Committee of the Whole Meeting 2/23/2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7TsFj5hnww
Automatic captions; not audio-verified.

[6:37] The committee of the whole for the city council of the city of Highland Park, Illinois, February 23rd, 2026. Will the clerk please call the role?

[6:46] Council member center present.

[6:47] Council member Brockman here. Council member Ross. Ross, you here? Here. Council member Tapio here. Council member Lower.

[6:57] Lower, you're here. She's here.

[7:01] Bloomberg. Mayor here. We have a quorum. Thank you. Um, we need to approve the participation of council member Lor

[7:10] uh via electronic process. Um, council member liter, who is the person you love the most right now?

[7:20] I'm sorry, what did you say? Who do you love the most right now?

[7:26] Baby Theo. All right, it's her. She can join us.

[7:30] Is it really? Is it really me? Is it really me?

[7:33] Any objections to Council Member Little participating? I see heads shaking and no response, so I'm going to go with I think we're okay. Thank you for joining

[7:42] us this evening. May I have a motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the committee of the whole held February 9th, 2026.

[7:50] So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. I. Thank you. I.

[7:54] Thank you. Thank you. Um, our next item, our first item of scheduled business is considerations pertaining to the

[8:02] permanent place of remembrance. I'd like to thank everybody for what I know will be um an important and emotional

[8:11] conversation. The um special working group has been meeting since last November, beginning um a multi-year

[8:21] process of planning for the permanent place of remembrance. And as you may recall, the city council hosted several roundt discussions through which the

[8:29] working group was established. Um the working group is responsible for guiding the planning process. But this city

[8:36] council is going to be receiving their recommendations and making the final determination. In the process, we've

[8:44] identified three primary objectives for the place of remembrance. To create an accessible public place for reflection,

[8:51] remembrance, and solace. to honor the community's resiliency, especially those who were injured, and importantly to pay

[8:58] tribute to the memories of Katie Goldstein, Arena McCarthy, Kevin Michael McCarthy, Steven Strauss, Jackie Loi

[9:06] Sunheim, Nicholas Toledo, and Eduardo Ialdo. I'd like to ask us to take a moment of silence to honor these beloved members of our community.

[9:26] Thank you so much. I will turn the discussion now over to Emily. Thank you.

[9:33] Thank you, mayor. Good evening, mayor and council. So, you know, we're here to discuss the place of remembrance and talk a little bit more about how we move

[9:42] forward in this process. So, we'll start with um this will be our agenda. We'll start with introductions, talk a little bit more about the overview and the

[9:50] process and where we're heading. Reflect on the meaning of the place of remembrance and what it means to you and

[9:58] have a ideas discussion a little bit be able to talk a little bit more about and engage with you in the process and

[10:06] really have some ideation about where we're heading through this process. And then we'll talk about connecting and staying connected throughout the the

[10:13] process. And as we do this, I'd like to turn this over to our team with S SWA, our design team, and their partner al

[10:21] together was communications and an engagement firm who'll be leading this part of the discussion. We have about 30 we have 30 minutes for this discussion.

[10:28] So we'll need to make sure we're getting through everything. And as they come up, we'll have them introduce themselves to you. So

[10:37] looks like Christian's going to So come on up. Your time to shine.

[10:44] Hello everyone. Good afternoon. Um, my name is Christian Gist. I am a brand strategist, communication specialist

[10:50] with Al together. We are a place-based creative agency um that headquartered in Evston, Illinois. Um, for this project,

[10:58] we'll be engaging the community, working with SWA, our design partners on um what this looks like. um working with

[11:07] everyone that has been impacted by um this and getting their feedback on how the design process moves forward and

[11:14] then we turn over to SWA who will take all of that feedback and come up with some beautiful designs. Um so for today's meeting, we wanted to open it up

[11:22] as a listening session. I have some questions prepared for you. If you have something to share, we'd love to hear it. Um if you want to respond at a later

[11:31] time, we will make that option available. But as much as you want to share, as little as you want to share, we just wanted to open it up and we'll ask some questions about the feeling of

[11:40] the place, the meaning kind of then we'll lean into some design preferences and what this looks like and feels like

[11:46] and how that all translates and this is our firm as well as SWI.

[11:58] Okay, so a little bit more information about where we're at in the project timeline. We kicked off the project back in January. We'll continue this until

[12:05] September 2027. Um, right now we are at the listening, discovery, and engagement phase. From there, once we have a good

[12:12] sense of what everybody wants and we have our engagement summary, we'll move forward into con concept refinements and schematic design to design development

[12:21] and then ultimately construction, construction administration.

[12:26] And that's right now our listening sessions will be taking place between February moving into March. And then we'll have an internal survey and

[12:33] statement. All of the feedback that we receive will be summarized into something that is not specific but still

[12:40] into any individual or person or group but we'll take everybody's considerations there.

[12:48] Okay. So moving into questions.

[12:52] Our first one is how would you like to feel at the place of remembrance?

[13:00] I'm gonna ask people to just shout out their answers and not wait for me to call on them.

[13:08] Peaceful. Same.

[13:18] Welcoming. Quiet.

[13:26] Safe. Peaceful.

[13:35] Peaceful. Okay. Reflective.

[13:43] What would you like this space to represent in our community? Remembrance.

[13:51] same unity,

[14:02] respect that day in our community.

[14:10] Um, yeah, I think my words for maybe a different question, but

[14:19] take your hand away from your mouth so they can hear you.

[14:22] That uh somehow everybody can feel represented but represented representation.

[14:29] Representation and inclusivity there. Okay.

[14:37] What's I would hope hopeful.

[14:42] What story would you like the design of the place of remembrance to tell

[14:54] the events of that day and how tradition is important in our community?

[15:04] I would say actually the diversity of our city. Mhm.

[15:13] I would say the resilience of our community. Still still the word I was about to say. I resilience and moving forward.

[15:22] The future. Yeah. As well. Holding each other together. Yeah. I was thinking strength and resilience. Yeah.

[15:35] Um, this is a little bit more personal.

[15:36] Where do you feel the safest? What things make you feel safe? And why why does that make you feel safe? It could be anywhere in the world.

[15:52] Say with family and friends, I would say nature

[16:08] in the heart of Highland Park. Repeating but home.

[16:19] Home. Yeah. Home girl place. Yeah, I would say kindness. Kindness.

[16:26] Okay. For next question, how do you see the two sites, Port Clinton and the Rose Garden, working together, if at all, or

[16:34] the journey between the two? And these could be the story that they tell between the two, design elements that they share. It could be nothing at all.

[16:42] Um, but if there's any relation, if you would like to see that, how would you like to see it?

[16:54] I don't think it's a journey. I think they have to sort of interact in a way

[17:00] that they express in either place um all the things we just put forward or that

[17:08] people put forward in some small way and then in some larger way. Okay.

[17:15] Um I agree. Uh and I I think you know in

[17:22] asking this question I'm thinking immediately they can't be disconnected.

[17:26] They have to have a connection and um you know maybe it's a piece of the rose

[17:35] garden um design that is is in

[17:42] you know is in Portland. um you know something of of that kind. Could it be the pallet be reflective?

[17:51] Because I kind of feel like they serve two purposes.

[17:54] I think the rose garden is more for solace and respit and reflection and then you're in the middle of Port Clinton and that's more

[18:03] remembering. I don't know that they have to work together because I think they have two purposes. I don't know.

[18:12] Yeah. I mean, working together, it's a little tricky because it's about the same event, right? So, I don't know if

[18:19] it has to be a linear working together, but they have to capture different elements of of the the story, right?

[18:28] And those elements could be completely different from each other, but that's a way of working together. That's a good way.

[18:36] Mhm.

[18:37] And and just for the members of the public who have joined us late, um there's going to be a huge opportunity for community input. This is just for

[18:44] the council to kind of brainstorm and and share their thoughts. So didn't want people to feel like this is it and I don't have a voice. Absolutely. We will

[18:53] fully embrace hearing from the community names. Anything else?

[19:00] Yeah, I I feel like they need to sort of reflect the fact that they're

[19:07] They have different purposes, right? And visitors to the rose garden are going to go for a very specific purpose. It's kind of out of the way intentionally.

[19:17] And so that should be thoughtful.

[19:23] And and those that are are not choosing necessarily to go there for that purpose, they have to be thoughtful, too.

[19:32] Yep. Agreed.

[19:36] Um, I do think the Rose Garden has that kind of a purpose. I like that. Um, but in

[19:42] some way it it raises the level then of poor Clinton since that's where it occurred to a different level.

[19:56] Okay.

[19:58] To the same effect here we have, you know, poor Clinton will continue to serve as a vibrant business hub. Um, how do you hope the balance feels when you're there?

[20:10] I think to council member Topia's point, um,

[20:18] not to apparent, subtle,

[20:24] subtle. Yeah. One thought that I had was respecting, and I mean this only with respect,

[20:33] where people died. Currently, people are running up and down the stairs. And it's to me like maybe we put a garden there

[20:40] and and have that be more of a almost like a sacred space, but not an in yourrface. this is where it happened.

[20:48] But we remember and we protect almost those memories, but have it be subtle so

[20:56] that people who come to Port Clinton see this beauty but aren't necessarily having to remember that horror. I don't know.

[21:06] Well, it sounds like it's uh more that there is a something symbolic, right?

[21:13] But it's not explicit. That's and then for those of us who experienced it, right?

[21:18] We know, right?

[21:19] And this that that what we see helps us remember.

[21:23] And then for those that you know who they don't know where you what happened and where, right, it's part of the beauty of the place

[21:32] of this gathering place still in the middle of this city.

[21:36] Whatever you think. I I I guess from the beginning I hoped that whatever is designed in Port Clinton Square is you

[21:44] know enhancing the experience of being in Fort Clinton Square where um you know where where it's serving both purposes

[21:52] and and and in that way become a you know beloved

[21:58] part of Port Clinton Square that you know people love about Port Clinton Square right

[22:05] um while still, you know, telling the story.

[22:11] Yeah. And I like the combination of having something there to remember and then like continuing to make, you know, as a central hub, the new memories and

[22:20] just gather um and well be able to also reflect in addition, but then like off to the and I and I like your idea of

[22:28] where to maybe a little a garden or off to one side of the square, but the location I'm not sure. Yeah,

[22:37] which I think ties back to as someone mentioned earlier like tradition and community and gathering which is kind of what Fort Clinton is for. So, it's a

[22:46] chance to make new memories while also having the subtle reflection there, right? I think Annette has something to say.

[22:54] I I think it's going to be quite a challenge, but I really um I I'm sure they're up to it because I've always

[23:02] looked to once we decided on having the rose garden as a place that's more reflective and larger and gathering, you

[23:10] know, both privately or families or however we do it. But I I love the idea that there would be something real in

[23:19] nature in for Clinton to remember. But it it's a very delicate balance because I agree

[23:28] with the mayor that I don't want to take care of the vibrancy. I don't want it to be anything but very subtle because life

[23:37] has continued and it it is the center in many ways of you know our vibrancy and

[23:47] an economic development and a lively community. So when you say running up and down the stairs I think that perfectly represents Port Clinton.

[23:56] So, um I don't know how you do it, which is why I'm not an artist or a developer or anything like that, but I I love that

[24:05] everyone's taking that into account because that subtlety really could make it as meaningful as we'd like it to be.

[24:15] With respect to that, I want to call up our design team and um we're going to have we have a few mood boards that

[24:23] we're going to hopefully get your feedback on. Um, and we'll make these as we again go into larger community engagement. We'll have these available for everyone. Um, but we have an

[24:32] opportunity for you all to kind of look at some things we put together. There's some different design elements in here, different features, and you can offer

[24:40] your feedback. Um, we will present these now, but we'll also leave these here.

[24:44] And we have some stickers. So, if there's a certain part that you love, you know, you can put a sticker there um and expand on it however.

[24:57] We have Ben, actually, do you want to come to the microphone? Oh, yeah. Sorry. Ben, feel free to introduce yourself.

[25:04] We'll do. Uh, hi everyone. Ben Waldo, SWA. Um, and I have Olivia Pinter with me as well from SWA. We're the landscape

[25:12] architects um supporting the design process here. Um, we developed some

[25:19] boards that you physical boards that you can all engage with and we can leave these with you so you have more time to

[25:27] consider them after the fact. Um, but the intent here is with sort of several

[25:35] kind of highlevel aspects of you know how the design would feel physically. We have sort of a range of of feelings.

[25:44] These are shown as like collages essentially um of different images that um kind of capture a range of how the

[25:53] the space could begin to feel physically. Um and so kept it fairly open-ended um and just want to get your

[26:02] reaction to these kind of different moods as it were. And so I think maybe the easiest way to do this space-wise if

[26:11] I don't know um I know you all have your microphones right in front of you, but if I were able to leave one of the boards at a

[26:19] time at this end of the table and you all kind of come and um did we do you have stickers or do you want us to shout out?

[26:26] Yeah. Yeah, we could do that too. 10 minutes. Yeah. 10 minutes. Okay.

[26:35] Um, so I'll put this here so that I'm not blocking the microphone.

[26:43] Um, so what we've done as well is, um, I would say that these are sort of complimentary to these target questions

[26:51] and it's more intuitive. Um, and the intent with the collage is to not allow like one specific image to be like the

[27:01] specific idea, but it's more of a overall character like Ben. suggested and we've set them up kind of on a

[27:07] gradient so it's not necessarily like um one or the other if you just like kind

[27:15] of what end of the spectrum and is this for which one?

[27:19] So this category for Clinton or Rose Garden.

[27:28] Okay. So these are just elements. Yeah. Um so this first um

[27:35] set of set of images is related to movement. So the first is more kind of open, ambiguous, loose then something

[27:45] that might be more sort of organic but um delineated I guess. Um and then the

[27:52] latter is maybe more formal, more linear. Yeah.

[28:02] Well, I I gravitate toward the middle one where it's I like the curves and the there's more of a design, less of an

[28:09] open thing. It's kind of conducive to kind of bringing people together and inward and the former one just feels too cold.

[28:20] I I typically mean middle to left. Um I find the right to be a little rigid. uh to council member Topia's earlier point

[28:29] around sort of nature being a good provoking feeling like that obviously is captured more so in one and two in my view

[28:38] there's a there's a there's a warm you know to the to the middle um middle

[28:45] images I think I I want to sort of make a comment that you know what you what

[28:53] the final design looks like could wind up looking more of like either end of the spectrum. It depends

[29:01] on what you know what you're trying to ultimately convey what so it it you know

[29:08] it it it may wind up looking more rectalineal or something. Sure.

[29:13] But but your preference is But my preference is for the the warmth of um I I like the middle but I also like

[29:22] John said I like the left too. with the movement piece, too. I like that uh look of it as well. That seems welcoming and

[29:30] open as well to me. Um I'm I'm two to one also. A little bit to the left of two.

[29:40] 1.5.

[29:40] Mayor, thank you. Thank you for the picture. Um I don't like three at all. I like two and I'm surprised because I'm

[29:48] usually a pretty formal person, but um I think one is beautiful also. So, I'm I'm

[29:54] kind of two. It's it's um curved and everything makes it feel good, but I I really like the looseness of one.

[30:05] reflecting the Jud Jensen approach to landscape. Thank you.

[30:14] Okay, that's great. Thank you.

[30:28] Uh so this this board relates to material. Um and so again kind of a

[30:35] gradient from maybe sort of rougher around the edges, looser to um kind of

[30:43] more crisp, clean on the far right, and then somewhere in between in the center.

[30:57] for me. Two and three.

[31:02] Same here. I like the water elements, too.

[31:11] Yeah. I tend to more I understand. I tend to the more organ. Yeah.

[31:17] Yeah. That's what I would say too. Or the rougher letter like that. I do too. Two to one again.

[31:25] Well, with the Yeah. Two to one. Okay. All right.

[31:32] Although the greenery is very nice on three. So maybe I would say two to one, but with a little more green.

[31:38] We have some more greenery to help decide that. Don't worry. But wait, there's more.

[31:46] Yeah, we can next.

[32:05] So, um, this this board relates to the the experience of nature, um, from kind of

[32:15] the more ecological wild feeling on the left to something more formal on the

[32:22] right and um, again something perhaps in between that in the center.

[32:34] You know, I I like the metal one. It's very elegant. Um, it's more finished than the left. So, while I said in the

[32:41] previous one, I like the raer one, but I like the the contrast of something raw and something more finished.

[32:49] I would agree with that. I like I I think you could have both. I and to a earlier comment about uh liking the

[32:58] water elements. I would love water elements but we live in this climate. I think it'd be very hard to do. Um

[33:06] although I love the idea of it. Um, but I I think you know some of the more

[33:14] refined with uh some that are, you know, grasses or something that are are freer flowing and maybe even what I love about

[33:23] tall grasses is the sound, you know, in in in the way the attraction for butterflies

[33:30] and and that too, but it also makes a sound.

[33:33] Yeah. So, as far as the water element, um we we've talked I think a lot of us like that. One of the projects that they

[33:41] did was for the Sandy Hook shooting and they have a a pond that they just drain in the winter time and refill when it's

[33:50] not going to explode with ice. So, it's not totally ruled out. We can certainly look at that.

[33:58] Yeah, I think I think with something like that, you just try to make it so that it looks, you know, beautiful in the winter, too.

[34:07] Exactly.

[34:07] Um, you know, maybe maybe the way snow sits in it is feels intentional. Um, any other questions or comments on this?

[34:18] Um, yeah, I would go I like I like the more formal green. I don't know. It just looks so

[34:25] kemp. Although to council member Ross's point, the sound of the grasses does seem beautiful and that is more

[34:32] indigenous to our area. So from that perspective, you know, I'm easy. But I do think that the green on the more

[34:40] traditional one is just beautiful. Maybe that's the best way in the house. Beautiful. I would go with I like two as well.

[34:50] That's my choice.

[34:51] I like two. And keep in mind, we have winter for part of this, so it's going to need to be able to handle not much

[34:58] growing. To your point, the grasses will be there throughout the winter, and there can be other interesting

[35:06] structures, you know, and trees that will bury. Good point. I'm at two.

[35:11] Yeah, I I as well we too, but I to council Tapia's point about sort of contrast.

[35:18] Yeah. Is lovely.

[35:29] related but um it's own kind of quality to the color um

[35:37] which can be related to you know obviously in a landscape project a lot of the color will come from nature. So, a lot of these images continue to

[35:46] emphasize that, but there could be other, you know, material elements that have, you know, natural colors or um or not.

[35:55] Um, and so this is maybe more um

[36:02] muted, more natural, more um kind of earthy color ranges. Um,

[36:10] in the center, this is more sort of colorful but soft I guess I would say and then on the far right really like

[36:19] bright bright colors. Um so think about how how those how that range sort of would make you feel. Um what would be the emotional experience of that?

[36:30] Yeah, the bright colors for me seem too celebratory to, you know, um but that one on the left feels too muted and so I

[36:38] like the that this sort of brings it down some but there's an elevation which to me it invites reflection, right? But

[36:47] it seems like it has a broader pallet of mood from reflective to uplift. Sure.

[36:53] And the others kind of go opposite directions.

[36:57] I May I speak? Sorry, I don't mean to keep no following one person, but the um I I agree about

[37:07] the bright colors. Um but and I Yeah, I'm not really sure I there seems to be a little more consistency in the middle.

[37:18] Um but they're they're also going to bloom at different times, right?

[37:22] Um plants flowers bloom at different times. So I assume you'll plant it in Yeah. Yeah, around that

[37:30] absolutely. Um, you know, we would be looking at kind of a full season's worth of palette and how that evolves and

[37:38] obviously in the fall the color palette's going to feel different inherently than it does in the spring,

[37:45] but sort of working where where does it kind of lean towards, right? Um, regardless of of time of year is I think

[37:53] how we're perennials versus annuals and what attracts pollinators. And

[38:00] what do you guys think? I I would I would agree with the comments sort of center and left and center. Um I

[38:07] think the bright is beautiful but overly vibrant and too colorful for what we're trying to accomplish. Yeah.

[38:13] Yeah. I I agree. But I exactly do I would go ahead.

[38:18] I would I would go more with number one though. I like that that more muted um feel. I like that like when people can go out and it just it's not as bright.

[38:28] Um, and I like there is still color but that's I just like the look of that and the feel of that of one a little better.

[38:35] I'm between one and two. Okay, great. Between one and two. Okay. I don't need to break obviously.

[38:44] Great.

[38:46] Sorry about that councilman before I interrupted. Oh, that's okay. Okay.

[38:55] That's all right. Just a couple more.

[39:01] Um, this is about night presence. Um, how lighting on the site would be implemented, whether that's something

[39:10] that's more kind of atmospheric, ambient, soft versus um, more kind of formal defined in the

[39:18] center. And then all the way on the right is, you know, something maybe even more experiential. Um, kind of part of

[39:27] part of the experience of actually visiting the memorial beyond sort of lighting as a sort of safety and accent feature.

[39:37] I like the more ambient the the quieter.

[39:43] Um, and I'm the middle one makes a little too circusy.

[39:50] I I feel like it I like the quieter. Number one. Number one. Okay. So, this time I'll follow you.

[39:59] Number one. Awesome. For the same reason. Yeah.

[40:01] I like number three. I think there's something really impactful.

[40:06] Experiential use the term around something like that. Okay.

[40:11] I would I like number one as well. I like the quiet look of it as well.

[40:16] Peaceful. And that number one I I I just I don't like

[40:23] number two at all and even number three is a bit much for me. I the subtlety is beautiful in one. I agree.

[40:31] And if I could add what I like about one is people create their own interpretation of what they experience. These kind of

[40:38] tend to tell too much of a story or too much of an experience that is supposed to be experienced a certain way. And this one you kind of make make your own journal.

[41:00] And finally, uh, memory or commemoration. So this would be sort of how this this one's a

[41:09] little bit more abstract, but it's kind of like how how do we want to use form,

[41:15] abstract idea, um space to um create an experience that

[41:23] reflects, remembers, celebrates the lives that were lost.

[41:29] um whether that be more subtle or um more kind of direct and formal.

[41:42] I'm a fan of subtle. Um, and I I think part of,

[41:50] you know, with with all due respect, because you may be able to come up with more defined images that I like better,

[41:57] but um I just in general, I feel like it it should be subtle and something that

[42:04] people to the comment uh council member Tapia just made that people can impose

[42:10] their own interpretation of can, you know, Um, yeah. Yeah, that makes sense.

[42:20] Pressing the mute button when you're talking.

[42:21] Oh, that's right.

[42:28] I I agree. I agree with customers. Those are the comments. Me, too. Yeah. Same with me. Subtle. Yeah.

[42:37] Yeah. So, I wanted to wait to see the final one. The thing that's really missing here is diversity of different

[42:44] aesthetic traditions because there's a very large Latino element to what happened and I don't see any of that

[42:52] here. Now, I'm not saying that these elements can't work, but I'm not seeing that influence at all.

[42:58] Um, and one of the challenges will be that Latino culture tends not to be subtle.

[43:04] So, I think that I think that's one big piece that's missing here. you saw my reactions to the a lot of things I like,

[43:11] but I'm really concerned now that that aspect is just absent right now. Mhm.

[43:18] Um to that point I because I was thinking those things before we walked in that we have a large you know Jewish

[43:27] population Hispanic um you know there we're pretty diverse community but I certainly hear you on the Hispanic

[43:36] uh you know Spanish speaking comp part and I had thought you know and I know it's too early for this but there might

[43:44] be some traditions as like lighting candles or leaving something at at the at the pres at the site of where something happened and to make space for that somehow.

[43:56] Um, but I guess my thought was the more abstract it is, the more or to the extent that it's abstract, you can put your interpretation onto it.

[44:07] Um, anyway, that but I I hear you on that.

[44:10] Yeah. And then just to then expand, I mean I focus on the Latino thing, but to the point that this is a diverse community, right? So the other what

[44:19] other elements might be missing culturally, right? And so and again explicitness.

[44:25] I'm not asking for something explicit, right?

[44:27] You know, like a dayto-day mask or something. I'm not talking about that, but something um um evocative

[44:35] of the different cultures that have were are part of our community that were affected and not just those that were uh killed and injured, but just the whole

[44:44] community. This is for also the expanded thing. And that's to make sure that people see them. You know, somebody said

[44:51] inclusive in one of the words that no matter what culture you come from or what religious tradition, you'll find

[44:58] something that speaks to you from who you are, even as it's speaking to all of us, there's no answer together.

[45:05] So, one of the questions we had was would we have a a plaque and it would certainly be in English and in Spanish

[45:13] because there was such impact on people who speak both languages. Um, one of the questions that I had was that for

[45:21] Clinton, given that it is essentially monochromatic at this point, is there an opportunity to introduce mosaic at some

[45:29] point to, you know, if you're doing something in the park? Um, so I appreciate you raising those points and

[45:36] I think the team hears you loud and clear and there should be a way to incorporate without causing stress

[45:44] because sometimes the two are in conflict but you don't want to disrespect one and and exclude the

[45:50] other. And so I said good luck with that balance. It can be done. It can be done. Absolutely.

[45:59] Yeah. I agree with um Council Member Ross. I like the feel um of number one.

[46:06] On the other hand, I I do I'm really grateful that C council member Takia brings up this aspect so that perhaps we

[46:14] can somehow incorporate it um for all the people that we have. Thank you. Thank you all.

[46:23] Thank you. Thank you so much.

[46:24] Um mayor, I just um just kind of want to summarize as we before we transition to the next phase of this. So, and thank you to the SWA and all to another team.

[46:33] Um so certainly this was the first of many conversations um with uh our corporate authorities as we go through

[46:41] this listening engagement session as well as preparing for sematic designs.

[46:47] So just as a reminder to the council um we sent email communication inviting each elected official to have a one-on-one with the consultant team. Um,

[46:56] and the conversation and discussion this evening provides kind of as a good launch point just to get an idea of the type of feedback that we are looking for

[47:05] you as they prepare to do um, their work on the next step for public information.

[47:11] Very important. Um, victim feedback and public engagement is a critical component to this project. And so um

[47:18] continuing now until June, we are going to be doing an extensive public engagement outreach um to get the same

[47:26] type of feedback from the public to make sure that whatever is designed here is really reflective of what we want as a community and then certainly um final

[47:35] design will come to the mayor and city council for final consideration. So that's kind of the next steps that are going to happen. Um so I want to thank the team here.

[47:44] Can I say a couple uh one is um and I was going to use the word when you were

[47:52] asking to council member Tapia's point, you know, some balance between something that's universally,

[48:01] you know, um more universal in terms of people being able to, you know, uh experience it. Um but also recognizing

[48:11] that we have you know some constituencies that feel it very strongly. Right.

[48:18] Um and then the other question was um uh is this the only time council will

[48:25] be able to react together? Any to sort of respond together?

[48:29] No, the schematic design will come back to the council. But in terms of providing your feedback, what's your vision? How do you want to feel?

[48:37] you want to see this this is that time. So definitely as this so when there's a rough sketch and that's when you design.

[48:45] Yes. Yeah. That'll certainly come back. Thank you. Okay. Thanks. Any other questions?

[48:52] Thank you all for your thoughtful and thank you for coming this evening. So appreciate it. Thank you.

[49:00] Um so I'm going to invite manager and up.

[49:05] Um so certainly as the council knows when we were first deciding on the location for the permanent place of remembrance

[49:14] um understanding that the rose garden is also uh designated as a local historic landmark. That was one consideration

[49:21] that we just wanted to make sure everyone was aware of. Um at this point we want to just provide information to you as it pertains to uh the background

[49:31] and history of that very briefly. um the components of that and then get your feedback um so we can give direction to

[49:38] the consultants as they prepare to plan um balancing the two aspects of it the place of remembrance design and then

[49:46] understanding and being informed certainly of the historic elements of the project.

[49:53] So, a brief history of um the Rose Garden and Laurel Park, more broadly Laurel Park. It was acquired by the park

[50:00] district in 1930 and then in 1942 the gardener memorial was developed and then donated to the city which is the actual

[50:09] landscaping component of of the park in at which point um in 1992 it was later

[50:17] designated a local landmark. It was designed by landscape architect Marshall Johnson and commemorated three different important historical figures to the city

[50:26] of Highland Park and then as you know in 2025 ownership was transferred to the city from the park district.

[50:35] I just wanted to briefly I'm not going to read this but briefly just highlight for you the landmark criteria that was met in 1992. The city code sets out a

[50:44] number of different criteria that need to be that need to be met in order to be landmarked locally landmarked and these

[50:52] are the criteria. It's not an all or nothing. These are a selection of which criteria were determined at that point

[50:59] in time to have been met to allow for the local landmark of this of this garden.

[51:08] This is briefly the original 1942 plan for the park in the area in the Rose Garden. You can see the Rose Garden Center there. The building at the bottom

[51:16] of the screen is City Hall to kind of to orient you on the west and then it moves in from the Rose Garden to um the native

[51:25] garden and then there's Players Hill which is the kind of component that is the southernmost component of the garden. But just to give you an idea of

[51:33] the original vision and scope of the garden which was not completely built to fruition in its entirety. So this is

[51:42] what it was envisioned to be. It wasn't built to its entire vision and this is the existing conditions of

[51:49] the space. So just to give you that brief idea and again looking at the current status

[51:56] where we were where it originally started and where the current status is the original plant elements where those three different elements the rose garden the wildfire flower garden and then the

[52:05] players hill which and each area commemorated a different individual.

[52:10] Staff has done an analysis of what's remaining that is historic in the area and staff identified the rose garden in

[52:18] its entirety as remaining historic element. And then of the wildfire floor garden two elements of that the sundial

[52:26] bench and the retaining wall are the remaining historic elements and there is actually because the players hill component was never developed that is

[52:34] not in its into what it was designed to be that is not a historic element today.

[52:41] We want to talk about the considerations and how this will interact with the design process as we look at the place of remembrance. It is possible that the

[52:50] historic elements in their as they exist today could impact the design um as far as if they are retained. So it is the

[52:57] ability to potentially limit the ability of the place of remembrance to achieve those three objectives that the mayor highlighted for that were determined to

[53:06] be the objectives for the place of remembrance.

[53:09] So we just want you to be aware that in its current status with its current landmark status that could interact with that design process if SWA and is

[53:19] designed to to keep those landmark status. So we're really looking for you again policy feedback and a

[53:26] recommendation from city council about how these will work together because the local landmark designation historic elements will inform this design process

[53:36] and if the really the primary focus will be creating that shared space based on the needs of the feedback and the victims the broader public council and

[53:45] staff. So really as we design that as the design process goes forward that

[53:51] focus on the place of remembrance and how that we're looking for your feedback and how that interacts with the current historic status of the of the Rose Garden.

[54:01] Can you put the picture back up of what it looks like now and what it looks like now? Show you what it was supposed to be.

[54:08] So that is the now as you can see and there is the vision the original vision. So, um, a couple of things that

[54:17] I saw in your report. A, most of the Egan roses are gone because the deer have snapped them into the ground. So, there's not much left in terms of the

[54:25] Egan roses, and I'm not sure, I think double knockout roses survive the deer, but not a lot of roses are able to

[54:32] withstand the deer that live in the ravine. Um, the pool never was built.

[54:39] the council ring. I'm talking about the top up right corner.

[54:43] Those never happened. Um, and the players hill, I think there's like a tree there with like some guy's name next to it or something

[54:51] that was never developed. I will note I believe the pools actually may have originally existed but were filled in long long ago.

[54:58] Right. Okay. Um, so you know, on one hand, I love that this was um landmarked and

[55:07] and the intentionality behind recognizing the three, Jesse, Lo Smith, um, Mr. Egan, and John Jensen. Um, I

[55:17] think there's a way for us to sort of adapt to that rose garden design. I don't love the like nonfountain in the

[55:26] middle that's now filled with like friendship rocks and a big plastic fake rock that just looks god awful. So, I don't know. I'm just sharing my own

[55:35] opinion. Um that I think there's a way to incorporate some of the rose garden elements, but I don't know what the

[55:42] steps would be in terms of historic preservation.

[55:46] You know, like and Steve, I think I turned to you and I said, "So, when you have a a great plan that doesn't get realized, are you locked into that? Are

[55:56] you locked into the wish or are you locked into the like what happened?" But not It's like barely there at this point. It's like a bunch of beds of half dead roses in a fountain.

[56:07] We are in an interesting predicament.

[56:10] Um, an interesting state. Um we are at a at a point essentially of non- enforcement. Um and and enforcement lies

[56:20] in with the city. Um and it it's it was our responsibility. We're the ones that failed to enforce. We're the owners of

[56:28] the property now. um what to do. You know, that's kind of difficult also because as you know in

[56:35] Highland Park and has always been in Highland Park, any kind of change of status, whether it's from a property that is not designated to become

[56:44] designated or a property that is designated to become undesated has a first a primary step with the with our historic preservation commission. Mhm.

[56:54] And their determination um is to recommend if there is a change of status, but a final determination if

[57:03] there is to be no change of status. So if you're hinting, mayor, in your comment that maybe we should ddesate it,

[57:11] it would be first entirely up to the Historic Preservation Commission. Um there's certainly a lot that could be

[57:19] brought before them um given the the the failure to um have it at its at its

[57:26] state. Um but that I just want to remind everybody about what our process is. We could change our process but that is our

[57:33] process and um it it's important to know that because there's some other applications that are looking similarly.

[57:40] So I want to be fully aware of the big comprehensive picture here in Iowa.

[57:50] Well, if I could weigh in, I um you know, I deal a lot with dilemma leadership and this is full of dilemmas

[57:56] right now and um and you know, one of the dilemmas is obviously what you just described. there's a process and it's

[58:05] our responsibility to do everything we can to follow the process, but we also have an exception process for a lot of

[58:11] things. Um, and so this is a community experience and a and affected us all in

[58:20] ways that no one ever planned. Even when this park was designed, it was designed with a whole different concept and then

[58:27] the plan wasn't really realized to the fullness. So it's an incomplete historically preserved place and I think

[58:35] this is when it comes to dilemma management I think all parties the historical society our commission us

[58:43] others I think this is where we have to really be willing to kind of look at the big picture what the objective is and

[58:50] the objective is not it's bigger than just preserving a historical place even though that's the charter but the bigger

[58:58] objective is we're trying to find a place of healing and remembrance and and and I'll say a couple more comments, but I want to make my statement here. If

[59:05] this becomes a place of divisiveness as we process the dilemma and we failed, we will have failed as leaders across the board, the commission and the city

[59:13] council. So I would urge us to say to rise above the the full legality and and I would say this proudly as a non-awyer

[59:21] there's moments when the law can really constrict us to a place of impossibility and dilemma and we have to obey the law

[59:29] but part of us being leaders is to be able to say what is the bigger objective that was not taken to account when these laws were put in place or these

[59:36] protocols so that we can rise above it and say okay what is the main objective is it holding on to the strict narrow definition of this protocol Congress

[59:44] policy or is to address something that we never imagined would happen and we have an opportunity. We found the piece of land. We've had the listening. The

[59:52] community has said this place. The community has said this place and Portland, right? So, we have to listen to that as representatives of the

[1:00:01] people and say, "Okay, the communities put a designation on this place and now we say, oh, there's some dilemmas." Now

[1:00:08] we have to push hard and say when push comes to shove which will be the primary you know we have to triage

[1:00:16] the conflicting uh demands and protocols upon us. So I'm just making a call for us to whatever we

[1:00:23] feel to not lose sight that the people park has said this place and and to fulfill this thing means

[1:00:31] putting some things aside or thinking creatively. So then let's do it. Now think creatively there's some names that

[1:00:38] are honored in this garden you know okay could that be factored in even as we honored the others you know I don't know

[1:00:46] like a side thing or I or there's some elements here that that were you know either not well executed or executed

[1:00:54] fine that could somehow be preserved right so there's you know back to the issue of symbol or could they be moved

[1:01:02] or they can they be moved right by preserving Can this be relocated?

[1:01:06] Yeah, relocated or folded into the concept because this is Highland Park 2, right? So, I don't and I don't know there's lineage, you know, I don't know

[1:01:15] there's a design element here that would fit with the design elements that's shown here, but if we can make some continuity per so I I'm not prescribing.

[1:01:23] I'm just saying this is a kind of brainstorming that leaders with different jurisdictions and different accountabilities

[1:01:31] can sort of lean into together and say, "Okay, how do we creatively figure out a way through?" And let me just say, I was responding to

[1:01:37] the mayor's question. You want to go in a direction I will make sure there's a legal way to do it.

[1:01:44] Yeah. But I want I but I don't want alienation to happen. One could determine a legal way to do it and in the process we alienate. Right.

[1:01:51] And polarize we will fail if we polarize in this problem. Right. Right. Right. Exactly. Exactly.

[1:01:59] Adette.

[1:02:01] So I have quite a few questions and comments on that. First of all, Council Member Tavia, thank you so much for

[1:02:08] leading in with that. I really appreciate it because the last thing we want to do is make something that should

[1:02:15] be really about the beauty of coming together and resilience into something canankerous. So I completely agree with

[1:02:23] you on the way we approach it. But um I also have a fundamental recognition and

[1:02:32] respect for preservation and and the problem with your basic ten not the ten

[1:02:39] about us all working together but about changing something because it's time is

[1:02:47] in my estimation in so many ways preservation is to ensure that something that we have protected for a specific

[1:02:56] reason for a long time is still honored and is not wiped away because something

[1:03:03] more important happened. And and so if I'm not saying it as politically well or as sensitively as I am, I just want to

[1:03:12] go on the record saying I don't mean it that way. But from a legal perspective and that's why I know that corporation

[1:03:19] council will protect us to do it. But in many ways I I and I don't know if it's possible because for example knowing the

[1:03:26] names of the three people who were to have the uh is it their elements or is their memories what has to be

[1:03:34] incorporated into the current um park because if it's their elements I would

[1:03:41] you know say why can't we take all these wonderful ideas and work them into the uh original plan as it was conceived if it's their memories, we have a problem.

[1:03:53] On the other hand, do we want to wipe away that portion of it because we have something even worse that occurred. And

[1:04:00] and so I'm I'm very torn about this because first of all, I obviously don't want to overstep our jurisdiction and I

[1:04:08] really respect the expertise that the Historic Preservation Commission brings to this process and I would urge us to

[1:04:16] work with them in order to incorporate the purpose that we all have now seen to

[1:04:24] move into this property. On the other hand, when we decided as a community to

[1:04:31] move it there, we didn't realize that it was landmark protected in the sense that it might stifle our creativity to move on with disreme.

[1:04:42] And I I'm not sure we can just walk away from the original designation.

[1:04:48] So I I would urge that if it's possible to incorporate the things that we really want to do with the original

[1:04:56] designation, I really want to retain that designation and broaden it and

[1:05:03] complete it, but with the pro with the view of all that has transpired since then and why we're doing this to begin with.

[1:05:13] Thank you. Any other input? question. Sure.

[1:05:21] The original designation um to honor the three individuals, was there um

[1:05:30] what's the rationale for choosing this site? Did something specific happened at this site or was it this was a nice place? It

[1:05:37] was a nice place is my recollection. not to my there's nothing in the documentation I've seen that relates to the physical location

[1:05:46] and and one oh I'm sorry finish your Thank you. Um so with that said um you

[1:05:52] know I I think hearing both well described

[1:06:00] uh positions from both council member Lower and Tabia um I think council member Tabia said it perfectly

[1:06:08] u I also think that we should pay respect to the historical

[1:06:16] you know intent and and and respect the importance of the commission. Um,

[1:06:24] but this isn't just something bad that happened. This is so much bigger than that. And to Council Member Topia's

[1:06:31] point, this is a site that um underwent significant amount of diligence as to

[1:06:37] the most logical place for people to be able to pay homage to that. And

[1:06:45] I believe there's common sense solutions to be able to still consider solutions that would allow us

[1:06:52] to pay homage to the three individuals in a different location or in a different way. And I would challenge us

[1:06:58] and caution us to try to jam that in with this site because I think it will

[1:07:06] uh it runs the risk of uh I don't say watering down what we're trying to accomplish, but complicating what we're

[1:07:13] trying to accomplish with respect to um the uh honoring the victims of the shooting and and those who were who were

[1:07:21] there. So, uh those are my thoughts.

[1:07:24] So, one thought that I've had looking at this is, you know, we use the rose garden currently as the temporary place

[1:07:33] of remembrance and when people were asked where would you like to see the permanent place of remembrance, it was literally called the rose garden. But I

[1:07:42] don't think very many people went past into the non-existent salute to Jennis Jensen and Jesse Lo Smith that has

[1:07:49] basically become an empty lot with a sund dial and a bench in there. Um, and so Ben and team I ask you, you know, is

[1:07:57] there and and I'm not trying to design at all, but you know, can we keep that oval? Cuz even the roses to the left are

[1:08:06] gone. There's nothing over there as far as I can remember. We've got a handful of efforts in this oval piece. The one that goes the lobe that heads to the east doesn't exist anymore either. Yeah.

[1:08:17] I mean, that's it. And then use the rest of the land beyond that for what we're trying to achieve. In essence, having

[1:08:26] like an entrance room, a an entrance in that pays homage to what has been this temporary place of remembrance. cuz we

[1:08:33] kind of cleaned we we tried to beef it up and and make it more beautiful just as it served this temporary purpose. But

[1:08:41] then there is so much to the east of it that then allows you to do more. Again, this is just me trying to figure out how

[1:08:49] to thread the needle. Um, you know, but I have no problem also saying, "We've got an acre to the east of the library.

[1:08:56] Can we just pick this whole thing up and move it over there?" Steve, I don't know if that's an option. I don't know that it was the location that mattered as

[1:09:04] much as the design that mattered. And I guess maybe that's a question for the Historic Preservation Commission. But to

[1:09:11] me, there are other places to pay homage to these three. And I don't know that this specific like place on the map

[1:09:19] matters as much as what they were trying to achieve. But again, so much of what was planned never even happened. So why

[1:09:26] are we trying to like accommodate all of this? This is me just sort of or even the park lit there.

[1:09:32] Right. Right. I mean, literally over by St. John's and um Central, you could turn that into the Rose Garden. So,

[1:09:41] I I don't know that it has to be here, but if it has to be here, then maybe we stick with that oval and then design to the east of it where

[1:09:51] we're really focusing in on the place of remembrance. Mayor, may I note something there?

[1:09:56] Sure. in a conversation. We have had some preliminary conversations with SWA about this and Ben, please step in if I'm um not providing enough context, but

[1:10:05] it is poss while that's certainly something that can be considered. It is possible that it would affect the experience of a memorial in terms of not

[1:10:13] being a holistic um experience for individuals. if they're coming through what was designed to be one thing and transitioning to

[1:10:20] another, it we may not be able to provide that smooth experience and that holistic experience if it were to be retained in its current state.

[1:10:29] Yeah. Does that accurately reflect I think the the only other thing I would add to that is just this um idea of

[1:10:36] opting in that has been really central and a concern being that people if the rose

[1:10:44] garden stays just as it is. Um and people will see it as the rose garden from the street say go to visit the rose

[1:10:52] garden and then they might be surprised to find this other you know.

[1:10:57] Yeah. Um or conversely, some people may not be able to find the voice of remembrance with

[1:11:04] because it's so hidden and that's not our intention.

[1:11:08] So those would be the I think there's really nice kind of um

[1:11:16] woodland framed space at the at the rear.

[1:11:19] Um that could be very lovely. Um it's it's more about how do you how do you make that feel

[1:11:27] um you know sacred enough. Yeah.

[1:11:34] Okay. We I would simply say that I you know we clearly want to want to proceed

[1:11:41] in as respectful a way as possible and you know to loop HPC you know into this

[1:11:50] conversation as soon as possible. Um my understanding based on brief update that I got from the city manager was that we

[1:11:58] were telling SWA that they should proceed for the time being

[1:12:04] uh without the constraints of of uh well we want to get the feedback from the council before

[1:12:11] and um I agree with everything that has been said so far. Yeah.

[1:12:17] Okay. Mayor, I just in your materials, one of the things that we um um uh

[1:12:24] provided you was the application for uh designation back in 1992. And one of the bases that was given for this piece of

[1:12:32] property, and I'm I'm not making any judgment on this, I'm just reporting to you factually, was um in the application

[1:12:40] that said the reason for this location was because it was donated to the city by the men's garden club back in 1942

[1:12:48] and was designed by the son-in-law of Jens Jensen. Right. Marshall Johnson.

[1:12:54] Right. So that I just um as to why this location um I want you to be aware of that document.

[1:13:02] A question and a follow comment. I want to pick up on what you said mayor. What is protected by the designation? Right.

[1:13:11] And so you're starting to answer here, but really is it really the place or is it the architecture? Yeah.

[1:13:18] And have a comment after you have answer that.

[1:13:20] Yeah. It it's a very good question. I think what all we have is a very limited the ordinance itself does not help us.

[1:13:27] Um it it isn't drafted as it would be today with more detail about what we're what what our goal is to to preserve. Um

[1:13:35] but in terms of the application it was simply the fact that it was dedicated by a garden club. So they wanted to keep um

[1:13:42] garden element of it. But if you elevate it to just the purpose of the historical preservation soc uh commission, what are they preserving?

[1:13:53] What is their charter? To preserve what?

[1:13:55] Not not in this particular thing, but just in general.

[1:13:58] It's a it's an excellent question. I think it's interpretive. I think it it's open for interpretation. I I think we have the the paragraph um that is part

[1:14:07] of the application and that provides our our primary basis. Okay. So if it's interpreted, let me which is why they're talking about creativity other possible creative interpretation.

[1:14:18] Obviously if I just go by the semantics is historical preservation commission.

[1:14:23] So preserving something that already existed but I'm putting my emphasis on historical this place of remembrance is a

[1:14:29] historical architecture because we are remembering something that happened in the history of Holland Park that shaped us. So I wonder without understanding

[1:14:38] the full charter and and and here seems like it's kind of loose for the historical preservation commission to say hm if we put the emphasis more on

[1:14:48] historical than preservation. Can we balance those two things? honor the need to to remember something historical that

[1:14:56] happened and at the same time preserve something that's already there and to your point mayor maybe the the location

[1:15:03] is not as important as a preservation of the architecture right and make room for really a

[1:15:11] historical remembrance which is really what's at stake here on the other hand if you have this preservation and the natural elements

[1:15:20] that were what we originally should have put in there. Couldn't you in a sense incorporate it but then change the

[1:15:28] emphasis um to the memorial portion of it and therefore you still have the key

[1:15:36] elements in terms of a garden club and the perhaps even the design of a Jensen and brilliance and all of that but

[1:15:44] incorporate that into what we now have which is uh a memorial that we want to

[1:15:51] keep alive with nature being one of the main aspects effects of that memorial.

[1:15:57] Do we know what the square footage is of the Rose Garden portion and how it compares to the acre that's by the library?

[1:16:05] I don't have that off the top of my head. It's not much.

[1:16:07] I mean, I just don't see us, you know, tripping over our feet to maintain like half of this plan is not has never happened. So

[1:16:16] it's more it feels to me like the rose garden piece is the big piece and the sund dial I've heard from three people who are apopleleactic over the sund dial

[1:16:24] and it's like okay so can we move it and figure out a way to relocate it related to the sun and call it a day.

[1:16:32] It's yeah the the the facts here and the sun and the very vague the facts that we

[1:16:40] have about what has happened since the designation the very vague application itself the very vague ordinance all lend

[1:16:48] itself to creative solutions such as those that were mentioned I wouldn't rush to to pounce on either of those or

[1:16:55] incorporate either of those immediately but if that's a direction that the council wants to go we can look for that

[1:17:03] kind of creativity. Um I I I think we we are we have been dealt cards that allow for that.

[1:17:09] So would it make sense to have the historic plan historic preservation commission come to a committee of the whole and have a conversation that we

[1:17:17] could then notice that meeting all of us could participate and sort of make our points and see where things roll.

[1:17:25] Does that make sense? have a joint meeting for sure. For sure. Yeah. Okay. That Okay.

[1:17:29] Cuz we may end up with just a modification as opposed to a DD designation.

[1:17:36] A special I can name the three other people who will show up.

[1:17:40] But it's, you know, it's a important gesture to the HPC.

[1:17:44] It is. It is. And yeah. Yeah. Okay.

[1:17:48] I mean, it's lovely. So we hope we do a special meeting.

[1:17:51] It can be a special meeting or make them have a special meeting on our committee the whole meeting whenever we are having you know I mean it's got to be sooner

[1:17:59] rather than later. So you can all take that information and move forward.

[1:18:04] Yeah. If we we'll do a polling if we could look at a special meeting because our next meeting is not until March 30th. Um and I know we've got some

[1:18:11] important budget conversations to have at that meeting is the only thing. So what do you think?

[1:18:17] Special meeting. It should be the only agenda item. Yeah. Yeah. Agree. I agree. I agree. Okay. Excellent. We'll keep you posted. Great. Thank you.

[1:18:26] Thanks.

[1:18:27] Um, do we have time to talk about short-term rentals? Um, 15 minutes. It's up to you. Give it a shot. Sure.

[1:18:35] Our next meeting on March 30th. Yeah. Enjoy.

[1:18:44] Not tonight. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate your time. See you cancel.

[1:18:54] Well, we may be meeting another 16th, but that's my All right.

[1:19:08] Are you ready, ma'am? Yes.

[1:19:09] Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, this is a brief discussion related to short-term rental regulation uh in the city. Um

[1:19:19] staff requests feedback. Don't know what happened to this screen. So, there you go. Um regarding the city's short-term

[1:19:27] rental policies and regulations, um want to want to get your feedback on just

[1:19:33] continued um support for u the allowance that uh we have for short-term rentals.

[1:19:40] uh definition of primary residence, use of industry data for enforcement and geographic limitations, licensing, and

[1:19:48] possible prohibition if if that's the council's desire. Um, city's code is intended to allow reasonable use of

[1:19:55] residential properties as short-term rentals, provided that it is the property owner's primary residence. So,

[1:20:02] um, this this law was, uh, created in, uh, November of 2020. Um, and what it

[1:20:09] essentially did was recognize um, short-term rentals of residential homes as accessory uses. And accessory means accessory to the primary, which is a

[1:20:17] single family detached home with a primary resident. Um, and that's a real important uh, point. Um, you know, the idea was to provide a little bit of a re

[1:20:25] relief valve for snowbirds and others who take extended vacations or or travel elsewhere and desire to have a reasonable use of their home as a

[1:20:34] short-term rental. was not intended for commercial use of homes as short-term rentals. And so that's important to know. Um, so the definition of a

[1:20:42] short-term rental is the accessory use of a dwelling unit overnight accommodations for overnight accommodations that is available for rent by transient guests for a period

[1:20:51] shorter than 30 consecutive days. Um, it doesn't include boarding houses, hotels, time share uses, lodging houses, etc. um

[1:21:00] the rental of the dwelling unit pursuit to the uh rental agreement executed in conjunction with a contract to sell uh

[1:21:07] the the dwelling unit. So there's there's two instances and and you can't have it for boarding houses, hotels. It

[1:21:14] can't be one of those, but you can um do so as part of a sale. And that was the the other element that I I meant to lead

[1:21:22] off with was you have folks that are snowbirds and then you have folks selling a home and they in between homes and sometimes they're holding a home for a little bit. They got to float it,

[1:21:31] right? And they're in another home and they have two homes. And so there are those issues as well. And so um so the

[1:21:39] zoning code section 15430 regulates short-term rentals and requires a registration per chapter 154. Chapter

[1:21:48] 154 rental registration's been around for over 10 years and that existed prior to our recognition of short-term

[1:21:55] rentals. Um, and so what the short-term rental uh regulation does is it requires a registration so that we know about it and then we can make sure that people

[1:22:04] read and understand the law uh that pertains to short-term rentals and operate things appropriately. we know who they are in case there's issues and

[1:22:11] then you know police and and others and and my office can get involved in remedying those through enforcement actions as necessary. Um we haven't had

[1:22:20] many complaints but those received come from all over the community and I will tell you people feel very strongly about

[1:22:27] short-term rentals thinking that they shouldn't be allowed those who would complain. Um, we have had enforcement efforts and most recently we just with

[1:22:36] our help of corporation council Martinez and uh Jim Ferver, senior inspector um secured over $9,000 in fine for a

[1:22:44] particular uh location. That is the highest fine levied on a short-term rental for repeated violations of garbage uh controls. Um so I'm sorry. How much was that?

[1:22:55] Over 9,000.

[1:22:56] Try to understand you. How much was that buying? over $9,000 over the I think there was 11 to 13 uh individual citations.

[1:23:06] Thank you.

[1:23:08] Um that was the the highest of its kind by far. Most of the others over the years have been at the minimum and were

[1:23:15] resolved thereafter. But as I will point out just right now on the next slide, um

[1:23:22] we do need uh some additional tools to aid our enforcement efforts. And so since November 2020, the adoption of the

[1:23:31] short-term rental regulations, staff's identified a need for additional information that would greatly help our enforcement efforts. So we we're looking

[1:23:40] for a couple of things. One, amending chapter 154 rental registration to require additional information to

[1:23:47] demonstrate primary residence as required by uh the zoning code section 15430.

[1:23:54] Um and then uh amending chapter 150 uh definitions to specify um what specifically primary residence means.

[1:24:02] Now our current code does not have a definition for primary residence. That means that the normal dictionary definition can be applied but we want to

[1:24:10] have a specific definition that we've developed and it's based on the IRS definition of what a primary residence is. So it's not something that we're

[1:24:17] just making up out of nothing. something that's used for real serious things in governmental uh understanding of where

[1:24:23] your residence is. Um so that's that's number one. Number two is is purchasing

[1:24:31] um short-term rental data from data brokers. Uh this would greatly aid our efforts in terms of number of days

[1:24:38] rented. We've had over the years um complaints about, hey, they're doing this for more than 45 days a year. you know, I see a car with different plates,

[1:24:47] you know, every day over there and this kind of thing. And so that's very hard to to enforce on um uh without

[1:24:55] independently being able to acquire data. Now, the agent the the businesses that that provide these services such as

[1:25:03] Airbnb, Verbbo, all those um services, uh they they don't share their data, but what they do do is they sell it so we

[1:25:12] can buy it. So, you know, thanks for the help, but not really. So, it's a several thousand. I think the when I looked at

[1:25:19] it a few years ago, it was about $3,000 a year.

[1:25:22] Okay. So, um and what that'll do is the the their data aggregators that will do by address how many times it's been

[1:25:30] rented on one of these places. So, that's pretty good information. Um what we have done thus far is we've literally

[1:25:38] asked the uh the the the people running the Airbnb how many times they've rented

[1:25:44] and to provide us a report from their uh service provider and you know to people's credit they have and in certain

[1:25:52] cases we've been able to enforce based on that and found them to be in violation. Um, but if we want to be more proactive and really nip this in the bud

[1:26:01] before it becomes an issue, we just get a report once a month and we'd know and we'd be able to contact folks and say, "Hey, do you realize that this is a law

[1:26:08] here? You signed this document saying you recognize this? You read and understood the law, so we really would like you to abide by it." So, and then

[1:26:16] if that doesn't work, well, then we go right to citation thereafter. So, I I do think that would make uh for a lot less

[1:26:23] staff time and a lot less um haggling over what is uh going on.

[1:26:28] And Joel, if I can just add, having had a lot of experience in in this space in a lot of other towns, um enforcement um

[1:26:37] by a government has been difficult. If a government is looking to try to to determine and smoke out whether a

[1:26:44] particular property is an Airbnb and and doing it by going on with our government

[1:26:51] um email address and and make an inquiry I'd like to rent. Um most of the Airbnbs um the big companies have now blocked

[1:27:00] out government uh email addresses knowing that there would there are enforcement efforts

[1:27:08] and um many governments have turned to their employees using their personal email addresses but that's not something that is a very good thing to do.

[1:27:16] How many do we have? Do we know?

[1:27:18] So so and just how many are registered and how many are registered? That's a better question. Yeah, thank you. Um, I can answer that one. Uh, the how many that

[1:27:27] we have, that's unclear. Um, but we have 12 uh registered at this time and so we're in registration mode again. Um, by April 1st, folks need to register again.

[1:27:36] So, we may have more this year. We'll see. Um, but we have about steady state about 12. I think one year was 15. Um, but there are more than that as you

[1:27:45] I'm sure you if you go online right now more than 12. So, well, the other piece is when we had the neighborhood meeting last year, there

[1:27:52] was um there were several families on one particular street who were agitated that I think the majority of houses on their street were short-term rental,

[1:28:01] creating a completely different environment than the one that they moved.

[1:28:05] There were two precisely McDaniels and and Court are both pretty close together and they're both registered. We have two registered right

[1:28:13] now. Um there was concerns about well what happens if more and more happen and then this whole block becomes this way and so yes that's one of the things that we were uh going to talk about today

[1:28:22] about do we want geographic um buffering around these types of uses before you get to that just the the

[1:28:29] primary residence concept the reason why this is an issue and I and we talked about it or those that were here when we first um adopted this regulation is

[1:28:38] because many um in there are investors out there, including some of the large um global companies that are simply

[1:28:47] buying houses for the sole purpose of of having them serve as rental as short-term rentals. And so our

[1:28:54] imposition of the primary residence concept curtails that. It cuts that off as was intended by council. A reasonable

[1:29:02] use of your home, not a business or commercial use. And so that's why we want to uh make that a definition in our

[1:29:11] code as opposed to relying on a definition that would be in the dictionary. Um and so we want to make that very clear. And so this would be one of the changes we'd be looking to

[1:29:20] make with the primary residence. And please know this is currently the the law. It's this defines it and puts a finer point on it and also enables us to request information to demonstrate that.

[1:29:31] Do you mean I mean I'm guessing that hang on in that by the um director Fontaine is going

[1:29:39] further. Um but in the packet was the beyond the defining primary residence

[1:29:48] was the possibility of licensing for being.

[1:29:52] Yep. Get to that just so so here we have also hang on Janette I think had something she wanted to say.

[1:29:59] So, um, in a way, actually, I'd like to hear what Director Fontes has to say to Council Member Ross's question, and then

[1:30:07] I do have a statement to make, but thank you. Thank you.

[1:30:11] Okay. Um, you want me to finish because we've got all the recommendations on here and then welcome your questions in the future.

[1:30:21] So, this would be what would be required to demonstrate your primary residence.

[1:30:25] And so we would ask for that at a time of application before we would say you could be a rental, a short-term rental.

[1:30:30] We could also ask for that information if there's an enforcement action that's needed. Um, and so

[1:30:37] again, there's two sections of code this this will be um pertain to and that has to do with our rental registration. And

[1:30:45] so what you'd have here is that you'd have these documents required to demonstrate that it is in fact your primary residence. I do feel that that

[1:30:52] will help tremendously in the problems associated with short-term rents. It really will. Um and it'll make sure that

[1:31:00] folks are utilizing this uh as appropriate. Having said that, mayor brought up a very good point about uh geographic limitations to prevent concentration of short-term rentals.

[1:31:11] Now, as it is right now, you know, it's it's an accessory use for uh folks owning single family homes, etc. so

[1:31:18] forth, and um they can do it. Um if there's a neighbor next door to them that has it before them, that doesn't matter. You could still use your home

[1:31:27] that way. So, there's something to think about in terms of a policy uh about whether or not the right to do something should be contingent on what your next

[1:31:35] door neighbor just did versus whether or not you have a right to use your home in that way. That's one aspect of things.

[1:31:41] Um, you know, we could also just prohibit them in certain zoning districts or throughout the city. I mean, you know, that that could be there's other

[1:31:49] communities that do that. And one of the follow-ups that we're going to do as staff is take a survey of other communities to just find out what they're doing as well. And you had asked

[1:31:57] about that back in 2020. Also, um, you can license rather than register. And so, you know, a license is a permission to do something rather than merely a requirement to tell us you're doing it.

[1:32:08] So, right now we have a registration. That's very different than a license.

[1:32:12] Licenses can be revoked, things like that. So something to think about uh in terms of of regulating. Um as I

[1:32:20] mentioned we have some next steps that we suggest but wanted to hear the feedback from council as to uh the

[1:32:28] formal consideration uh with your direction of code amendments to make primary residence as defined etc for so

[1:32:36] forth as we went through that and then also your feedback on uh researching further to see if still available. It's been a few years, but this data broker

[1:32:44] services that we had identified a couple years back. And then uh we'll conduct a survey of communities about short-term rentals as well. And this would then

[1:32:52] come back to you, you know, because it would require ordinance changes.

[1:32:56] And one other to add to the list of recommendations, things for you to consider in

[1:33:04] this takes it a little outside of the box, but may as well put it on the table. And that's uh the power to tax um

[1:33:11] make these subject to your existing 5% hotel tax.

[1:33:18] You could do Okay. So, mayor Yes, ma'am. I uh chime in. Thank you. Sure.

[1:33:24] So, first of all, um I I really want to commend staff because many times um we're given various options, yes, no,

[1:33:33] and it it is really yes, no with a couple of caveats. And what I like about all of this is the openness with which

[1:33:41] um we're still open to the idea. Um, and I say that as a former member of the PDC

[1:33:48] when we did all the research on should we permit short-term rentals and then it was brought to the city council and the

[1:33:56] PDC at the time felt very strongly that we as a community should remain competitive with other communities so

[1:34:05] that when someone purchased a home in Highland Park but did want to use it for short-term rental every now and again,

[1:34:14] they at least have that optionality if it was permitted in a a neighboring community so that Highland Park wouldn't

[1:34:21] be um held back in a sense if they didn't have that same freedom. So, in

[1:34:28] keeping with that, I I really would like to make it as easy as possible for staff and and give them the tools that they're

[1:34:36] requesting and and re-evaluate this to see in fact whether we can and whether that's I I like the idea of the lensure

[1:34:46] better than the permit. Um, and that's because, mayor, to your point, if one neighborhood becomes too heavily

[1:34:54] licensed in this particular fashion, we don't give out any more licenses and we limit it that way. But, um, I I think

[1:35:03] that they've come up with some really creative ways in which to regulate this a little bit better and yet keep it as

[1:35:11] an option for residents in our community. um and corporation council. I love the idea because you know me with

[1:35:19] the taxation um if if we can bring in some revenue to the city um because people are using this um I think that's

[1:35:28] a great idea too. So, I I just wanted to say that, you know, especially in light

[1:35:34] of this perhaps upand cominging legislation about ADUs and primary

[1:35:40] residents and and people who um you know want to be able to build another

[1:35:48] property and and you know that even though we're home rule that may be the way in which Illinois is going, it is

[1:35:56] certainly the way in which California has gone.

[1:35:59] I mean it it's almost second nature when there's a primary reference residents to have a if there's enough property an ADU

[1:36:08] um and and people have used as a source of income. So um and and I don't want to get into the whole dilemma of

[1:36:16] alternative dwelling units right now but I do think that this to cut this off right now would not be going with the

[1:36:24] trend of what we see. And so I like these alternatives.

[1:36:28] My understanding of the bill in Illinois proposal is that there's state preeemption. Right.

[1:36:35] That's correct. I hope you're all getting our alerts on this. We provide a very comprehensive study generally and then today we sent out one specifically on ADUs.

[1:36:45] Right.

[1:36:46] Right. And so to be clear, great.

[1:36:48] This was this is just about renting less than 30 days. So ADUs would be

[1:36:55] theoretically rented a month at a time or more like year at a time, you know.

[1:36:59] So it would it would pertain to ADUs or uh nonADUs, you know.

[1:37:06] So in the interest of time, I think it's important that we kind of do a quick straw poll around the table.

[1:37:11] Thank you. Do you favor prohibiting because that like then you're not having any conversation about the rest of it or

[1:37:19] do you want to go ahead with what staff is recommending in terms of having a defined term for primary residents, gathering the industry data, getting a

[1:37:28] better understanding of what our surrounding communities are doing and having the potential for geographic limitations and licensing. Uh and then

[1:37:36] we'll also add in taxation if that's something else that people are interested in. So yeah, we'll just put on the table.

[1:37:41] Yeah. And those all this is to direct staff to give us the data. Right.

[1:37:45] Right. It's not any there's no final disc. I'm good with all of it.

[1:37:49] You're good with all of it. Well, you don't want to prohibit though. Other than prohibition. Okay.

[1:37:53] Yeah. I I don't see prohibiting it. Um but I have slightly I I do support everything staff is recommending. um the

[1:38:02] geographic limitations, licensing, um defining the the the residents, primary

[1:38:09] uh primary residents. Thank you. And um I think it it's interesting, you know, hearing about other um communities. I my

[1:38:19] sense reading, you know, the packet was that um I I understand that staff should research what other res uh communities

[1:38:27] are doing, but I I feel like we are our own city. Right.

[1:38:31] And um we we can decide, you know, for ourselves, do do residents, you know, really want this or or or not. I mean,

[1:38:40] when I say want it, want more in any event. I I I I don't support prohibiting it. I I guess I'm just

[1:38:47] trying to say go easy on the the what is everybody else doing. Um we are Highland Park and you know, we decided we can make our our own minds.

[1:38:56] Okay, Marissa. Um, yes, I'm in favor of everything on there. Um, as well as the tax um question, too.

[1:39:05] Okay, John.

[1:39:06] Great presentation. Agreed with the suggestions. I'm not sure how I feel about geographic limitations. Um, so we'll be curious to hear more. Okay.

[1:39:14] But certainly supportive of the the continued work here as as suggested.

[1:39:19] Okay. And Annette, do you feel you were able to give your feedback on the recommendations?

[1:39:25] I think it's all great except I do not support the geographic limitations. I'd rather look at it through lensure, but other than that, I think it's all great.

[1:39:33] Thank you. Great. Okay. Um, and then I support it.

[1:39:37] I am a trust in the geographic limitations. I think you can't overburden a particular block just by virtue of where they live. I think

[1:39:45] that's just not fair to people who have made an investment in buying their home and now all of a sudden half the street is, you know, short-term rentals. I just

[1:39:54] don't think that's that's fair to people.

[1:39:57] Um, all right. Great job, Joel. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you, Council.

[1:40:01] Um, we will um adjourn and we'll do close session after co after the city council meetings. Yes. So, adjourn this meeting.

[1:40:08] Still seeking a motion to adjourn. So move. Second. All in favor say I. I. Great. Thank you. I All right.