The Colchester City Council met in regular session Oct. 5, with budget issues framing much of the evening’s agenda.
The meeting began with public comments from Doug Erickson of Benton Engineering concerning the ongoing sewer project.
Two funding sources are being pursued, one through the Illinois EPA and the Community Development Block Grant, administered through the Illinois Department of Economic Opportunity (DCEO). Erickson told the council he is confident that EPA funding would be available next fiscal year, while the block grant award will be announced around Election Day. According to Erickson, the DCEO grant would enable the city to move more quickly on the storm water issues.
Ordinances
Five action items required drafting of ordinances, with two passing unanimously.
The council approved offering a discount of $1 on residents’ utility bills if they choose to receive by email rather than regular mail. An ordinance will be created to amend the City Code to allow the discount.
The council waived second reading and approved an ordinance to amend City Code Chapter 22 to add a new Article XII to allow credit card payments of authorized obligations.
Three additional ordinances slated for discussion and action met with dissension. Council member Catherine Louderman moved to waive a second reading of Ordinance 202610 to amend the City Code to add a subsection regarding a dedicated investment account for the City Hall renovation project. During discussion, council member Martha Clark questioned wording issues and whether a first reading was held.
Mayor Mark Clark, in conversation with the city attorney, stated that a change had been made to the language but then returned to the original wording.
After no further discussion, Clark called for the vote.
Limkeman, Louderman, and Wetzel voted “yes;” Clark, Frost and Welch voted “no,” with Mayor Clark casting a “yes” vote to break the tie and approve the ordinance.
The second ordinance called for the waiving of second reading and approval of Ordinance 2026-11 to amend the City Code to add a subsection regarding a dedicated investment account for the purchase of police vehicles. After a motion by Limkeman, council member Frost asked what amount and fees were needed to open an account. City Treasurer Susan McSperritt said that if it’s over $500 and fewer than six transactions/withdrawals a month, then there would be no fee. Interest rates; however, would depend on the financial institution. Limkeman pointed out that the ordinance under consideration would only authorize the City to pursue the investment account. Opening the account could happen any time in the fiscal year if so desired and monies were available. Wetzel, Clark, Frost and Welch voted “no,” while Louderman and Limkeman voted “yes.” The motion to create an ordinance authorizing an account for purchase of police vehicles failed.
This decision by a majority of the council necessitated the tabling of a third ordinance to amend the City Code and add a subsection to open a dedicated investment account for the purchase of public works vehicles. As presented in the agenda, the proposed Ordinance 2026-12 would have to be renumbered because of the failure to pass Ordinance 2026-11 above.
Discussion
Dates were established for upcoming committee meetings. Welch expressed her “great concern with budget deficit issues.” When asked about her concerns after adjournment, she noted that in the August Claims and Accounts report, which the council passed unanimously, the City collected $54,808.81 in receipts against $60,168.76 in expenses.
“We only took in this much, and we spent this much. You cannot keep doing that every month,” she stressed.
She also had concerns about attorney fees to enforce residents’ violations of city ordinances and resultant fines. She gave one example of an individual who was fined $300, but legal fees to prosecute amounted to $270 with a likely additional court appearance. Welch shared that attorney fees for August and September were $4,332.90.
“We approve the attorney’s bill, but we don’t ever discuss it in a meeting,” stated Welch.
Welch referred to ordinance violations for Colchester property owned by individuals in England and in Florida.
“Do you think they’re going to pay us anything at all?” she asked.
She also mentioned that the attorney assesses a $57 fee for every ordinance summons by city police chief Gary Smith.
At issue is what happens if the City files for receivership when no effort has been made for payment of fines or for improvement. If these derelict/abandoned properties would then revert to the city, what can be done with them?
“We’re going to lose money,” said Welch.
During her allotted time, Louderman spoke about attending a FEMA meeting at Spoon River College Outreach Center concerning flooding in the city. Technically, Colchester, except for a tiny segment in the northern part of town near the Lamoine River, is not considered a “flood plain.” Only residences in that small portion would be eligible for flood insurance. However, if the City of Colchester would register with FEMA and pass a city ordinance, then people in the city who wanted to purchase flood insurance (likely through FEMA) would be eligible to do so. In light of the severe flooding several weeks ago, affected residents would have been able to apply for insurance reimbursement had the agreement been in place.
In other business, the council approved moving the December City Council meeting to Dec. 8 because Dec. 7 is the caucus date. The council also approved $175 (plus mileage and meals) for software company Locis training in Pleasant Plains November 13 for City Clerk Randy Faxon.
