye, Spears -aye, Plocher -aye, Werderich -aye, Golinski-ave, Besco -aye, Leslie -aye, Sutcliff -aye Resolution 2007 -55 Approving 12 Month Extension for Recording Final Plat of Subdivision Hudson Lakes Unit 1 (EDC 2007 -42) A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to approve a resolution approving twelve month extension for recording Final Plat of Subdivision for Hudson lakes Unit 1, as presented, subject to final staff and legal review; seconded by Alderman Plocher. Administrator McLaughlin clarified that this is a resolution not an ordinance. Attorney Roth stated it was a resolution. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -8 Nays -0 Spears -aye, Plocher -aye, Werderich -aye, Gohnski -aye, Besco -aye, Leslie -aye, Sutcliff -aye, Munns -aye Resolution 2007 -66 Approving 12 Month Extension for Recording Final Plat of Subdivision Grande Reserve Units 10, 11, 16,17 &24 (EDC 2007 -43) A motion was made by Alderman Leslie to approve a resolution approving twelve month extension for recording Final Plat of Subdivision for Grande Reserve Unit 10, Grande Reserve Unit 11, Grande Reserve Unit 16, Grande Reserve Unit 17, Grande Reserve Unit 24, as presented, subject to final staff and legal review; seconded by Alderman Plocher. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -8 Nays -0 Plocher -aye, Werderich -aye, Golinski -aye, Besco -aye, Leslie -aye, Sutcliff -aye, Munns -aye, Spears -aye PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT No report. ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT No report. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS YEDC Photographs Alderman Golinski read a statement regarding an incident at the recent Yorkville Economic Development Corporation dinner (see attached) concerning pictures taken of him and Don Hammon by the mayor's husband. Mayor Burd explained that she was joking because she thought the whole situation was silly and her husband did not take photos of Alderman Golinski. She stated that he gave every photo he took to Lynn Dubajic with the Yorkville Economic Development Corporation and not one is of Alderman Golinski. She stated that he is imaging the whole thing. She stated that from what Alderman Leslie said to her she understood that Alderman Golinski was at a candidate's forum when the pictures were taken of him, not at the Yorkville Economic Development Corporation dinner. She asked Alderman Golinski to apologize to her husband because he doesn't want to take photos of Alderman Golinski; he is not interested in him. It was a joke. Alderman Leslie commented that he discussed Alderman Golinski's photo incident with the mayor and told her it was at the YEDC dinner however in the conversation he discussed another individual who had a concern with being photographed at a candidate's forum. He stated that Alderman Golinski explained the incident so he encouraged and supported him in bringing the matter before the Council. Alderman Leslie reminded Mayor Burd of the details of their conversation and stated what affected him was her response of "That's right. The next time he tries to publicly humiliate me, their going straight to the Tribune ". Alderman Leslie was surprised that she said that and he noted that she did not "crack a smile" when she made the comments. Alderman Leslie told Alderman Golinski of the conversation and encouraged him to talk to the mayor about the incident in order to clear the air. Alderman Golinski advised him that he wanted to speak of the incident publicly. Alderman Leslie stated that his preference was that Alderman Golinski did not do it this way however he understood why after photos appeared on the internet during the last election showing Council members with Hitler and wearing swastikas. He stated he understood Alderman Gohnski trepidation and supported him. He did not feel that Alderman Golinski owed anyone an apology however if an apology is due it was owed to Alderman Golinski and the City Council. The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Citv Council — October 23, 2007 — nage 11 Mayor Burd reiterated that the incident was "in your mind ". There are no photos of Alderman Golinski with Mr. Hammon and she encouraged them to check with Mrs. Dubajic to verify this. She also noted that photos were given to Katy Farren of the Record Newspaper. Mrs. Farren was present so she asked if she saw any of Alderman Golinski and Mr. Hammon. Mrs Farren replied that she wasn't sure because Mr. Burd gave her over 200 photos. Alderman Golinski noted that Alderman Werderich was next to him when this happened. He asked him if Alderman Werderich was under the impression that Mr. Burd was snapping photos of them with Mr. Hammon. Alderman Werderich stated that this was his impression that Mr_ Burd was taking photos of them. Mayor Burd stated that she had never seen the pictures but would review them but she did not know he had any pictures of Aldermen Golinski and Werderich with Mr. Hammon. She stated that she was "kidding around ". She felt the situation was "preposterous" because she wouldn't do something like this. She noted that she did not do anything like this during the last election. She stated that during the election she had a campaign committee but there were people upset about the landfill. She noted that she did not control 1700 people who voted for her. She stated the website with the negative photos was not her website; she had an official website which did not have pictures of Alderman Golinski on it. When a highly emotion issue is going on in the community, things happen. The people runnin for office cannot be blamed for these things. Alderman Leslie reiterated his modification with Mayor Burd's threat. He stated that it was inappropriate and scared him especially when she didn't even smile when she said it. Mayor Burd stated that she laughed. Alderman Leslie noted that Alderman Werderich was of a like mind because he also felt the photographs were being taken by Mr. Burd. He commented that using a photo to publicly exploit someone is a real and concerning issue. Alderman Plocher noted that the aldermen are public figures and people will take pictures; that's the name of the business. Mayor Burd suggested that next time Alderman Golinski wait until she does something to carry on about it. Nothing has been done to Alderman Golinski; no pictures have been printed in the paper. It is against the law to accuse someone of thinking of doing something. Alderman Leslie reiterated that Mayor Burd made a threat about the use of the photos and he reminded her of the swastika photos. Mayor Burd stated that Alderman Leslie did not tell her in their conversation that it was her husband who took the photos. Alderman Leslie stated that he absolutely told her it was her husband and she should not retract her statement. He stated she could "pan it off as a joke" however it was not a joke to Alderman Golinski. Her remarks were inappropriate. Alderman Munns asked Alderman Gohnski if the situation made him feel threatened. Alderman Golinski stated that he did not feel threatened but he did not want to see the photos used inappropriately during the next election. He stated he had concerns with the tactics used during the last campaign and he was trying to be proactive. Alderman Besco asked if the city was funding the Yorkville Economic Development Corporation and was told they were. He questioned if there was a conflict of interest with Paul Burd doing photography for the YEDC. He explained that he offered his company's services to the city for free but was told that this was a conflict because he would be taking the opportunity of another company away from them. Mayor Burd stated that she would think about this. Ethic Policy Alderman Spears asked if someone would check to see if someone has been appointed the city's ethic's officer. Administrator McLaughlin explained that the ethic ordinance indicates that the ethic officer is the state's attorney. Food at Meetings Alderman Munns stated that a few aldermen have discussed having food being brought in to meetings since they are runnin so late. Some of them do not have the opportunity to have dinner before coming to a meeting. Fox Hill Ward Meeting Alderman Munns asked City Engineer Wywrot if he would have information on the Sycamore traffic light available for the Ward III meeting. Mr. Wywrot stated he would get information together for the meeting. EXECUTIVE SESSION Attorney Roth indicated that a motion to recess into executive session would be in order. To be discussed are: 1. The purchase or lease of real property for the use of the public body. The Minutes of the ReL-ular Meetine of the City Council — October 23, 2007 — nage 12 2. For the appointment, employment, compensation, discipline, performance or dismissal of specific employees of the public body or legal counsel for the public body, including hearing testimony on a complaint lodged against an employee of the public body or against legal counsel for the public body to determine its validity. 3. For litigation, when an action against, affecting or on behalf of the particular public body has been filed and is pending before a court or administrative tribunal, or when the public body finds that an action is probable or imminent, in which case the basis for the finding shall be recorded and entered into the minutes of the closed meeting So moved by Alderman Spears; seconded by Alderman Plocher. Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes -4 Nays -2 Present -2 Spears -aye, Sutcliff- -aye, Werderich -aye, Besco -nay, Golinski -nay, Leslie -aye, Munns- present, Plocher- present The City Council adjourned into executive session at 11:58 p.m. The City Council returned to regular session at 12:25 p.m. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Burd entertained a motion to adjourn. So moved by Alderman Golinski; seconded by Alderman Sutcliff. Motion approved by a viva voce vote. Meeting adjourned at 12:26 P.M. Minutes submitted by: Jacquelyn Milschewski, City Clerk City of Yorkville, Illinois l 1 i PLEASE SIGN IN MEETING: DATE:. r NAME BUSINESS PHONE # s mss. ►-ter Lso,./ ��=� �lf�ns�� ��� 7 s- 0 J (2r- ve 4 �c k, �QITS�'I��w (3o -_553 - 7 w 1 P GrieS" Iczv,r, 6 30` S - S 3 -7q /S v 553 ©lz3 �wwrL► s L- i Nq::> � -y' G, 5i 94F ON i t�A��ur�.�'� -1_I L�l�t��1s�6�t, ��c . X30 •��. • oS�l l i I PLEASE SIGN IN MEETING: DATE: NAME BUSINESS PHONE # PJAL 1IOA4cGlckc4-Sl U/sG 586 - go f 630 - 362- 3 c/ �/ CITY COUNCIL MEETING UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS i REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS had at the meeting of the above - entitled matter taken before CHRISTINE M. VITOSH, C.S.R., on October 23, 2007, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., at 800 Game Farm Road in the City of Yorkville, Illinois. I I I D- 831207 REPO • COURT reporting service 1212 South Naper Boulevard • Suite 119 -185 • Naperville, IL 60540 • 630 - 983 -0030 • Fax 630 - 299 -5153 www.depocourt.com 2 1 P R E S E N T: 2 MS. VALERIE BURD, Mayor; 3 MR. GARY GOLINSKI, Alderman; 4 MR. WALLY WERDERICH, Alderman; 5 MR. ARDEN JOE PLOCHER, Alderman; 6 MS. ROSE ANN SPEARS, Alderman; 7 MR. MARTY MUNNS, Alderman; 8 MS. ROBYN SUTCLIFF, Alderman; 9 MR. JASON LESLIE, Alderman; 10 MR. JOSEPH BESCO, Alderman; 11 MR. BRENDAN McLAUGHLIN, City Administrator; 12 MR. WILLIAM POWELL, City Treasurer; i 13 MS. JACQUELYN MILSCHEWSKI, City Clerk. 14 15 A P P E A R A N C E S: 16 BY: MR. MICHAEL ROTH, l appeared on behalf of the United 17 City of Yorkville, Illinois. 18 19 - - - - - 20 21 22 23 24 Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 3 1 (Pledge of Allegiance) 2 MAYOR BURD: We have a public 3 hearing, Anthony and Nicole Zangler, petitioners, 4 have filed an application with the United City of 5 Yorkville requesting annexation and rezoning from 6 Kendall County Al to United City of Yorkville R1 7 One - Family Residence District. 8 The real property consists of 9 approximately 5.7 acres located at 96 Quinsey 10 Lane, Yorkville, Illinois. 11 Can I have a motion to go into i i 12 public hearing? 13 ALDERMAN LESLIE: So moved. 14 ALDERMAN SPEARS: Second. 15 MAYOR BURD: All in favor? 16 (A Chorus of Ayes) 17 MAYOR BURD: All opposed? 18 (No Response) I 19 WHEREUPON: 20 GREGG INGEMUNSON, 21 testified before the Yorkville City Council as 22 follows: 23 MR. INGEMUNSON: I'm going to be 24 brief because you guys have heard almost i I Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 4 1 everything on this already, so initially we came 2 to the City for mile and a half review to go to 3 county zoning and Staff had made the 4 recommendation, they would like us to annex, so -\a 5 then we switched it and filed a petition for 6 annexation, so you've heard a little bit back and 7 forth about the bike trails as well as storm 8 sewer easement and the widening of the easement, 9 the existing easement on the western edge of the 10 property. 11 My clients, the Zanglers, have 12 no problem with the western edge of the property, 13 the widening of the easement, that's perfectly 14 fine with them, but, of course, the bike trail is 15 something they really don't feel that they want 16 to have on their property. 17 There is a couple of issues. 18 Number one, they're buying the property as 19 almost a six -acre parcel with one house on it and 20 it would somewhat tend to have an invasion of 21 privacy with the bike path on the north end as i 22 well as the western edge of the property. 23 And then the other issue would 24 be security reasons; since it's a pretty heavily I De p o Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 p 9' 5 1 wooded area, there would be a little different 2 implications on a bike path if it was a well -lit 3 area, so those are some considerations that they 4 have. They really don't want to have a bike path 5 there. 6 And the other issue with the 7 storm sewer, they again don't have a problem with 8 that, but they would like to have the storm sewer 9 constructed while they're doing the construction, 10 so we had said maybe put a limit on the time of 11 the easement so the City could put the storm 12 sewer in within a two -year period, something so 13 they don't have to disrupt the land down the 14 road. 15 Since the storm sewer is 16 actually going to be in the back yard, the house i 17 is going to be in the middle of the parcel, and 18 the storm sewer then would be towards the river, 19 so it would disrupt the land to come in say 10, 20 15 years down the road and install the storm I 21 sewer. 22 So those are really the 23 considerations. We would ask for a favorable 24 recommendation down the road from you guys, but, Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 6 1 of course, we would not like to have a bike path 2 and the limitations of the storm sewer easement 3 to actually have a storm sewer constructed within 4 that two -year time period. 5 MAYOR BURD: Okay. Does anybody 6 have any comments, public response? Yes, ma'am. 7 MS. POLHILL: Do I have to go up 8 there? 9 MAYOR BURD: You have to come up 10 here and identify yourself, please, for the 11 record. 12 WHEREUPON: I i 13 JULIE POLHILL, 14 testified before the Yorkville City Council as 15 follows: 16 MS. POLHILL: I am Julie Polhill and 17 I am in Ward 2 and I am right behind -- my house 18 is behind the proposed bike path. 19 MAYOR BURD: If you could give your 20 address, please. 21 MS. POLHILL: Yes. 208 Johnson 22 Street. I also have to speak for several of my 23 neighbors. One is at home in bed with poison ivy 24 so badly that he could not come, then the Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 7 1 neighbor on the other side has a fever, and my 2 neighbor, Jim Hawkins, has a patient in labor, so 3 he is not able to come and be here as well. I 4 But all of us, if I can speak 5 for them, do not want the bike path for several 6 reasons. Again, it is heavily wooded; we are 7 concerned about security. We also really don't 8 want all of our kids exposed to strangers 9 coming -- I mean, it's right at the end of our 10 back yard, so it was distressing enough to have 11 to have all the trees cut down for the 45 -foot 12 easement. We really, really prefer not to have a 13 bike path behind us. Thank you. i' I 14 MAYOR BURD: Thank you. Do we have 15 any other public comment? 16 WHEREUPON: 17 KEVIN POLHILL, 18 testified before the Yorkville City Council as 19 follows: 20 MR. POLHILL: I am Kevin Polhill, 21 208 Johnson Street, and I'm just very strongly 22 opposed to the bike path. We've had woods behind i 23 us the whole time that we've been there, and I 24 guess I just don't think it would be fair to, you Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 8 1 know, have this, you know, bike path just put i 2 back there, potentially have hundreds of people 3 coming behind us and coming and going any time. 4 You know, we never foresaw that 5 the whole time that we've been there, and I do 6 appreciate the aldermen and women who, you know, 7 can see our point on that, and I guess I hope the 8 rest of you could also maybe just put yourselves 9 in our shoes and think of it as if you were 10 living there, you know, would you want that 11 behind you. Thank you. 12 MAYOR BURD: Any other public 13 comment? 1 14 WHEREUPON: 15 KEN GRIESMAN, 16 testified before the Yorkville City Council as 17 follows: 18 MR. GRIESMAN: My name is Ken 19 Griesman. My wife and I live at 96 Quinsey Lane. 20 My wife and I are the present owners of the land 21 to be rezoned. It is our hope you will accept 22 the recommendations of the Planning Commission's 23 October 10th meeting. 24 We support the Planning Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 9 1 Commission's recommendations that the easement 2 for the bike path be eliminated. If the Zanglers i 3 were subdivision developers, we could understand 4 requesting them to put a pathway in a proposed 5 subdivision, but the Zanglers are not developers. 6 They're asking for rezoning to build one house. 7 The buildable portion of this 8 land is not very large. The southerly section 9 along the river is floodplain. There are already 10 two easements on the property; there is a 30 foot 11 by 765 foot easement on the west side and there 12 is a 16 foot easement at the north end. 13 There are not many pieces of I 14 land like this left in Yorkville. It's quiet, j 15 tree covered, secluded and peaceful. Perfect 16 place to put a large, beautiful home and to raise 17 a family. 18 We don't want a pathway from 19 Heartland Circle through this property to the 20 river. The homeowners next to the proposed 21 pathway don't want it either. Safe access to 22 this same riverside area is already available by 23 the sidewalks on Bruell Street. It seems 24 unnecessary to add expense to the taxpayers for Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 10 1 something that already exists. 2 We are also in agreement with 3 the Commission's recommendation to install the 4 sanitary line during the construction phase of 5 the Zangler home instead of years later when 6 their landscaping will need to be disturbed. 7 In conclusion, we would like to 8 urge you to accept the recommendations of the 9 Planning Commission, especially the abandonment 10 of the pathway easement through this property. 11 Thank you. 12 MAYOR BURD: Thank you. Any other 13 public comment? 14 (No Response) 15 MAYOR BURD: Do any Aldermen want to 16 comment? Alderman Spears. 17 ALDERMAN SPEARS: First of all, I'd 18 like to know if our Staff would make that 19 commitment, to have the sanitary sewer line being 20 placed within their two -year time frame. 21 MR. MILLER: That's something that 22 we'll have to negotiate as a provision of the 23 annexation agreement. We have not had a sit -down 24 with the petitioner since the Plan Commission Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 11 1 public hearing, to talk about the terms of that. 2 Staff would -- we'll continue 3 the discussions and as we refine the agreement 4 and this comes back in final form, the hope would 5 be to a recommendation at that point. I am not 6 prepared to make a recommendation tonight as to 7 what that timing is or as to the agreement. 8 We understand the issue and we 9 understand the concern of the petitioner and 10 we'll do our best to come up with an agreement, a 11 solution and recommendation to you. 12 ALDERMAN SPEARS: Are there specific 13 issues that this could not be addressed at this 14 time? I mean, is this typical that you need to 15 go back and negotiate? 16 MR. MILLER: Yeah. A public hearing i 17 is typically the starting of the process. What 18 happens following the public hearing is this 19 would return to a future EDC agenda for 20 discussion. 21 In the meantime, we take 22 discussion and comments from the public hearing 23 and work with the petitioner to craft an 24 agreement in final form for you to receive Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 12 1 consideration and hopefully your consideration. 2 ALDERMAN SPEARS: And is this the I 3 time that we give you our recommendation 4 regarding the bicycle path? 5 MAYOR BURD: You can comment on that 6 now. I think you mentioned it earlier. 7 ALDERMAN SPEARS: Okay. I just want 8 to go on record to say that I am not in favor of 9 putting the bicycle path on the property, near 10 the property. 11 MAYOR BURD: Alderman Leslie. 12 ALDERMAN LESLIE: I worked on this I 13 in EDC with Travis. I think these people have a 14 unique piece of property. I have no problem not 15 putting a path, easement for a path, respect 16 their privacy. 17 With regard to your question, 18 Rose, for the implementation of the sanitary 19 sewer, it's about a hundred grand to put pipe in 20 there. It's critical that we get access and I 21 think it's a great benefit for the petitioner to 22 grant an easement for the extension. 23 Unfortunately, to put a hundred 24 thousand dollars in the ground that in all Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 13 1 likelihood we may not use for several years is an 2 expense the City's going to incur. 3 I don't know what the Zanglers 4 are looking at doing. I guess my hope would be i 5 in terms of long -term development of the property 6 we could put a trigger switch in terms of time, 7 but if given that opportunity, I mean, obviously 8 if you put standing structures or, you know, I 9 don't know, something that couldn't be moved or 10 something would radically be disturbed, it would 11 be a great concern. 12 If you wouldn't, you know, we 13 would certainly be willing to have full repair to 14 your approval to any property at a later time. 15 MS. ZANGLER: Can I comment on that? 16 ALDERMAN LESLIE: I have no problem 17 if she comments. 18 MAYOR BURD: Wait. Did you just say 19 that you are negotiating this? What did you just 20 say? I'm sorry, would you repeat what you just 21 said? 22 ALDERMAN LESLIE: What I said, we're 23 looking for the easements. We have the trail 24 easement, I have no problem -- Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 14 1 MAYOR BURD: Right, removing. 2 ALDERMAN LESLIE: We need the 3 sanitary easement, which the parties are 4 agreeable to. They are looking at a time frame 5 of upwards of two years I believe. 6 I guess my recommendation and 7 hope would be if we put this pipe in at any given 8 point in time, we are looking ballpark at a 9 hundred thousand dollars, and the pipe is just 10 going to set there, so if we can have -- if the 11 Zanglers are going to put a permanent structure, 12 obviously they're not going to want us to come in 13 there and take a gazebo out, you know, a 5,000 14 square feet gazebo and remove it, if we had an 15 idea of that, what they were going to do. 16 The further we can extend it i 17 off for the City, the better. We have no use for 18 that sanitary, and if they would be open to 19 meet, you know, whatever landscape they have or 20 if you have a landscape plan development at any 21 point in time in two years, if the City could 22 agree to reconstruct that at our cost, at least 23 then we'd have the opportunity -- 24 MAYOR BURD: Okay. Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 15 1 ALDERMAN LESLIE: -- either we put 2 the pipe in for a hundred grand or fully 3 reconstruct anything they may have at that point 4 in time. 5 MAYOR BURD: Okay. I missed the end 6 of what you were saying there. Okay. Alderman 7 Werderich. 8 ALDERMAN WERDERICH: I've got one 9 question for the City Staff and then one question 10 for Attorney Ingemunson. 11 For the City Staff, just so I 12 can nutshell this -- and tell me if I'm wrong -- 13 the benefit to annexing the land into the City is 14 this sewer line needs to be there; is that right? 15 MR. MILLER: That's one of the 16 benefits. t 'I 17 ALDERMAN WERDERICH: What are the i I 18 other ones? 19 MR. MILLER: Another benefit when I 20 property annexes to the City, we will be 21 providing public utilities, water and 22 particularly sanitary sewer. 23 If this property were to remain 24 unincorporated, they would be able to apply to Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 16 1 the county for a septic facility, for example, 2 which typically isn't in the best interest 3 long -term for any property owner in the City, 4 especially with property -- 20 years down the 5 road if the system were to fail and pollution 6 were to occur that close to the Fox River. 7 There are long -term advantages 8 to trying to work with the property owner trying 9 to provide those services that are adjacent to 10 the property as we sit here today. 11 ALDERMAN WERDERICH: So the sewer 12 easement and then the fact that we would provide I 13 sewer and water to them? I 14 MR. MILLER: Those are probably two 15 of the primary advantages to annexation. 16 ALDERMAN WERDERICH: And next 17 question is for Attorney Ingemunson. Just to 18 flip flop that over, what is the reasons why the 19 property owners wish to come into the City? i i 20 MR. INGEMUNSON: Well, I could 21 actually add on to Travis's as well. I think a 22 couple advantages to the City is you're not going 23 to have pockets of county in the middle of the 24 city, so you make a contiguous city, so you start Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 17 1 here and here and all the way through, so I think 2 that's the an advantage to the City as well. 3 And I think also if we went to 4 the county we could actually ask for more than 5 one building permit as well, we could try to 6 rezone it and get a couple lots out of it, so 7 another advantage is you get one house there, so 8 that's another advantage to the City. 9 As far as the advantages to the 10 Zanglers, I think one of the advantages is once 11 we come in the City, we have an agreement with 12 the City, and then that's what it is, so we know I 13 nothing is going to change, there is not going to 14 be a bike path there because we've got the 15 agreement, there's not going to be a bike path, 16 so that's going to be an advantage for that, so 17 we think that's beneficial as well. 18 And, again, the reason we 19 really came for annexation, though, was at the 20 request of the Staff because we came in for mile 21 and a half review. They requested annexation and 22 we said sure, we'll definitely listen. 23 Initially when we came -- 24 because we thought the cost for annexation to YSB Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 18 1 was going to be too cost prohibitive, but I think 2 we may have gotten over that hurdle. 3 ALDERMAN WERDERICH: That's all I 4 have. 5 MAYOR BURD: Alderman Plocher. 6 ALDERMAN PLOCHER: I think what we 7 said earlier, we kind of asked them to do it, 8 they're willing to work with us, like I said, I 9 don't think the bike path -- if they don't want 10 it and the surrounding residents don't want it, 11 there is no reason to put it there. 12 I think we should kind of work 13 with them on the easement of getting in there in 14 a timely manner if that is possible. 15 MAYOR BURD: Alderman Munns. 16 ALDERMAN MUNNS: Yes. We have a 17 bike path down in Fox Hill and probably every 18 resident I talk with does not really like it, you 19 look out your window and you see strange people I 20 that you know don't live there cruising around on 21 the bike path, and it has proven to be a safety 22 hazard, safety issue. 23 As a homeowner, I would not 24 want to see people I didn't know riding bikes at Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 19 1 the back of my house at dusky parts of the day 2 and you're not sure what they're doing back 3 there, so I am not for jamming it in on people 4 who are not requesting it and not expressing 5 interest in wanting it. So that's my opinion. 6 MAYOR BURD: Alderman Sutcliff. 7 ALDERMAN SUTCLIFF: I just want to 8 thank the residents for coming here and staying 9 this late to talk to us. I've heard from a lot 10 of residents from my ward from the City, and one 11 of the things they tell me is they want this to 12 be a walkable city. i 13 We are behind the ball with 14 bikepaths and we're just trying to find -- we're 15 just trying to find ways and places to create a 16 regional bike path, a local bike path, so we can 17 stay off the roads and enjoy the beautiful woods 18 that we have and really catch up with our 19 neighbors because we are behind the ball. 20 Now, this property and this 21 area was just an idea, and I would never want to 22 force this on anyone, but just want you to know 23 that this was really -- this idea was for the 24 betterment of the City, and it's something I get Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 20 1 asked about all the time, so I just wanted to let 2 you know that the City's not going after anyone, 3 it was just an idea, and it's a beautiful parcel 4 and it would be lovely to ride through there or 5 walk through there, and that's why you all live 6 there. 7 MR. MOGLE: If I could ask something 8 for clarification. I think another reason why we 9 saw that this might be a good possibility for a 10 bike lane was because there was going to be an 11 easement running across the property anyway, and 12 we thought that that would, you know, kind of I 13 make it an easy way to get down to the I 14 riverfront. 15 So there is no question it's a 16 little bit more unusual when it's just a six -acre 17 piece than if it were like a large subdivision, 18 that would be more normal, but it was a small 19 piece, there is no question that that was a I 20 little need, but again, I think that due to that I 21 the utility easement was going to run down to the 22 river, we saw it as an easy way to do it. i 23 MAYOR BURD: Alderman Spears. 24 ALDERMAN SPEARS: I just have one Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 i 21 1 question. If the sanitary sewer line at this 2 time cost a hundred thousand dollars, what do you 3 predict it could cost like say five years from 4 now? I mean, does it -- The cost certainly would 5 be increasing. 6 ALDERMAN LESLIE: It would escalate, 7 yeah, there is no doubt. 8 ALDERMAN SPEARS: Okay. 9 MAYOR BURD: Okay. I have a 10 motion -- Oh, do you have another question? 11 ALDERMAN LESLIE: The question is I 12 believe Ms. Zangler, when I had asked my question 13 earlier about long -term, did you want to speak in I 14 terms of what your comment was? 15 WHEREUPON: 16 NICOLE ZANGLER, 17 testified before the Yorkville City Council as 18 follows: 19 MS. ZANGLER: Nicole Zangler. It I 20 was this very comment that we had discussed. I 21 There is not a lot of buildable land, believe it 22 or not, on this pocket until you get closer to 23 Quinsey Lane, so in that area where your easement 24 is happens to be exactly in the area of our back Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 22 1 yard, so that's where it came in. 2 The house, we were looking for 3 an area that is not within floodplain obviously, i 4 and yet still had a little bit of an area to 5 build a walk -out to the basement, so obviously 6 long -term goals would be potentially to be a pool i 7 or something of that nature, whatever it may be, 8 but that is right on our house, and I know the 9 City Council -- or, I'm sorry, the committee had 10 mentioned that you would replant, but you know as 11 well as I do, replanting years from now an oak 12 tree that I planted or another, it's not going to 13 be good'. i 14 So we have absolutely no 15 problem with that easement connecting. Actually, 16 I think it's a great idea, there is a lot of 17 vacant land there and eventually that will be 18 developed in one way or another; however, we i 19 would ask that when it's all torn up, it would 20 make sense even though it's a hundred thousand 21 dollars to put in that easement or that line. 22 ALDERMAN LESLIE: Were you amenable 23 to the two -year time frame? 24 MS. ZANGLER: I think that that was i I Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 I 23 1 still in discussion. 2 MR. INGEMUNSON: I just talked to 3 Tony about that previously today. 4 MS. ZANGLER: Because, as you know, 5 in our case landscaping will help, but it will 6 happen God willing. 7 MAYOR BURD: Okay. Any other -- 8 ALDERMAN WERDERICH: I just have one 9 real quick, really simple quick question. Where 10 is the property located again? I'm sorry. 11 MR. INGEMUNSON: Just west of the I 12 old swim club -- or just east of that. What's 13 the subdivision called? Woodworth Estates. 14 Directly next to Woodworth Estates. 15 MAYOR BURD: Motion to leave 16 executive session -- close the public hearing. 17 Excuse me. To close the public hearing. Can I 18 have a motion to close the public hearing? 19 ALDERMAN SPEARS: So moved. 20 ALDERMAN LESLIE: Second. 21 MAYOR BURD: All in favor. 22 (A Chorus of Ayes) 23 MAYOR BURD: Opposed? 24 (No Response) Depo Count Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 24 1 (Which were all the 2 proceedings had in 3 public hearing.) 4 --- 000 - -- I 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 25 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ss: 2 COUNTY OF LASALLE ) 3 I 4 I, Christine M. Vitosh, a Certified 5 Shorthand Reporter, do hereby certify that I 6 reported in shorthand the proceedings had at the 7 hearing of the above - entitled cause and that the 8 foregoing Report of Proceedings, is a true, 9 correct, and complete transcript of my shorthand 10 notes so taken at the time and place aforesaid. 11 I further certify that I am neither 12 counsel for nor related to counsel for any of the 13 parties to this suit, nor am I in any way related 14 to any of the parties to this suit, nor am I in 15 any way interested in the outcome thereof. 16 I further certify that my I 17 certificate annexed hereto applies to the 18 original transcript and copies thereof, signed 19 and certified under my hand only. I assume no 20 responsibility for the accuracy of any reproduced 21 copies not made under my control or direction. 22 23 24 Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 26 1 In testimony wh reof, I have 2 eunto set my hand this - - -- day of 3 A.D. , 2007. 4 5 - — 6 Christine M. Vitosh, CSR 7 CSR No. 084 - 002883 8 9 10 11 12 I 13 i 14 15 16 17 18 19 I 1 20 21 22 23 24 Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 City Council, October 23, 2007 27 --- oOo - -- 24:4 agreement 10:2, 8:2, 11:4, 11:15, buying 4:18 084 - 002883 26:7 10:23, 11:3, 11:7, 19:1, 19:2, 21:24 1 5:19 11:10, 11:24, 17:11, badly 6:24 10th 8:23 17:15 ball 19:13, 19:19 < C > 15 5:20 ALDERMAN 2:3,2:4, ballpark 14:8 C.S.R. 1:8 16 9:12 2:5, 2:6, 2:7, 2:8, 2:9, basement 22:5 called 23:13 2 6:17 2:10, 10:16, 12:11, beautiful 9:16, case 23:5 20 16:4 15:6,18:3, 18:5, 19:17, 20:3 catch 19:18 2007. 26:3 18:15, 18:16, 19:6, bed 6:23 cause 25:8 208 6:21, 7:21 20:23, 20:24 behalf 2:17 certainly 13:13, 21:4 30 9:10 Aldermen 8:6, 10:15 behind 6:17, 6:18, certificate 25:18 45 -foot 7:11 Allegiance 3:1 7:13, 7:22, 8:3, 8:11, Certified 25:5, 25:20 5,000 14:13, 14:13 almost 3:24, 4:19 19:13, 19:19 certify 25:6, 25:12, 5.7 3:9 already 4:1, 9:9, believe 14 :5, 21:12, 25:17 765 9:11 9:22, 10:1 21:21 change 17:13 7:00 1:9, 1:9 amenable 22:22 beneficial 17:17 Chorus 3:16, 23:22 800 1:9 ANN 2:6 benefit 12:21, 15:13, Christine 1:8, 25:5, 96 3:9, 8:19 annex 4:4 15:19 26:6 annexation 3:5, 4:6, benefits 15:16 Circle 9:19 10:23, 16:15, 17:19, BESCO 2:10 City 1:1, 1:2, 1:10, <A> 17:21, 17:24 best 11:10, 16:2 2:11, 2:12, 2:13, Al 3:6 annexed 25:18 better 14:17 2:18, 3:4, 3:6, 3:21, abandonment 10:9 annexes 15:20 betterment 19:24 4:2, 5:11, 6:14, 7:18, able 7:3, 15:24 annexing 15:13 bicycle 12:4, 12:9 8:16, 13:2, 14:17, above - entitled 1:7, Anthony 3:3 bike 4:7, 4:14, 4:21, 14:21, 15:9, 15:11, 25:8 anybody 6:5 5:2, 5:4, 6:1, 6:18, 15:13, 15:20, 16:3, absolutely 22:14 anyway 20:11 7:5, 7:13, 7:22, 8:1, 16:19, 16:22, 16:24, accept 8:21, 10:8 appeared 2:17 9:2, 17:14, 17:15, 16:24, 17:2, 17:8, access 9:21, 12:20 application 3:4 18:9, 18:17, 18:21, 17:11, 17:12, 19:10, accuracy 25:21 applies 25:18 19:16, 19:16, 20:10 19:12, 19:24, 20:2, acres 3:9 apply 15:24 bikepaths 19:14 21:17, 22:9 across 20:11 appreciate 8:6 bikes 18:24 clarification 20:8 �- Actually 5:16, 6:3, approval 13:14 bit 4:6, 20:16, 22:4 Clerk 2:13 16:21, 17:4, 22:15 approximately 3:9 BRENDAN 2:11 clients 4:11 add 9:24, 16:21 ARDEN 2:5 brief 3:24 close 16:6, 23:16, address 6:20 area 5:1, 5:3, 9:22, Bruell 9:23 23:17, 23:18 addressed 11:13 19:21, 21:23, 21:24, build 9:6, 22:5 closer 21:22 adjacent 16:9 22:3, 22:4 buildable 9:7, 21:21 club 23:12 Administrator 2:11 around 18:20 building 17:5 comes 11:4 advantage 17:2, assume 25:20 BURD 2:2, 3:2, 3:15, coming 7:9, 8:3, 8:3, 17:7, 17:8, 17:16 Attorney 15:10, 3:17, 6:5, 6:9, 6:19, 19:8 advantages 16:7, 16:17 7:14, 8:12, 10:12, comment 7:15, 8:13, 16:15, 16:22, 17:9, available 9:22 10:15, 12:5, 12:11, 10:13, 10:16, 12:5, 17:10 Ayes 3:16, 23:22 13:18, 14:1, 14:24, 13:15, 21:14, 21:20 aforesaid 25:11 15:5, 18:5, 18:15, comments 6:6, agenda 11:19 19:6, 20:23, 21:9, 11:22, 13:17 agree 14:22 < B > 23:7, 23:15, 23:21, Commission 8:22, agreeable 14:4 back 4:6, 5:16, 7:10, 23:23 9:1, 10:3, 10:9, 10:24 Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 City Council, October 23, 2007 28 commitment 10:19 development 13:5, escalate 21:6 form 11:4,11:24 committee 22:9 14:20 especially 10:9, 16:4 forth 4:7 complete 25:10 different 5:1 Estates 23:13, 23:14 Fox 16:6, 18:17 concern 11:9, 13:11 direction 25:22 eventually 22:17 frame 10:20, 14:4, concerned 7:7 Directly 23:14 everything 4:1 22:23 conclusion 10:7 discussed 21:20 exactly 21:24 full 13:13 connecting 22:15 discussion 11:20, example 16:1 fully 15:2 consideration 12:1, 11:22, 23:1 Excuse 23:17 future 11:19 12:1 discussions 11:3 executive 23:16 considerations 5:3, disrupt 5:13, 5:19 existing 4:9 5:23 distressing 7:10 exists 10:1 < G > consists 3:8 District 3:7 expense 9:24, 13:2 Game 1:9 constructed 5:9, 6:3 disturbed 10:6, exposed 7:8 GARY 2:3 construction 5:9, 13:10 expressing 19:4 gazebo 14 :13, 14:14 10:4 doing 5:9, 13:4, 19:2 extend 14:16 getting 18:13 contiguous 16:24 dollars 12:24, 14:9, extension 12:22 give 6:19, 12:3 continue 11:2 21:2, 22:21 given 13:7, 14:7 control 25:22 doubt 21:7 goals 22:6 copies 25:19, 25:22 down 5:13, 5:20, < F > God 23:6 correct 25:10 5:24, 7:11, 16:4, facility 16:1 GOLINSKI 2:3 cost 14:22, 17:24, 18:17, 20:13, 20:21 fact 16:12 gotten 18:2 18:1, 21:2, 21:3, 21:4 due 20:20 fail 16:5 grand 12:19, 15:2 Council 1:1, 3:21, during 10:4 fair 7:24 grant 12:22 6:14, 7:18, 8:16, dusky 19:1 family 9:17 great 12:21, 13:11, 21:17, 22:9 far 17:9 22:16 counsel 25:13, Farm 1:9 GREGG 3:20 25:13 < E > favor 3:15, 12:8, Griesman 8:15, COUNTY 3:6, 4:3, earlier 12:6, 18:7, 23:21 8:18, 8:19 16:1, 16:23, 17:4, 21:13 favorable 5:23 ground 12:24 25:3 easement 4:8, 4:8, feel 4:15 guess 7:24, 8:7, couple 4:17, 16:22, 4:9, 4:13, 5:11, 6:2, feet 14:14 13:4, 14:6 17:6 7:12, 9:1, 9:11, 9:12, fever 7:1 guys 3:24, 5:24 course 4:14, 6:1 10:10, 12:15, 12:22, filed 3:4, 4:5 covered 9:15 13:24, 14:3, 16:12, final 11:4, 11:24 craft 11:23 18:13, 20:11, 20:21, find 19:14, 19:15 < H > create 19:15 21:23, 22:15, 22:21 fine 4:14 half 4:2, 17:21 critical 12:20 easements 9:10, First 10:17 hand 25:20, 26:2 cruising 18:20 13:23 five 21:3 happen 23:6 CSR 26:6, 26:7 east 23:12 flip 16:18 happens 11:18, cut 7:11 easy 20:13, 20:22 floodplain 9:9, 22:3 21:24 EDC 11:19, 12:13 flop 16:18 Hawkins 7:2 edge 4:9, 4:12, 4:22 following 11:18 hazard 18:22 < D > either 9:21, 15:1 follows 3:22, 6:15, heard 3:24, 4:6, 19:9 D- 831207 1:24 eliminated 9:2 7:19, 8:17, 21:18 hearing 3:3, 3:12, day 19:1, 26:2 end 4:21, 7:9, 9:12, foot 9:10, 9:11, 9:12 11:1, 11:16, 11:18, definitely 17:22 15:5 force 19:22 11:22, 23:16, 23:17, developed 22:18 enjoy 19:17 foregoing 25:9 23:18, 25:8 developers 9:3, 9:5 enough 7:10 foresaw 8:4 hearing. 24:3 Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 City Council, October 23, 2007 29 Heartland 9:19 ivy 6:23 listen 17:22 16:14 heavily 4:24, 7:6 little 4:6, 5:1, 20:16, MILSCHEWSKI 2:13 help 23:5 20:20, 22:4 missed 15:5 hereby 25:6 < J > live 8:19, 18:20, 20:5 MOGLE 20:7 hereto 25:18 JACQUELYN 2:13 living 8:10 Motion 3:11, 21:10, hereunto 26:2 jamming 19:3 local 19:16 23:15, 23:18 Hill 18:17 JASON 2:9 located 3:9, 23:10 moved 3:13,13:9, home 6:23, 9:16, Jim 7:2 long -term 13:5, 23:19 10:5 JOE 2:5 16:3, 16:7, 21:13, MS 2:2, 2:6, 2:8, homeowner 18:23 Johnson 6:21, 7:21 22:6 2:13, 13:15, 21:12, homeowners 9:20 JOSEPH 2:10 look 18:19 21:19, 22:24, 23:4 hope 8:7, 8:21, 11:4, Julie 6:13, 6:16 looking 13:4,13:23, MUNNS 2:7,18:15, 13:4,14:7 14:4, 14:8, 22:2 18:16 hopefully 12:1 lot 19:9, 21:21, hour 1:9 < K > 22:16 house 4:19, 5:16, Ken 8:15, 8:18 lots 17:6 < N > 6:17, 9:6,17:7, 19:1, Kendall 3:6 lovely 20:4 name 8:18 22:2, 22:8 Kevin 7:17, 7:20 nature 22:7 hundred 12:19, kids 7:8 near 12:9 12:23, 14:9, 15:2, kind 18:7, 18:12, < M > need 10:6,11:14, 21:2, 22:20 20:12 M. 1:8, 25:5, 26:6 14:2, 20:20 hundreds 8:2 ma'am 6:6 needs 15:14 hurdle 18:2 manner 18:14 negotiate 10:22, < L > MARTY 2:7 11:15 labor 7:2 matter 1:7 negotiating 13:19 < I > land 5:13, 5:19, MAYOR 2:2, 3:2, neighbor 7:1, 7:2 idea 14:15, 19:21, 8:20, 9:8, 9:14, 3:15, 3:17, 6:5, 6:9, neighbors 6:23, 19:23, 20:3, 22:16 15:13, 21:21, 22:17 6:19, 7:14, 8:12, 19:19 identify 6:10 landscape 14:19, 10:12, 10:15, 12:5, neither 25:12 ILLINOIS 1:2, 1:10, 14:20 12:11, 13:18,14:1, next 9:20, 16:16, 2:18, 3:10,25:1 landscaping 10:6, 14:24, 15:5, 18:5, 23:14 implementation 23:5 18:15, 19:6, 20:23, Nicole 3:3, 21:16, 12:18 Lane 3:10, 8:19, 21:9,23:7, 23:15, 21:19 implications 5:2 20:10, 21:23 23:21, 23:23 No. 26:7 in. 22:1 large 9:8, 9:16, Mclaughlin 2:11 nor 25:13, 25:14, increasing 21:5 20:17 mean 7:9, 11:14, 25:15 incur 13:2 LASALLE 25:3 13:7,21:4 normal 20:18 INGEMUNSON 3:20, late 19:9 meantime 11:21 north 4:21, 9:12 15:10, 16:17,23:11 later 10:5, 13:14 meet 14:19 notes 25:11 Initially 4:1, 17:23 least 14:22 MEETING 1:1, 1:6, nothing 17:13 install 5:20, 10:3 leave 23:15 8:23 Number 4:18 instead 10:5 left 9:14 mentioned 12:6, nutshell 15:12 interest 16:2, 19:5 Leslie 2:9, 12:11 22:10 interested 25:16 likelihood 13:1 MICHAEL 2:16 invasion 4:20 limit 5:10 middle 5:17,16:23 < O > issue 4:23, 5:6, 11:8, limitations 6:2 mile 4:2, 17:20 oak 22:11 18:22 line 10:4, 10:19, MILLER 10:21, obviously 13:7, issues 4:17, 11:13 15:14, 21:1, 22:21 11:16, 15:15, 15:19, 14:12, 22:3, 22:5 Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 City Council, October 23, 2007 30 occur 16:6 perfectly 4:13 problem 4:12, 5:7, R1 3:6 October 8:23 period 5:12, 6:4 12:14, 13:16, 13:24, radically 13:10 Okay 6:5,12:7, permanent 14:11 22:15 raise 9:16 14:24, 15:5, 15:6, permit 17:5 Proceedings 1:6, real 3:8, 23:9 21:8, 21:9, 23:7 petition 4:5 24:2, 25:7, 25:9 really 4:15, 5:4, 5:22, old 23:12 petitioner 10:24, process 11:17 7:7, 7:12, 7:12, once 17:10 11:9, 11:23, 12:21 prohibitive 18:1 17:19, 18:18, 19:18, One 4:19, 6:23, 9:6, petitioners 3:3 property 3:8, 4:10, 19:23, 23:9 15:8, 15:9, 15:15, phase 10:4 4:12, 4:16, 4:18, reason 17:18, 18:11, 17:5, 17:7, 17:10, piece 12:14, 20:17, 4:22, 9:10, 9:19, 20:8 19:10, 20:24, 22:18, 20:19 10:10, 12:9, 12:10, reasons 4:24, 7:6, 23:8 pieces 9:13 12:14, 13:5, 13:14, 16:18 One - family 3:7 pipe 12:19, 14:7, 15:20, 15:23, 16:3, receive 11:24 ones 15:18 14:9, 15:2 16:4, 16:8,16:10, recommendation open 14:18 place 9:16, 25:11 16:19, 19:20, 20:11, 4:4, 5:24, 10:3, 11:5, opinion 19:5 placed 10:20 23:10 i 11:6, 11:11, 12:3, opportunity 13:7, places 19:15 proposed 6:18,` 9:4, 14:6 14:23 Plan 10:24, 14:20 9:20 recommendations Opposed 3:17, 7:22, Planning 8:22, 8:24, proven 18:21 8:22, 9:1, 10:8 23:23 10:9 provide 16:9, 16:12 reconstruct 14:22, original 25:19 planted 22:12 providing 15:21 15:3 outcome 25:16 please 6:10, 6:20 provision 10:22 record 6:11, 12:8 owner 16:3,16:8 Pledge 3:1 public 3:2, 3:12, 6:6, refine 11:3 owners 8:20,16:19 Plocher 2:5, 18:5 7:15, 8:12, 10:13, regard 12:17 pocket 21:22 11:1, 11:16, 11:18, regarding 12:4. pockets 16:23 11:22, 15:21, 23:16, regional 19:16 < P > point 8:7, 11:5, 14:8, 23:17, 23:18, 24:3 related 25:13, 25:14 P.M. 1:9 14:21, 15:3 put 5:10, 5:11, 8:1, remain 15:23 parcel 4:19, 5:17, poison 6:23 8:8, 9:4, 9:16, 12:19, remove 14:14 20:3 Polhill 6:13, 6:16, 12:23, 13:6, 13:8, removing 14:1 particularly 15:22 7:17, 7:20 14:7, 14:11, 15:1, repair 13:13 parties 14:3, 25:14, pollution 16:5 18:11, 22:21 repeat 13:20 25:15 pool 22:6 putting 12:9, 12:15 replant 22:10 parts 19:1 portion 9:7 replanting 22:11 path 4:21, 5:2, 5:4, possibility 20:9 Report 1:6, 25:9 6:1, 6:18, 7:5, 7:13, possible 18:14 < Q > reported 25:7 7:22, 8:1, 9:2, 12:4, potentially 8:2, 22:6 question 12:17, Reporter 25:6 12:9, 12:15, 12:15, POWELL 2:12 15:9, 15:9, 16:17, reproduced 25:21 17:14, 17:15, 18:9, predict 21:3 20:15, 20:19, 21:1, request 17:20 18:17, 18:21, 19:16, prefer 7:12 21:10, 21:11, 21:12, requested 17:21 19:16 prepared 11:6 23:9 requesting 3:5, 9:4, pathway 9:4, 9:18, present 8:20 quick 23:9, 23:9 19:4 9:21, 10:10 pretty 4:24 quiet 9:14 Residence 3:7 patient 7:2 previously 23:3 Quinsey 3:9, 8:19, resident 18:18 peaceful 9:15 primary 16:15 21:23 residents 18:10, people 8:2, 12:13, privacy 4:21, 12:16 19:8, 19:10 18:19, 18:24, 19:3 probably 16:14, respect 12:15 Perfect 9:15 18:17 < R > Response 3:18, 6:6, Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 City Council, October 23, 2007 31 10:14, 23:24 16:11, 16:13, 21:1 switch 13:6 11:8, 11:9 responsibility 25:21 shoes 8:9 switched 4:5 Unfortunately 12:23 rest 8:8 Shorthand 25:6, system 16:5 unincorporated return 11:19 25:7, 25:10 15:24 review 4:2, 17:21 side 7:1, 9:11 unique 12:14 rezone 17:6 sidewalks 9:23 < T > United 1:2, 2:17, 3:4, rezoned 8:21 signed 25:19 talked 23:2 3:6 rezoning 3:5, 9:6 simple 23:9 taxpayers 9:24 unnecessary 9:24 ride 20:4 sit 16:10 tend 4:20 until 21:22 riding 18:24 sit -down 10:23 terms 11:1, 13:5, unusual 20:16 River 5:18, 9:9, 9:20, six -acre 4:19, 20:16 13:6, 21:14 upwards 14:5 16:6, 20:22 small 20:18 testified 3:21, 6:14, urge 10:8 riverfront 20:14 solution 11:11 7:18, 8:16, 21:17 utilities 15:21 riverside 9:22 somewhat 4:20 testimony 26:1 utility 20:21 Road 1:9, 5:14, 5:20, sorry 13:20, 22:9, thereof 25:16, 25:19 5:24, 16:5 23:10 though 17:19, 22:20 roads 19:17 southerly 9:8 thousand 12:24, <V> ROBYN 2:8 SPEARS 2:6,10:16, 14:9, 21:2, 22:20 vacant 22:17 Rose 2:6, 12:18 20:23, 20:24 timely 18:14 VALERIE 2:2 ROTH 2:16 specific 11:12 timing 11:7 Vitosh 1 :8, 25:5, run 20:21 square 14:14 today 16:10, 23:3 26:6 running 20:11 ss 25:2 tonight 11:6 Staff 4:3, 10:18, Tony 23:3 11:2, 15:9, 15:11, torn 22:19 < W > < S > 17:20 towards 5:18 Wait 13:18 Safe 9:21 standing 13:8 trail 4:14, 13:23 walk 20:5 safety 18:21, 18:22 start 16:24 trails 4:7 walk -out 22:5 sanitary 10:4, 10:19, starting 11:17 transcript 25:10, walkable 19:12 12:18, 14:3, 14:18, STATE 25:1 25:19 WALLY 2:4 15:22, 21:1 stay 19:17 Travis 12:13, 16:21 wanted 20:1 saw 20:9, 20:22 staying 19:8 Treasurer 2:12 wanting 19:5 saying 15:6 storm 4:7, 5:7, 5:8, tree 9:15, 22:12 Ward 6:17,19:10 secluded 9:15 5:11, 5:15, 5:18, trees 7:11 water 15:21, 16:13 Second 3:14, 23:20 5:20, 6:2, 6:3 trigger 13:6 ways 19:15 section 9:8 strange 18:19 true 25:9 well -lit 5:2 security 4:24, 7:7 strangers 7:8 try 17 :5 WERDERICH 2:4, seems 9:23 Street 6:22, 7:21, trying 16:8, 16:8, 15:7, 18:3 sense 22:20 9:23 19:14, 19:15 west 9:11, 23:11 septic 16:1 strongly 7:21 two 9:10, 14:5, western 4:9, 4:12, services 16:9 structure 14:11 14:21, 16:14 4:22 session 23:16 structures 13:8 two -year 5:12, 6:4, whatever 14:19, set 14:10, 26:2 subdivision 9:3, 9:5, 10:20, 22:23 22:7 several 6:22, 7:5, 20:17, 23:13 typical 11:14 whereof 26:1 13:1 suit 25:14, 25:15 typically 11:17, 16:2 WHEREUPON 3:19, sewer 4:8, 5:7, 5:8, support 8:24 6:12, 7:16, 8:14, 5:12, 5:15, 5:18, surrounding 18:10 21:15 5:21, 6:2, 6:3, 10:19, Sutcliff 2:8, 19:6 < U > whole 7:23, 8:5 12:19, 15:14, 15:22, swim 23:12 understand 9:3, widening 4:8, 4:13 I Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 i City Council, October 23, 2007 32 wife 8:19, 8:20 1:8, 1:8, 1:8 will 8:21, 10:6, 15:20, 22:17, 23:5, 23:5 WILLIAM 2:12 willing 13:13, 18:8, 23:6 window 18:19 wish 16:19 within 5:12, 6:3, 10:20, 22:3 women 8:6 wooded 5:1, 7:6 woods 7:22,19:17 Woodworth 23:13, 23:14 work 11:23,16:8, 18:8,18:12 worked 12:12 <Y> yard 5:16, 7:10, 22:1 years 5:20, 10:5, 13:1, 14:5,14:21, 16:4,21:3, 22:11 Yorkville 1:2, 1:10, 2:18, 3:5, 3:6, 3:10, 3:21, 6:14,7:18, 8:16, 9:14,21:17 yourself 6:10 yourselves 8:8 YSB 17:24 <Z> ZANGLER 3:3,10:5, 13:15,21:12, 21:16, 21:19,21:19,22:24, 23:4 Zanglers 4:11, 9:2, 9:5, 13:3, 14:11, 17:10 zoning 4:3 < Dates > october 23, 2007 Depo Court Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 October 23, 2007 Veto Issue Let me ask a hypothetical question which I will try to answer: Our working on issues begins with items being placed on a committee agenda. Then the committee spends valuable time discussing the particular issue. If the committee favorably by majority (and I will highlight the word majority) passes it , it goes to Committee of the Whole for further discussion. Then the issue goes to City Council for vote. If the majority of the council votes in favor the ordinance gets passed. So if we have the mayor vetoing above what is the point of having committees and spending countless hours debating issues. Just tell me how to vote and I will just phone it in. By doing the veto it usurps the majority will of the people who elected the representatives to do their work. Your memo states "not so that power can be conferred on individual alderman" so why would you think that all the power should be conveyed to the mayor ?? If we allow this veto, what majority vote will be vetoed next? I have also heard countless times about democracy from the mayor -I agree that we should have a democracy. Democracy defined by Webster's says.... government by the people; especially: rule of the majority b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections We also have heard arguments that one person should not hold power over the majority of a committee -Well then would it not make sense that 1 person should not control the will of the MAJORITY of the council who were elected in a democratic fashion ?? My math shows that votes of 8 -0 6 -2 or 5 -3 are votes of the majority. The majority who were elected to represent their wards. By vetoing my vote you are vetoing the residents of ward 3. So you found a loophole in the system -I ask that you reconsider this veto which goes directly against democracy. And again if we allow this veto on this non essential issue what important ordinances will be vetoed in the future ? ? ?? YEDC Dinner Pictures Alderman Golinski I'd like to bring up an incident that happened at the YEDC dinner less than two weeks ago. I'm sure most of you recall the event because I sat with many of you at the same table. It was my first time attending this event and I thought it was a great opportunity to meet and socialize with the Yorkville business community. What concerned me about the event is what transpired near the end of the night. After the guest speaker ended and the night was winding down, I bumped into Alderman Werderich and asked him if he'd like to go to the bar for a drink. As Wally and I were sitting at the bar and enjoying some casual conversation, Don Hammon came over and introduced himself. This was the first time in my life that I'd ever met the man or had any sort of conversation with him. At the time, I really didn't think much of it. Both Wally and I were polite and cordial and talked with him for several minutes. I showed him the same courtesy that I would show anybody that came up to me and introduced themselves. That's just the way I am and the way that I was brought up. The reason I'm bringing this up to you tonight is because of what happened during those few minutes. As we were talking, I noticed the Mayor's husband with a camera pointed at us clicking off picture after picture as the Mayor was standing nearby. Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't waste this council's time with something like this. But, sitting there watching the Mayor's husband take all these pictures made me feel very j uncomfortable. Considering some of the tactics used in the last campaign, I felt that these pictures, in some way, may be used to try and misrepresent, or discredit me because of my outspokenness. I want it to be public knowledge as to the context in which these pictures were taken. I also would like the rest of the city council and staff to know that when another Alderman brought up this picture taking incident, right here in City Hall last Tuesday, the Mayor chimed in and said," That's right, and the next time he tries to publicly humiliate me, they're going right to the Tribune." I'm shocked by this comment. My job on this council is not to publicly humiliate the Mayor. My goal is to do what is best for our city. And if that means, at times, that I disagree with the Mayor, then so be it. I'm here to help make our City a great place to live and work. I only have two questions for you Mayor. Why would you say such a thing? And, should this entire council be on notice that this is the type of tactic that you intend to use to intimidate and undermine this body?