[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[8:31] On Monday, February 24, 2025. If everyone could please stand, we'll first start out with our prayer, and I'll have to call Pastor Caleb Hong of Christ United Methodist Church to the microphone. Let us pray.
[8:50] Good and gracious God. We thank you for the gift of this new day. Thank you for the break in the cold weather. Thank you for the promise that no matter how bitter the winter is,
[9:03] may be spring is coming and new life is coming. We ask for your blessing on this evening's
[9:11] a business on our city council members and their families. We ask for your blessing
[9:18] on the people of Rockford and all who are gathered this evening that we would be united
[9:24] in our pursuit of making our city a place of hospitality, prosperity, peace, and justice for all.
[9:33] Lord grant us vision and compassion and unity in all that we say and do this evening.
[9:39] We pray all this in the name and for the sake of love that binds us all together. Amen.
[9:45] I move
[10:09] right into our public speakers tonight.
[10:12] You do have five, just as a reminder, you'll have three minutes to come up to the microphone and make your comments.
[10:20] Once you hear an alarm sound, we will ask you to bring your comments to a close at that time.
[10:35] Tonight's first public speaker is Denzel Winter.
[10:37] good
[10:46] morning committee people.
[10:51] My name is Denzel Winter and the weather is
[10:58] starting to warm up and my children will be out on the on the corners giving
[11:05] water to the people that have that need the water in in the summer time when
[11:10] is hot.
[11:13] These children, they're out doing something that they know that's good. They take
[11:19] their own money and buy these waters. And I've been hearing on the street because I'm
[11:26] on the street all the time. And I have people threatening to do bodily harm to these children.
[11:36] and these children aren't doing anything to nobody.
[11:42] But I let it be known.
[11:44] Should it be that I'm there in the harmony of these children?
[11:50] They can call the police all they want to,
[11:53] because I'm not going nowhere.
[11:54] I'll be right there, because these children are doing things.
[11:58] You know, they could be I'm doing a bad thing,
[12:00] but they chose to become entrepreneurs,
[12:06] you know.
[12:06] And like it says, it takes a village to raise a child, and everybody should be watching out for these children.
[12:17] But all these people going around trying to harm these kids, still these kids and stuff like that.
[12:25] And I'm gonna tell you, I'm gonna be the one going around my neighborhood watching out for my children because they are my children.
[12:38] I appreciate the job that you've been doing, but there's some people out there mumbling
[12:47] and grumbling and talking about what they would do to you if they saw you in person.
[12:53] But I let them know, you mess with my sister, you mess with me.
[12:59] And I don't care how many police officers she has around me.
[13:03] She got one that she don't even have to pay.
[13:07] I got her back, you know, and this is ridiculous.
[13:12] You know, these children ain't doing nothing to nobody, you know.
[13:16] And I've been around here for a long, long time.
[13:19] I was under your dad, Mayor.
[13:22] I was a building inspector for your dad and for Charles Barks.
[13:28] I love this city and we shouldn't have to go through all this garbage that we're going
[13:34] through now because I tell you we have a president all he's doing is so undiscord and
[13:46] the
[13:46] thing over is we had people voting for him or he's going to do this and he's going to
[13:52] do this.
[13:53] My pal, the stadium, what he's doing with you guys.
[13:58] You got to go in there.
[14:00] Thank you.
[14:01] You're five.
[14:11] Our next speaker is Prophet Yusuf.
[14:17] Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.
[14:19] In the book of Psalms, 121st chapter, the first set of second verse,
[14:23] it says, I look to the hills which comes from my health.
[14:28] My health comes from the Lord who may heaven and earth.
[14:32] What I want to speak about tonight,
[14:33] Forgotten heroes, fighting Germans and General about 2000 Black soldiers stormed
[14:41] normally while serving in a still segregated military. It was the most massive
[14:47] amphibious invasion the world has ever seen. With tens of thousands of ally troops
[14:52] spread out across the air and see aiming to get a toe hole in normally for the final
[14:58] So
[15:00] And while portrait of day-day, often show an all-white army, in fact, it also included black
[15:08] soldiers. Roughly 2,000 black soldiers hit the shores of Normandy and bearish
[15:13] capacity on June the 6th, 1944, serving in the United States military, still segregated
[15:20] by race. They encounter discrimination both in the service and when they came home, but
[15:25] Not only did they face the same danger as everyone else.
[15:31] The only African-American comeback unit that day was a 320 barrage balloon battalion
[15:36] whose job was to set up explode.
[15:38] Red balloons is her German plane.
[15:41] Wavily Wilson Jr. was a corporal and a medic with the battalion.
[15:45] Although Wilson did not live to see this 75th anniversary, he died in 2005.
[15:50] He told the Associated Press in 1944 about how his landing craft hit a
[15:55] a man on the way to Omaha Beach, the tag brought us in.
[15:59] And that's when the 88 hit us.
[16:01] He said of the 88, the germs 88, millimetre gun.
[16:03] They were murdering us of our 26 and 80s person there.
[16:07] There was only one left.
[16:08] They wait the whole top of the ship and kill all the crew.
[16:12] Then they started with the watershed.
[16:15] Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland
[16:17] is head of an effort to have Woodson
[16:19] awarded the Medal of Honor for his action on D-Day.
[16:23] Another number of the unit.
[16:24] William Datton described what they count on D.D.
[16:27] And in 2009, the Associated Press interview,
[16:30] during the invasion, the prime was theorist on the D.D.
[16:33] I was picking up dead bodies.
[16:35] I was looking at the minds born up the cell as a soldier.
[16:39] I didn't know if I was going to make it or not.
[16:42] Said that who passed with Linda Herbist,
[16:44] detailed the export of the 329th and her book for God.
[16:49] The untold story of D.D. Black heroes at home.
[16:52] And she said the military resisted efforts to desegregate as it went up a world war two and
[16:58] instead they kept separate units and separate for citizens for blacks and
[17:02] like African-Americans people don't believe the lies they say about I people I people have
[17:08] folk and back of the United States of America thank God for all better welcome back home I
[17:13] did 19 years 11 months 29 days one hour 10 minutes 15 seconds and I did three tours in
[17:20] Thank you.
[17:21] Thank you.
[17:22] Allow me.
[17:26] Thank you.
[17:28] This is a reminder to the public.
[17:31] We do not allow standing in the room, so if you could please find a seat.
[17:36] If you cannot find a seat inside of council chambers, there is an opportunity for you to either
[17:43] watch the television outside of these stores over the balcony, or you can go down to the
[17:47] first floor and watch council from there.
[17:51] If there are no chairs to set up down there right now, there will be some on the way in just a few moments.
[18:14] If any chairs do become available after public speaking, feel free to come back in once others do leave.
[18:28] Our next public speaker is Mary Ann Leonard.
[18:44] I'm here to ask that the welcome to Rockford sign be all inclusive.
[18:51] I've heard that somebody's suggesting making a change that would be a limiting message.
[18:58] I simply want it to say welcome to all, Rockford.
[19:17] Our next public speaker is Sully Kandago.
[19:26] Everyone, thank you for having me.
[19:28] My name is Sully Kandago, and I've been a proud resident of Rockford for the past 40 years.
[19:32] I stand here before you today to express my
[19:35] and wavering support for the Rockford,
[19:37] all people are welcome sign.
[19:39] It was shortly after founding my business in 2018
[19:42] that I became aware of larger issues regarding
[19:44] inclusion in Rockford,
[19:45] which prompted me to get involved in the community.
[19:47] I wanted to help ensure that all residents feel at home
[19:49] and valued something I didn't always experience
[19:52] growing up here.
[19:53] So officially, I also aim to contribute my small grain
[19:56] of sand to create a better city and environment
[19:57] for the family I'm raising.
[19:59] In recent years, I have witnessed a remarkable
[20:01] available transformation in our community, our city has embraced inclusivity, hosting community and family oriented events that celebrate our diverse backgrounds.
[20:09] At these gatherings, I have seen firsthand how residents from various cultures come to gather, share stories and build relationships.
[20:17] Most importantly, I have never experienced violence at any of these events, only camaraderie and joy.
[20:23] Brockford's commitment to inclusivity has not only improved our community spirit, but has also garnered national attention.
[20:29] recent data highlights that our crime rates have declined and Rockford has increasingly
[20:32] recognized one of the best places to live.
[20:35] This is a testament to our collective efforts to create a safe and welcoming environment
[20:39] for everyone.
[20:40] I want to address a misconception that welcoming all people somehow invites criminal behavior.
[20:45] This assertion is not only unfounded but also ignorant.
[20:48] There is no data supporting the idea that cities with welcoming messages experience increased
[20:52] crime rates.
[20:53] In fact, many communities that embrace inclusivity see improved safety and cohesion among residents.
[20:58] I urge you to consider how keeping all people are welcome sign will reflect our city's values.
[21:04] This message does not diminish rockford, rather it enhances our reputation as a compassionate and inclusive community.
[21:10] We want to track new residents, visitors and businesses who value diversity, and
[21:14] a welcoming sign sends a clear message that rockford is a place where everyone can thrive.
[21:18] Let us not be swayed by fear and
[21:20] dice of rhetoric instead let us stand together and affirm that rockford is a community that
[21:25] All people will maintain safety and respect for one another.
[21:29] Keeping them signed as this will only strengthen our community and show the world that we embrace our differences.
[21:34] Thank you for your time and I hope you support the resolution to keep proper to all people who are welcome signed.
[21:38] Together, let's continue to build a city that's a beacon of hope and inclusivity.
[21:43] Thank you.
[21:52] Thank you.
[21:54] And Suly, I apologize for mispronounceing your name before.
[21:59] Our next public speaker is Janie Wilson-Cook.
[22:02] I
[22:07] will be reading a letter that I sent to my older person, Ms. Torina, earlier today.
[22:14] Apparently there is a resolution to be considered at tonight's meeting to affirm the sign at the I-90,
[22:21] any state street entrance, which says, Rockford, all are welcome.
[22:27] In response to a complaint from Alderman Tunberg, Ward 3, the Alderman's comments during the February 10,
[22:35] On 2025 meeting, opposing the message on the sign were reflective of very recent anti-immigrant messaging heard at our federal level, which is not in keeping with the U.S. Constitution concerning the fair treatment of all people under the law.
[22:51] Alderman-Tunberg's comments also flout the spirit and meaning of the equal protection and equal rights sections of the Illinois Constitution.
[23:01] Every single citizen of Rockford, now or in their family's past, is an immigrant to the Rock River Valley,
[23:08] which, before Germanicus Kant thatcher Blake and Lewis Lemmon discovered the Ford over the Rock River, was until 1834,
[23:17] or populated solely by the indigenous peoples of the Winnebago and Padawanda be tribes, it's way too late to stop welcoming immigrants.
[23:28] As a born and raised citizen of Rockford, a 34-year resident of the Fifth Ward and the wife of a naturalized American,
[23:38] I express support for the resolution of firming this inclusive and welcoming message for all of Rockford.
[23:44] I am acting as an individual and not on the behalf of any organization, civic, or religious.
[23:52] In a land of immigrants, it's not brave for me to stand up for equality.
[23:58] It is far more braver to declare one is more entitled just because their ancestors arrived here earlier.
[24:05] Thank you.
[24:15] Thank you to our public speakers.
[24:18] We'll move right into tonight's agenda.
[24:21] Claire, could you please call the roll?
[24:23] Here.
[24:24] Here.
[24:29] Here?
[24:30] Yes.
[24:31] Thank you.
[24:33] Item 1 under committee reports is an approval of the workforce development agreement between the city of Rockford and LC construction for the not exceed amount of $675,000.
[24:45] The funding sources revenue replacement through the American Rescue Plan Act are befunds to have a motion to approve.
[24:51] No move.
[24:52] Second.
[24:53] Any discussion or questions?
[24:57] All the women, Torina.
[25:00] Thank you for allowing me to speak on your committee.
[25:03] A couple of questions, can you give me sort of a timeline that I thought originally that we were giving like 250,000?
[25:11] Maybe I have my numbers wrong, but I do notice an increase in the funding.
[25:15] And I also noticed that the funding source for this is specifically ARPA, and I thought we were out of ARPA funds.
[25:21] So can we just kind of explain where the money's coming from?
[25:24] I thought ARPA funds were used up for one.
[25:27] Yeah, so ARPA funds were set aside for a certain number of years for this program.
[25:31] So we're kind of reaching towards the tail end of that allocation.
[25:35] Okay, so.
[25:36] And then we increased this to $6.75, was it a lower dollar amount before?
[25:41] It was slightly lower but in the past we've typically had to come back and
[25:45] ask for more so that they could complete the training.
[25:49] So they've been getting more work done than originally anticipated, which is driving the cost off a little bit.
[25:56] Can you tell me what it was last time?
[25:58] I think we went to council with like 525,000 initially last year, and then we had to come back for like another 100,000.
[26:07] And then my final question is how are we selecting these sidewalks?
[26:10] So, we've been with this program, we have been focusing on gaps and sidewalk repairs and replacements near schools and parks, highly traveled areas, things like that.
[26:26] So, that's what our focus has been.
[26:28] Okay.
[26:28] Thank you.
[26:31] Any other comments or questions?
[26:33] Clerk, please follow the roll.
[26:37] Aye.
[26:38] Aye.
[26:41] Thank you.
[26:41] And one under resolutions.
[26:44] Questions?
[26:46] Item one is a proposed resolution to recognize
[26:51] migratory birds and migratory bird day in the city of Rockford.
[26:55] Do I have a motion to approve?
[26:56] So moved.
[26:58] Second.
[26:59] Any discussion or questions?
[27:03] Clerk will you please follow the roll?
[27:05] Aye.
[27:06] Aye.
[27:08] Aye.
[27:10] Thank you.
[27:12] Item two is an adoption of the housing strategy framework.
[27:15] The Housing Strategy Framework will serve as the guiding document for city of rockford housing policies, programs, and initiatives.
[27:22] Do I have a motion to approve?
[27:24] So moved.
[27:27] I'll second.
[27:28] Is there any comments or questions?
[27:30] All the woman meets?
[27:33] I spent a lot of time focused on another area.
[27:39] So I didn't really have an opportunity to really review this in the way that I want to.
[27:44] And so I feel like I want to lay this item over if possible.
[27:48] Can I make a motion to lay this item over?
[28:04] Aye.
[28:05] Aye.
[28:06] Thank you, Sarah.
[28:13] Item three is
[28:17] a proposed resolution to support City of Rockford.
[28:20] Welcome to mind on East State Street and I-90.
[28:23] Do I have a motion to approve?
[28:24] No move.
[28:25] Second.
[28:26] Any questions or comments on the item?
[28:29] I'm sorry.
[28:30] Before we go into questions or comments from the council, I would like to allow administrative
[28:36] of Cagnoni, an opportunity to discuss this item.
[28:39] Thank you, Chairwoman.
[28:42] Just to give a little bit of background information related to the landscaping and
[28:47] signage that's up there for consideration.
[28:52] The signage and landscaping is a result of an intergovernment agreement between the city of
[28:57] Oxford and the Illinois Toaway, which was first completed in 1991.
[29:01] at that point in time, the structures that currently exist and landscaping was installed.
[29:08] Later in 2017 and 2018, Delano told me he had a significant capital improvement out on the property,
[29:16] which resulted in a revised inter-government agreement coming before City Council,
[29:21] which was subsequently approved.
[29:23] That inter-government agreement allowed for a joint investment to revamp the existing
[29:30] landscaping, lighting, and signage out at the property.
[29:34] The vast majority of the landscaping improvements were done by the Eleanor Tollway at an amount of approximately 185,000.
[29:42] Within the IGA, it identified an additional $30,000 investment that would be coming from the City of Rockford.
[29:48] The City of Rockford partnered with the RACVB and Go Rockford on the project.
[29:55] It ultimately became also a part of the four city beautification project at
[30:00] That time, predominantly the work done by the City of Rockford included some minor landscaping, up lighting for the sculptures and signage that was out there as well as the revamp of the signage that currently exists today. So an artist by the name of Justice Row was commissioned to do the mural that sits on the sculptures. Ironically, there's an article in the Chicago Sun Times over the weekend.
[30:28] and talked a lot about the murals that he's done throughout the Chicago area.
[30:34] And so that portion was completed by him.
[30:37] The wording was identified by Graham Spencer, Dre Graham, and
[30:43] it was tied to a larger business attraction strategy that had taken place.
[30:49] And he identified this language through a series of studies that suggested and
[30:55] aligned the business attraction to fill high skilled jobs within our community.
[31:02] Communities that had language similar to this were successful at a greater result
[31:08] of attracting individuals to the community and an effort to help drive and create
[31:14] economic wealth for the community.
[31:17] During that time, that signage was shared with the administration as Mayor McNamara
[31:22] As stated in the past, he approved the signage that was identified and ultimately that sign was constructed.
[31:31] You may recall that, and since that time, you know, a few things have taken place related to signage.
[31:39] That's also been part of our recent conversations.
[31:42] There was an investment, and I believe it was ARPA dollars, or maybe it was surplus funds.
[31:49] I forget which one it was to do some court or signage, and there was quite a bit of discussion related to City Council approval approving court or signage that would come forward in the future, and certainly should there be a revamp of this sign, it would fall under that circumstance.
[32:09] There is a resolution within your packet of firming council support of the existing signage as was referred in by Alderman Bonnie last week.
[32:22] I know that there was some communication with our legal department Alderman Bonnie that didn't get connected until later today when there was the possibility of an amendment to the resolution that future signage changes come before city council.
[32:37] So certainly that could be a friendly amendment of the planning and development committee, and we would have no objection on a staff level as we believe that to be the circumstance as it currently exists now.
[32:49] With that, I would be happy to answer any questions.
[32:52] I'll
[32:58] start with you.
[33:01] Thank you and thank you to all who reached out today, had some great civil conversations
[33:10] and had some very lively, couple emails to say the least.
[33:17] So for those of you who have come here tonight, thank you for
[33:23] showing your your vigor and such within our community. To give a little timeline
[33:33] going back some people on council were here at that time some people were not. Some
[33:42] of you may have heard me talk about this previously during this timeline. Going
[33:50] Looking back a number of years, approximately seven or so years ago, there was talk on
[33:58] city council on becoming a sanctuary city.
[34:02] It was termed a welcoming city.
[34:05] There was vigorous debate.
[34:11] My self pointed out specifically a part of the ordinance that had stated if there, so my question was according to what this ordinance had stated was, if there was an individual who was pulled over, according to the ordinance, as long as they produced a valid government issued identification card,
[34:39] that no further questions could be asked.
[34:43] So my follow up to legal was if an individual produced a ID that was coming from North Korea,
[34:56] Iran, some country that maybe is on our terrorist list, that law enforcement officer would not be able to answer,
[35:05] ask any more questions. Our city legal director had given the answer that is correct.
[35:15] So I had an issue with that. A few other aldermen stated their issues. I think there were maybe
[35:23] some aldermen that maybe hadn't, due to possibly no fault of their own, read through it as thoroughly
[35:29] as a few of us did, but it was apparent at that time that Rockford wasn't at that time ready to be a sanctuary city.
[35:45] It died. In fact, it didn't even come up for vote. It just died on the floor, for the most part, if I remember correctly.
[35:56] So, again, a week or two later, as I've stated here before, the Rockford paper did an op-ed,
[36:05] and pretty much reamed on Alderman Durkey and I for speaking up against it, but failed
[36:14] to even mention Alderwoman Hervey, who was adamantly against it.
[36:23] So, I think it made for a good story, I guess, to fit the narrative that you went after the white male Republicans, but you failed to mention a black female Democrat.
[36:41] I can handle it. I can handle it. But I just don't know why I don't know why that was the case.
[36:49] Because there was someone that spoke up, all the women in Hervee, as much I think as we did.
[36:59] But going forth, we did not vote on becoming Sanctuary City shortly thereafter, the sign had gone up.
[37:10] And I started receiving calls, are we a Sanctuary City?
[37:16] And I didn't know we were a sanctuary city, so I had stated, no, we're not a sanctuary city, and they said, well, it pretty much says that on the side.
[37:30] And other, other sanctuary cities were using that line at the time.
[37:35] So, fast forward, if individuals other than the mayor, the police, the county corner,
[37:53] maybe the state's attorney, many people don't hear about the crime in Rockford as we do,
[38:01] as Alderman. As time goes on, my thoughts were, I don't care if someone is from out of this
[38:17] community, out of this country, or has resided in this community for 50 years, grew up in this
[38:25] community, my constituents number one issue, bar none is crime, speeding maybe a close second.
[38:38] But bar none taking care of crime in our community is number one with my constituents.
[38:47] So, as we've had individuals that have come from outside our community, they've come from Elgin, you may remember, again, in the last year or two, which I talked about at another time, we had two young girls kidnapped.
[39:08] I think ages around 9 and 11 or so, one was murdered, another one escaped, we had a 75-year-old woman on the bike path recently, she was beaten, and then raped, and that was by an individual, apparently here, for a short time from either Venezuela or Honduras.
[39:37] Honduras. We've had a number, we have a family peace center that we talk about all the
[39:45] time from a domestic violence that takes place in our community. And I bet a lot of that
[39:53] is homegrown, people that live within our community.
[40:00] So I don't care whether someone comes
[40:05] comes from outside our community or lives within our community is homegrown, grew up here
[40:13] their whole life, they're a citizen or they're a non-citizen.
[40:19] My constituents care about crime and I don't want criminals in Rockford.
[40:27] I don't care where they're from.
[40:28] I don't, it's, most people don't want criminals in their community, so that is where all of a sudden how this turned into, for this to turn into then, everything else, I'm sorry for that, that that happened, that that turned into that.
[40:54] But this was something on Monday that I had stated my piece on at the end.
[41:09] I did say that if the sign stays up, that's what it's going to be.
[41:15] At least we know that going forth, that this sign, or at least we know going forth, that signage within our wards and within the city generally will have to go through the respective aldermen or council's approval.
[41:41] This was one that did not, and at the beginning, I was getting it from the other side.
[41:49] How can we be a sanctuary city?
[41:52] This is crazy, everything else in my, we're not a sanctuary city.
[41:56] Now I'm getting from this side, the other side.
[42:01] So, just realize that you get it from both sides and so if you want to then state everything that which I think you should be transparent,
[42:18] that is what the position is. But at the end when Alderman Bonnie, when I stated that, I was done. That was it.
[42:27] Signs going to be there, fine, but we know that signage going up is not going to cause this kind of controversy going forth because the aldermen and the city council will have a say in the matter and aldermen body, and I'm not putting anything forth on you because you thought at the best of the time, I'm sorry, 14th of 14th of aldermen, that we put a motion up to vote on it.
[42:57] So, there was no, as someone told me today, I heard you put a motion up to counsel the vote to take down the sign.
[43:10] No, that is false and untrue.
[43:16] So, that's where we stand right now.
[43:19] Today, I had a call, in fact, a probably about an hour conversation.
[43:25] I found out today, as I told the mayor earlier in chairman's meeting, that I learned more today about this sign that I did in seven years.
[43:38] I just found out today who actually came up with the verbiage of the sign.
[43:46] And in fact this person who did that called me today because they're a personal friend of mine.
[43:54] And so they felt horrible on some of the things they were reading and so we had a great civil
[44:05] conversation as I did with some others today, people like Beth who reached out, had a great
[44:12] conversation with her, but this individual and I who came up had a great conversation.
[44:21] He understood some of my points with crime in our community, and again, not associating it with that, and so, he understood it, and I understood his point, and what was nice to hear was that point of it was that he did, which administrator Kagnoni talked about.
[44:50] I think he was sorry to see that this has caused the divide in the community from the onset to now this part.
[45:00] He had said, Jad, this was really to draw, try to draw people here for the needed jobs such as Woodward and UTC. And he explained thoroughly and candidly and very transparently what his intentions were. And I fully understood that. And so I will close now for many people, thank goodness.
[45:32] So that to those individuals out there who believe that sign means that we are a sanctuary city, it does not.
[45:45] And for individuals who think anybody who has any thoughts on that, it's completely
[45:59] two different things, and so for individuals that like the sign, it's going to stay, and I think that individual and those individuals also can realize that it does not mean that all people are welcome meeting criminals, and that means that, so thank you.
[46:30] Before we go into further comment or questions or allow Mr. Cagnoni to respond to some of
[46:36] the comments concerning Alderman Thunberg, I'd just like to state that I know that this
[46:43] is a very sensitive topic for many of us.
[46:47] However, we will not tolerate any disruption of the City Council meeting.
[46:52] That being said, if it does continue, you will be asked to leave.
[46:56] Any
[47:01] other questions, or I'm sorry, Mr. Cagmoney, did you want to respond, clarify the same thing in the comments?
[47:06] Thank you, Chairwoman.
[47:08] Just to elaborate in regards to Oliver and
[47:13] Tumberg's statements that we are not a sanctuary city.
[47:16] Sanctuary city was not under consideration.
[47:20] I believe the references was to the welcoming ordinance and I mean there's a distinction between
[47:25] a sanctuary city and a welcoming community.
[47:28] Generally, a sanctuary city limits cooperation with immigration authorities.
[47:33] And that's not the practice policy or adoption of our city council, where welcoming community focuses on creating a supportive environment for immigrants.
[47:44] And we certainly do that as a community now.
[47:47] There's a number of programs from YMCA, YWCA, Catholic Charities, RBC,
[47:52] We see school district 205, we speak 70 language in school district 205 so that is a robust part of our overall community.
[48:03] At the same time, reduction in crime and crime prevention, this council has invested extremely heavily in crime reduction.
[48:13] whether that's traditional policing, through our Rockford Police Department,
[48:18] or other initiatives such the Family Peace Center, as mentioned by Aldermen Coomber.
[48:23] We don't want murderers, we don't want rapists, we don't want individuals at home,
[48:28] drug houses and grow houses within our community.
[48:31] Those type of activities have the tendency to lead the violent crime within our community.
[48:36] We want to make sure that we are attacking that information.
[48:40] I would also say that, even though the welcoming ordinance never brought forward to City Council for consideration,
[48:50] we did land on language that's relative, right?
[48:55] City Council, this council in January 2022 did adopt guiding principles, and they were related to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
[49:04] And says Rockford provides a welcoming, nurturing, inclusive community that values our diversity where community members feel safe.
[49:10] in respect it. Ultimately, the resolution in front of you relays the language that council
[49:16] already approved as well as affirming the existing sign that's up at I-90 in a totally.
[49:24] Thank you. Any other comments or questions? All the women's arena.
[49:29] Thank you for allowing me to speak on your committee. First, I want to just thank the residents.
[49:33] I personally love it when we see you guys show up, we love it when it's not empty behind us and people stand up for things in our community.
[49:43] It's very, it's noble and it's appreciated and I want to see more of it.
[49:51] Thank you specifically to the residents that did reach out to me.
[49:54] I responded back to everyone.
[49:56] I will absolutely not be voting to change a sign.
[50:02] It's ridiculous, but in my own research, there was something that I read, I don't have
[50:10] the source, but it's quick and sweet and I thought it just kind of sums up how I feel
[50:14] about this.
[50:15] Crime is about behavior, not identity.
[50:18] Criminal activity is not tied to any race, nationality or immigration status.
[50:24] Studies show that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native born citizens.
[50:28] conflating the two spreads harmful misinformation and distracts from real solutions to public safety.
[50:34] So I thought that was a great summary.
[50:43] My question, though, is this?
[50:45] We as a city council, I don't know if it was last year or two years ago.
[50:49] We sat and voted, we sat and wrote it together.
[50:52] We also voted on a city value statement.
[50:56] Can you find that and read that, please?
[51:03] Which, are you referencing the resolution related to the guiding principles?
[51:10] Something that was, it was like guiding principles or like a value statement.
[51:13] When this can then go red her, her public comments, it made me think that we sat and
[51:19] came up with like a value statement for our city, some guiding principles for our city.
[51:26] And there was like, there had to be some sort of like summary statement that we all agreed upon.
[51:29] I'd like to know what that was.
[51:31] So, most certainly, the guiding principles came out of a couple of working sessions that City Council had and ultimately voted on in January 2022.
[51:42] I don't see that there's a summary statement attached to it, but there is a lot of statements related to leadership and communication, finance and infrastructure, safety, business climate, quality life, neighborhoods, education, health, diversity, equity and inclusion.
[51:58] In the last statement I read related to Rockford provides a welcoming, nurturing, inclusive community that values diversity where community members feel safe and respected.
[52:08] That is one of the guiding principles that City Council created and then ultimately approved.
[52:13] Perfect, thank you.
[52:17] Alderman Monney?
[52:28] First, I have first a question, Alderman, the Alderman from the third ward.
[52:35] and I was off topic had a conversation with someone in the media today, and I think we also ought to consider a changing our rules that we don't have to refer to each other as Alderman from the ward because it's very a news media unfriendly because nobody's going to want to use a comment that says Alderman from the third ward begs the question who are you talking about.
[53:01] Anyhow,
[53:04] when Alderman Tuenberg mentioned that we now have an agreement of the Council
[53:11] to have future signage, quarter signage, welcome signage, require City Council approval,
[53:21] we've had that discussion on the Council floor, but we haven't actually approved anything
[53:27] in writing to that effect, have we?
[53:33] I know that we articulated that, you know, future signage that would come before the committee or was sponsored or approved or funded through City Council for lack of a way of defining the type of signage that we're talking about, we would bring forward to City Council and for the most part that type of signage is typically going to come through Council one way or another.
[53:58] But we are going to be more specific to the will of council to identify what the signage is, the specifics so that it gets approved as part of any package.
[54:07] So we're going to receive that in writing at some point, I mean, the email I sent today was really along the lines of, and to be more specific about, I think, what Alderman Meeks was referring to.
[54:25] This was forwarded to me and I didn't look at it until today because seven of us are up for re-election of our own.
[54:33] That's what I think you're referring to.
[54:35] And that's why I didn't look at it until today.
[54:38] I mean, I knew it was coming. I spoke with the mayor about it, but I didn't actually look at it until today.
[54:42] So if that's not coming, I would like, I would, and I'm not asking the committee to amend it.
[54:51] I will amend it when it comes to Council next week, so that it also includes it.
[54:59] Because I think Alderman Tuneberg has a good point.
[55:02] We wouldn't be having this conversation, probably, I don't think we'd be having it if it
[55:09] had received a Council approval in the first place.
[55:12] And that's why I brought it requested that we vote on it now, so that it does have Council
[55:18] approval.
[55:18] and that we don't have to continue having this conversation.
[55:25] I think all the women Torena talked about the, I'm not sure why, and I heard some of the same thing.
[55:32] There seems to be some confusion that we're voting tonight to change the sign when the resolution clearly says we're voting tonight to affirm our support for the message.
[55:42] So that is my intent in making it not to be clear not to change the sign.
[55:51] And I guess my only other comment really is that it's unfortunate that we now live in times where all are welcome can't be just taken up face value.
[56:03] And that it has to, you know, that there's subtext and, you know, hidden meaning and
[56:11] concern that it's a bipartisan message.
[56:15] And I get that.
[56:16] I mean, those are the times we're living in, but I think half of us were not on the council
[56:25] when this was originally, the message was originally put on that sign, and I doubt I don't think
[56:33] I think the council would have not approved it if it had been put to the council at that time and I don't think the council is going to reject the message now, but it, you know, it's just it's unfortunate that that's where we are as a country and I guess it's a city.
[56:54] Thank you.
[56:56] We would support a friendly amendment from any of the planning and development committee members.
[57:02] Understanding that it doesn't have to be in writing at committee, so if there's an amendment that future corridor planning or similar type signage sponsored by the city requires city council approval, that would be completely acceptable on the staff level.
[57:15] Thank you.
[57:17] Alderman Rose.
[57:19] Yeah, thank you.
[57:20] I did want to comment on some of the things that are been said tonight and in past conversations about this development.
[57:29] First, I guess one of my questions, I first want to recognize third world Alderman for reaffirming that idea that it's not a sanctuary city sign.
[57:42] But I do want to address the idea of sanctuary city because I think it's very important for this discussion.
[57:49] And this is for staff, are you aware of any federal definitions of what a sanctuary city is?
[57:58] So I don't know if there's a federal definition, but a common language would be similar to what I stated earlier limits cooperation with immigration authority.
[58:07] Okay. And the reason I asked that is because there is no federal definition of what a sanctuary city is and I think that's very important for the public to understand because what is happening around that conversation or that narrative around sanctuary city is a political narrative, which is meant to identify cities that are, quote, unquote, friendly to immigrants and I say immigrants.
[58:36] not illegal immigrants, friendly to immigrants, where then that narrative is used to co-opt our
[58:45] policing and our law structures to go in and to target those populations.
[59:00] And I think it's important to understand that this has happened historically.
[59:05] here in the United States since the founding of our country.
[59:10] Back in the 1700s and early 1800s, there were efforts during the French Revolution where our federal government limited
[59:21] French people from accessing our country due to the rabble rousing of the French during their revolution.
[59:29] Again, we saw in the 1860s, when Irish immigrants were limited due to the fact that they were labeled drunks.
[59:40] They were labeled, obviously they come from Catholic backgrounds.
[59:44] And the nativist populations did not want to see that population grow here.
[59:51] We saw in the late 1890s when Jews and Austrians and Russians were targeted
[1:00:00] In their case, they were targeted with medical exams when they were trying to come to the United States, and the doctors that did those medical exams would look at their paperwork and see that they were Jewish, Austrian or Russian and deny them on the spot.
[1:00:19] We saw it in the 1924 Immigration Act against the Chinese.
[1:00:26] We are now seeing it against Hispanic folks and any basically brown folks in this country.
[1:00:35] And so, I think it's important to call out both the history of this and
[1:00:40] how our immigration laws have often been co-opted to criminalize immigrants.
[1:00:45] but also the fact that we have a constitution that protects against this type of discrimination.
[1:00:55] First of all, being an immigrant should not make you liable to be asked questions
[1:01:02] from law enforcement.
[1:01:04] We have this thing called jurisdiction, okay?
[1:01:08] A jurisdiction means that certain law enforcement bodies can only operate within those frameworks.
[1:01:19] For example, we have cyber crimes.
[1:01:23] Who's in charge of cyber crimes in this country, the FBI, because they happen across state lines.
[1:01:30] Who's in charge of tax crimes, the IRS is in charge of tax crimes.
[1:01:36] No other body, our police department, doesn't go asking people about their taxes or
[1:01:42] seeing their taxes.
[1:01:44] The IRS does that.
[1:01:46] And I think it's very clear to recognize these jurisdictions because it's important
[1:01:51] to understand that who implements immigration law in this country?
[1:01:57] ICE and our border patrol.
[1:02:00] And so what we're seeing here is an uptick in a conversation where individuals want to deputize local police departments,
[1:02:12] sheriff's, city departments, state police to be their deputies in enforcing this law.
[1:02:20] And again, based on the Constitution, we should be protecting against that.
[1:02:26] I think that's very, very important in following our Constitution and I think it's also important to understand the connection between the enforcement piece and the uptick in the use of private prisons in this work.
[1:02:45] Is that private prisons have seen major investments since the Trump administration was elected?
[1:02:54] And I will share with you that Geo Group, which is one of the major prison companies in the United States,
[1:03:03] saw 100% growth in their stock price after he was elected.
[1:03:08] And it's no accident that those same companies are housing these immigrants in our country.
[1:03:17] So I will say it, I will continue to say it.
[1:03:21] This is no accident that these types of conversations and narratives are coming up because people want to make money off of it.
[1:03:37] This is a reminder, please try and hold your claps to yourselves so we don't have disruption in the meeting, please.
[1:03:44] So, I'll just end with this is, I think it's, I'm glad that the alderman from the Third
[1:03:51] Ward made the change in his language, that we're not a sanctuary city, but I think it's
[1:03:57] important as Americans to understand that there is no federal definition of sanctuary
[1:04:01] cities, it's a made-up narrative, it's used politically to attack immigrants, and
[1:04:07] we need to stand up to it because our neighbors are our neighbors.
[1:04:13] thank you for your comment. I felt it in y'all but thank you for holding it. Do
[1:04:22] we have any other comments or questions? All the women makes and then
[1:04:27] Timber. I'm sorry.
[1:04:33] We've been talking about this for a while now. So I would much
[1:04:37] rather be having a vigorous conversation about the housing framework and really
[1:04:42] diving into that because it was so important. But here we are talking about this
[1:04:47] And I just want to say that I am very proud when I drive into the city and I see that sign.
[1:04:57] It makes me happy, it's bright, and it says words that I love to see because I believe that to my core that we want to welcome everybody.
[1:05:09] And I actually, I feel you agreed to Alderman Tumberg, but I just want to point out one thing.
[1:05:18] Just recently, the City of Rockford posted information about the year and crime stats.
[1:05:26] So I just want to repeat, again, for those that have not been able to read that,
[1:05:32] that we have had a significant decrease in property crimes since 2016.
[1:05:37] We're down 35% from 2016 to 2024.
[1:05:41] And although it's not a continual decline, so I love the transparency, we're down 38% in violent crime from 2016 to 2024.
[1:05:55] And our homicide rates have fallen drastically since they peaked in 2020.
[1:06:01] And an individual, I don't know how to say this, because it has been charged in 16 of the 18 homicides in 2024.
[1:06:11] So of 18, 16 of those individuals that committed those crimes have been caught by our police department.
[1:06:20] And we gave out 15,815 citations or warnings in 2024, which is a 48% increase from 2022.
[1:06:31] I know some people won't like to hear that, but some people love hearing that, because that's what they've been requesting.
[1:06:37] I border the third ward so we have very similar residents and I know what I experience today and I have to know what you experience too and I'm glad that you have civil conversations.
[1:06:54] I think that you'll always have civil conversations with these individuals in this work because that's what we are.
[1:07:00] We're civil people.
[1:07:03] And
[1:07:09] I just can't believe that we're having this conversation in the way that we are.
[1:07:15] But I don't believe that anybody wants to see this sign go anywhere.
[1:07:19] I think they love it just the way that it is.
[1:07:22] And coming from a finance department and your goal is to be, you know, watching that money to want to tear down this sign
[1:07:33] and bring something else that is not as
[1:07:38] and couldn't possibly be as inclusive
[1:07:40] as what's on that sign right now.
[1:07:42] I just said don't understand it.
[1:07:45] But here we are, in my opinion,
[1:07:48] wasting a lot of time on City Council, a lot of time.
[1:07:52] And I would rather not do that.
[1:07:54] So I'm going to stop talking and hopefully
[1:07:56] we can all move forward and stop talking about this,
[1:07:59] because I don't think the sign's going to go anywhere.
[1:08:02] Thank you.
[1:08:07] I
[1:08:11] have no idea why this is in front of the council.
[1:08:15] If we voted no, what happens to the sign?
[1:08:18] Nothing.
[1:08:18] We don't even really own the sign.
[1:08:21] And to tell you the truth, you know, we all get what the sign means.
[1:08:26] So, you know, we heard all kinds of history that has nothing to do with the issue on the floor.
[1:08:32] We're running down rabbit trails.
[1:08:33] The signs going nowhere, it's kind of pretty good message, and I just don't get it.
[1:08:40] So, if we vote, no, nothing happens, so this is, I agree with Alderman Meeks.
[1:08:45] So, total waste of the time.
[1:08:48] Alderman, too, Mert.
[1:08:50] Thank you.
[1:08:51] Yes, and I would agree we're done with this, and crime stats, yes, they are down.
[1:08:59] I appreciate that, we've done a lot of work on council, and that is one of my
[1:09:05] Biggest things as Alderman is the crime portion.
[1:09:09] So I'm glad you did put those statistics together for your comments.
[1:09:16] So thank you and we will move forward and continue to get our streets done as well, come in this year.
[1:09:24] Thanks.
[1:09:27] Thank you.
[1:09:28] Any other comments or questions?
[1:09:32] Clerk will you please call the roll.
[1:09:35] Thank
[1:09:39] you, the item passes, is there a motion to adjourn?
[1:09:45] Any questions or discussions?
[1:09:48] All those in favor say aye.
[1:09:50] Aye, any opposed?
[1:09:51] Same sign, this meeting is adjourned.