City Council Regular Meeting

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DATE: Monday, August 23, 2021 TIME: 7 : 0 0 pm PLACE: 400 South Vine Street, Urbana, IL 61801 The City Council of the City of Urbana, Illinois, met in regular session Monday, August 23, 2021, at 7:00pm. ELECTED OFFICIALS PHYSICALLY PRESENT: Diane Wolfe Marlin, Mayor; Phyllis D. Clark, City Clerk, CM Maryalice Wu, CM Christopher Evans, CM Chaundra Bishop, CM Grace Wilken, CM James Quisenberry ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT: CM Shirese Hursey STAFF PRESENT: Jason Liggett, Darcy Sandefur, Dave Wesner, Bryant Seraphin, Rich Surles, Sheila Dodd, Carol Mitten, Kat Trotter OTHERS PRESENT: 1. Call to Order and Roll Call With a quorum present, Chair Mayor Marlin called the meeting of the Urbana City Council to order at 7:00 PM. 2. Approval of the Previous Meeting Minutes CM Kolisetty motion to approve the July 12th meeting minutes as corrected. Seconded by CM Quisenberry. Vote: AYE: Wu, Evans, Kolisetty, Bishop, Wilken, Quisenberry NAY: None *correction, remove “=” 3. Additions to the Agenda None 4. Public Input and Presentations a. Library Annual Report – Presented by Director Celest Chaote from the Ubrana Free Library CM Evans asked about the future of the Café and reading area. CM Wilken asked about future acquisition of other press archives. b. Revised Use of Force Policy Presented by Chief Seraphin and Deputy Chief Surles. CM Wilken asked for definitions of the types of force, examples of them, and when each is applicable. CM Evans asked about Chief’s previous comments about de-escalation being a two way street. CM Wu asked about ongoing de-escalation trainings. CM Quisenberry asked about no chase policies. CM Bishop asked questions about disciplinary policies. Further discussion ensued. c. Public Input Mayor Marlin read comments on the revised use of force policy on behalf of the ACLU president Carol Leff and Carol Spindell director of communications (enclosed). *CM Wilken motioned to recess for 5 minutes. CM Bishop seconded. Vote: AYE: Wu, Evans, Kolisetty, Bishop Wilken, Quisenberry NAY: None Katie Muir provided information to the council regarding the purchase of the Cunningham Township property and the relocation acts. Expressed dissatisfaction with the proposed Page 1 of 3  agreements. Allan Max Axelrod expressed concerns about the new police use of force policy. Spoke in support of extending the eviction moratorium and utility shut off moratorium due to the increase in COVID cases. Tracy Chong expressed concerns about the amount of public participation in the use of force policy revision process. Urged council to examine what options they have to approve this policy. Angie Williams expressed privacy concerns about the California Township properties. Informed the council that if the Township intends to have office space in this building that it is very easy to hear conversations between units. Brandi McCoy submitted written comment via email (enclosed). 5. Council Input and Communications (following public comment) CM Wu wanted to make clear that the funds used to purchase the Township property were Township funds and not ESG funds by the city. There were no COVID grants or rapid rehousing funds used for this purchase. CM Quisenberry appreciates engaged public. Apologized to constituent who submitted public input to be shared last week but CM did not see it prior to the meeting. Asked that future input be submitted prior to immediately before the meeting. Mayor Marlin provided background on the neighborhood safety task force. 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None 7. REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES Committee Of The Whole (Council Member James Quisenberry) 1. CONSENT AGENDA a. Resolution No. 2021-08-033R: A Resolution Approving an Intergovernmental Agreement for Project and Fiscal Management of American Rescue Fund Plan Act (Champaign County Regional Planning Commission) – Executive b. Resolution No. 2021-08-034R: A Resolution Approving the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Agreement with the Illinois Department of Human Services – CD c. Resolution No. 2021-08-035R: A Resolution Approving the ESG Subrecipient Agreement with Cunningham Township – CD d. Resolution No. 2021-08-036R: A Resolution Approving the Emergency Solutions Grant Under CARES Act (ESG-CV2) agreement with the Illinois Department of Human Services – CD e. Resolution No. 2021-08-037R: A Resolution Approving the ESG-CV2 Subrecipient Agreement with Cunningham Township – CD Presented by CM James Quisenberry. Motion to approve consent agenda by CM Quisenberry Seconded by CM Wu. Vote as follows: AYE: Evans, Wu, Bishop, Kolisetty, Quisenberry, Wilken NAY: None 2. REGULAR AGENDA a. Ordinance No. 2021-08-036: An Ordinance Approving a Special Use Permit (206 and 208 East California Avenue / Plan Case 2427-SU-21 – Cunningham Township) – CD Presented by Kat Trotter and Kevin Garcia from Community Development with support from requester Cunningham Township Supervisor Chynoweth and architect Andrew Fell. Discussion regarding building safety conditions being outlined as part of ordinance approval ensued. Questions regarding timeliness and jurisdictions of building safety followed. Motion to approve by CM Quisenberry. Seconded by CM Bishop. Vote as follows: AYE: Wu, Evans, Kolisetty, Wilken, Bishop, Quisenberry Page 2 of 3  NAY: None b. Ordinance No. 2021-08-037: An Ordinance Revising the FY2022 Annual Budget – HR/Finance Motion to approve by CM Quisenberry. Seconded by CM Wilken. Vote as follows: AYE: Evans, Quisenberry, Wu, Kolisetty, Bishop, Wilken, Mayor Marlin NAY: None. 8. REPORTS OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES None 9. REPORTS OF OFFICERS Mayor Marlin provided an update on local COVID statistics and an update on the upcoming neighborhood cleanup. 10. NEW BUSINESS None 11. ADOURNMENT With no further business before the committee, Chair Mayor Marlin adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. Darcy Sandefur Recording Secretary This meeting was video recorded and is viewable on-demand HERE. Minutes approved: 09/27/2021 Page 3 of 3  • Sandefur, Darcy From: Carol Spindel <cspindel7@gmaiLcom> Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 10:57 AM To: !City Council Subject: PUBLIC INPUT August 23, 2021 .... To the Members of the City Council: Mayor Marlin, Chief Seraphin, and city staff deserve credit for creating a pathway for members of the Urbana community - including the ACLU of Champaign County, represented by Carol Spindel - to participate in thoughtful discussions about revising the policy. We were pleased to work in partnership with President Minnie Pearson of the NAACP-Champaign County Branch, members of the Ministerial Alliance, and other community representatives. ACLU of Champaign County is committed to working for a more equitable and effective approach to public safety in Urbana. This policy is just a first step -- a critical first step. Like any policy, it requires meaningful implementation and enforcement so the public can be assured that all officers are held accountable for their actions on the streets of Urbana. We call on Chief Seraphin to continue his leadership to ensure that the policy becomes practice in his department, and we call on our elected representatives, the Mayor and City Council, to continue their important oversight role. The Black and brown communities in Urbana have historically been both over-policed and underserved. With proper implementation and enforcement, the revised use of force policy can be the foundation of a new approach that can help rebuild trust between the police department and the community it serves. 1 . • Carol Leff, President Carol Spindel, Director of Communications ACLU of Champaign County aclu-cu.org info'Waclu-cu.org 2 Sandefur, Darcy From: Brandi MV McCoy <brandivmccoy@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, August 20, 2021 8:34 PM To: !City Council Cc: 1_ Kolisetty, Jaya Subject: Public input 8-23-21 *** Email From An External Source*** My name is Brandi and I am an Urbana resident. I want to address the proposed use-of-force policy for police. The proposed policy does show progress from the current policy and I appreciate that there are changes being made. I do still have concerns regarding some of the language. We are still giving individual officers much opportunity to weaponize their personal biases through subjective perception. For example, one consideration listed for whether force should be used is "known propensity for violence". Unless an individual ls behaving in a way that seems capable or likely to commit an act of violence in that specific moment, they should be no more likely to end up battered by police than any other individual, regardless of any reputation or record that precedes them. An officer's understanding of a subject's 'propensity' to become violent should not be discounted or ignored, but it should not be used as an excuse to abuse civilians. This language allows for such a scenario. Another example: Police must warn a subject of the potential use of deadly force "unless doing so would create a substantial risk of death or great bodily harm". This loophole gives officers permission to shoot someone dead without warning based again on subjective perception. No lives should be taken by a public-serving institution without fair warning. I also take issue with the Supervisory investigation of use-of-force. It is my understanding that the supervisor would be responsible for conducting an investigation for the purpose of determining if a subject has grounds for litigation and if so reporting to bodies that can then impose countermeasures to such litigation. Please clarify if this understanding is incorrect and the investigation serves another purpose not served by the review board, but l believe that if a subject of excessive force has grounds for litigation, that subject has the right to pursue such an avenue. And if the grounds are concerning enough to the department that forewarnings seem necessary, does that not speak to the validity of the potential litigation itself? Why do we need to warn legal council about litigation before a victim even has a chance to pursue it? It comes off to me as responding to use of force in a defensive manner, rather than one of accountability and/or acceptance of potential wrong-doing. Again, please clarify if this understanding is off-base, as well as why such a policy is needed in an environment focused on ensuring civilian rights are not stripped and police accountability is not shirked. I would also like to see clarification of the "periodic training". Periodic can mean a multitude of things in terms of an actual time-table. I think we should have a clearly set determination of how often officers must review the use of force training, and documentation of such to ensure proper compliance. The vaguity of the word "periodic'' undermines the purpose of having an ongoing process of training in this area. All-in-all, I'm glad we are working on being better and I hope we continue to work on being better until we see true equity and real justice in our community. We still have work to do on this use of force policy, so let's keep it up. Thank you, Brandi Sent from Mail for Windows 1