Chicago City Wire

City of Prospect Heights City Council met May 27

Here are the minutes provided by the council:

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL – At 6:30 PM, Mayor Ludvigsen called to order the Special Meeting of the Prospect Heights City Council at City Hall, 8 N Elmhurst Road, Prospect Heights, IL 60070. 

City Clerk Prisiajniouk called roll. A quorum was present. 

ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT - Alderman Ward 1 Cameron, Alderman Ward 2 Anderson, Alderman Ward 3 Morgan-Adams, Alderman Ward 4 Dash, Alderman Ward 5 Dolick, Mayor Ludvigsen, City Clerk Prisiajniouk 

ABSENT - City Treasurer Tibbits with prior notice 

OTHER OFFICIALS PRESENT - City Administrator Wade, Assistant City Administrator Falcone, Director of Building and Development Peterson, Director of Public Works Roscoe, Deputy Clerk Austin, Attorney Jim Hess, Digital Communication Technician Colvin. 

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Mayor Ludvigsen led the pledge of Allegiance. 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 

A. May 12, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes - Alderman Ward 5 Dolick moved to approve May 12, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes as presented; seconded by Alderman Ward 3 Morgan-Adams. There was unanimous approval. 

ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Michelle Cameron, Terry Anderson, Wendy Morgan-Adams, Danielle Dash, Matt Dolick 

NAYS: None 

ABSENT: None

Motion carried 5-0 

PRESENTATIONS – None 

APPOINTMENTS, CONFIRMATIONS, AND PROCLAMATIONS - None 

PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA MATTERS (FIVE MINUTES TIME LIMIT) – Michael Kormanik - Mr. Kormanik shares his experiences from the previous chicken meetings that have been held. He also shared some information he received after submitting a Freedom of Information request. Mr. Kormanik questions the motivations behind implementing a chicken ordinance, and believes that a certain group of people, people who own chickens, are maybe being targeted to get additional tax money for the city. He also mentions that, unlike some other municipalities, the zoning commissioner does not have to reside in Prospect Heights, and he believes this creates a sticky situation as they have "no skin in the game". 

Jim Kleinschmidt - Mr. Kleinschmidt states he is not against chickens, he is against owning roosters and is worried about the quantity of chickens someone can have. He gives his experience of dealing with Roosters first-hand and how it was not a pleasant experience. Mr. Kleinschmidt is looking for simple regulations that can work for everyone. 

Katie King - Ms. King wants to give some perspective from a non-chicken owner who is not opposed to chickens. She says she is frustrated that it seems like every non-chicken owner must want restrictions on chickens. She talks about how she appreciates those who do own chickens and how she enjoys having them around her. She likes how it doesn't make Prospect Heights a cookie-cutter suburb. 

 Joel Steffens - Mr. Steffens talks about how he sees mostly pro-chicken people at these meetings, and he is not sure why the city is listening to the minority instead of the majority. Mr. Steffens discusses the current laws that are in place and questions why they can't be enforced, especially noise complaints. He echoes Mr. Kormanik's sentiment and questions the motivation behind this ordinance. He believes the proposed ordinance is too extreme. 

Angelo Petratos - Starts by stating he is not a chicken owner, and then shares his experience of living in Prospect Heights. He mentions how this issue has seemed to drag on and all he sees are dollar signs adding up for the city if this ordinance goes through. Mr. Petratos shares his positive experience with chickens and roosters and compares them to other sounds like ATVs and dogs barking. Mr. Petratos is not sure why the city is spending so many resources and so much time on something that he believes is arbitrary and is not an issue. 

Niki Moylan - Ms. Moylan talks about this year-plus-long process and how she believes all the progress that was made by the PZBA has now taken some steps back with this new proposal that is on the agenda tonight. She mentions how frustrated she is by this outcome and urges the council to listen to their constituents when coming to a decision on this ordinance. Ms. Moylan says that she thinks a lot of what was in the agenda packet is based on what-if scenarios rather than what is actually going on currently in Prospect Heights. She wants to see the council go lighter on the regulations to start instead of going from zero to one hundred. She talks about making sure to implement the zoning concerns the city has, but not adding some of the things, like only allowing fifty to seventy-five chicken permits, as this may dissuade people from looking to move to this community. Ms. Moylan discuses the process Des Plaines went through with a similar ordinance and how that could be a good place to start. She also wishes the council would take a look at the finite number of chickens a person will be able to have. 

Grace Martinez - Ms. Martinez starts by sharing her personal experience of owning roosters and how she has never heard a complaint about them. She talks about the need for regulations on coups, but says putting a number limit on birds is arbitrary. She talks about how there could be a different number of birds that can safely live in that coup depending on the size and type of bird that is there. Ms. Martinez says she is against annual inspections, and does not know why they would be required when there is no other annual inspection that is required. She hopes there is a way to start small with regulations as she does not see where the problem is with owning chickens. 

Christine Shiel - Ms. Shiel talks about how this community has a rural feeling that its constituents love, and she is not sure why the council is trying to add in regulations for the minority of people while the majority are here in support of chickens. She also adds that she believes there is currently no problem with how things are running. Ms. Shiel gives some background about her current chicken ownership and how she has not once received a complaint. She also talks about what people were told when it came to building coups in the past. Ms. Shiel also discusses the noise issue that is often brought up. She believes that living in a community opens you up to hearing certain sounds that come from your neighbors, and she adds that the current laws we have in place work already, adding a story about her and her neighbor's dog. 

Megan Sliwa - Ms. Sliwa discusses her move to Prospect Heights, and she has done her research on how this topic has progressed over the past year. After speaking with some different people, she does not see what the problem is that exists and is questioning what the motivation is behind getting this ordinance in place. She talks about the positive benefits this can have on the community and for the property value of the people in town. She wonders how, if regulations are not in place now, how making it stricter will be able to be enforced properly. She is in favor of the previously mentioned pilot to see how regulations go before setting anything in stone. 

Judy Saldar - Ms. Saldar says she is a non-chicken owner who did not even realize there were chickens in her neighborhood. She doesn't want to see many regulations put in place that won't be easy to reverse. 

Gina Salefski - Ms. Salefski starts by saying she is disheartened that we are here again having the same conversation. She gives her personal experience with chickens and how that positively affected her neighbors, who decided to get some as well. She talks about how her children take care of their chickens and this has given them a sense of responsibility over something. Ms. Salefski does not see a problem with owning chickens and urges the council to let them keep owning their chickens as they always have. 

CONSENT AGENDA - None 

OLD BUSINESS - 

A. Continuation and Discussion of draft 0-24-13 an Ordinance for Consideration of Text Amendments to Title 5 Zoning: Chapter 2: Definitions, Chapter 3: General Provisions and Chapter 6 adding Keeping Fowl (chickens) as a permitted Special Use; and Title 9 Police Regulations: Chapter 1: Animal Control of the City Code Pertaining to Keeping Fowl (chickens) in the R-1 Single Family District. 

Action Requested: (Discussion and Direction) - Mayor Ludvigsen gives an opening statement and explains the process that this ordinance has gone through. He mentions how unique this process has been, and says that just because an ordinance is put into place does not mean that those decisions cannot be changed. Next, Director of Building and Development Peterson, gave his opening statement recapping the process this ordinance has gone through. Director Peterson then starts to go through the issues that were raised by the council to set the stage for the discussion that is to be held. Director Peterson goes through each of the points mentioned in the agenda and gives a brief overview of what he heard from the council. Mayor Ludvigsen starts with the first topic and discusses with the council the answers they gave, and then the council will try and come to a consensus on each topic. 

Mayor Ludvigsen sets the stage for the first topic, discussing how many permits should be allowed for chicken keeping. The council was surveyed prior to the meeting with two in favor of limiting to fifty licenses, one in favor of fifty to seventy-five, and then three in favor of seventy-five licenses. Alderman Anderson throws the number of seventy-five out and each of the other four aldermen are in agreement that seventy-five is a good starting point for the number of licenses that will be available to own chickens. Alderman Dash discusses her desire to have heard more comments about the agenda points that were sent out to everyone. Alderman Morgan-Adams adds that, as it currently stands, chickens are not allowed in Prospect Heights, so this ordinance is happening one way or another and this would've been a good chance to hear feedback about the proposal presented. Getting back to the first topic, seventy-five permits for chicken keeping was unanimous. 

The next topic discussed is the number of chickens to be allowed, with prior comments from the council including: two in favor of limiting the maximum number of chickens to ten, one in favor of a maximum of twelve, one in favor of a range from twelve to fifteen, and two in favor of a maximum of twenty. Alderman Anderson puts a number of a maximum of twenty chickens and all other aldermen are in agreement with that number. Alderman Morgan-Adams adds that Prospect Heights is not a rural town, it is a commercial suburb just like our surrounding neighbors. Mayor Ludvigsen clarified with Director Peterson that the number of chickens will be dependent on the accessory structure that each lot of land is able to build or have used up already. Director Peterson provides some information on the amount of square feet an accessory structure is allowed to take up. A maximum number of twenty chickens dependent on the already used-up accessory structure amount is unanimously agreed upon. 

The next topic covered is whether any other bird should be allowed beside chicken hens. The prior results from the council include: five in favor of just chicken hens, and one in favor of the PZBA recommendation of chicken hens, domesticated ducks, and quail. Alderman Morgan-Adams is the one council member who was in favor of expanding the list to those three fowl, and Alderman Dash says she would be fine with that as well. All five aldermen are in unanimous agreement to use the PZBA recommendation for allowing chicken hens, domesticated ducks, and quails. 

All five aldermen are in agreement that there should be no roosters allowed. 

All five aldermen are in agreement that part of keeping fowl is that a person must register their property as a "Livestock Property" with the Illinois Department of Agriculture. 

The next topic is the time-frame for getting compliant. Director Peterson outlines some of the bigger hurdles from the City's point of view that might be difficult for homes to become compliant. The greatest hurdle is becoming compliant with all the proper zoning regulations. All five aldermen are in agreement that a twelve-month grace period to come into compliance is more than reasonable. 

The next topic is discussing non-compliance or revocation of a license. Director Peterson first starts by explaining that currently the zoning code can not properly dictate the licensing that will need to take place, so this will need to be transferred to the animal control portion of the city code. For current chicken owners, Alderman Dash and Morgan-Adams propose that if compliance does not occur within twelve months, this would warrant a revocation of a license. Mayor Ludvigsen clarifies there are two different topics, one being a twelve-month compliance period and the second being what consequences are there for non-compliance after issuance of a license. Director Peterson explains the process is a warning period that lasts around fourteen to twenty-one days which can then be followed up with a second warning before ultimately being issued a citation which can be upward of seven hundred and fifty dollars daily. The final recourse for non-compliance would be revocation of a license. 

The final topic proposed by Mayor Ludvigsen is a provision that does not allow a house to be surrounded by chicken owners on all sides. Current homes would be grandfathered in but new licenses going forward would not permit a home to be surrounded by more than two chicken-owning licenses. 

The council has given Director Peterson direction to take the feedback given this evening and prepare a draft ordinance for the June 9, 2025, City Council meeting. 

NEW BUSINESS - 

A. R-25-35 Staff Memo and Resolution Authorizing and Awarding Bid Recommendation for the Willow Trails Flood Control Project with Berger Excavating Contractors, Inc. for a total Bid of $2,479,324.90 with a Recommended 10% Contingency for Unforeseen Underground Conditions, Subject to City Attorney Approval - Alderman Ward 5 Dolick moved to approve R-25-35 Staff Memo and Resolution Authorizing and Awarding Bid Recommendation for the Willow Trails Flood Control Project with Berger Excavating Contractors, Inc. for a total Bid of $2,479,324.90 with a Recommended 10% Contingency for Unforeseen Underground Conditions, Subject to City Attorney Approval; seconded by Alderman Ward 1 Cameron. There was unanimous approval. 

City Administrator Wade says this was an application the city made for a federal community projects grant, which is very competitive. Support started from Representative Schneider and, after redistricting occurred then Representative Schakowsky got involved. This specific project can be traced back as far as ten to fifteen years ago as it was part of the master plan for storm water management. The parking lot for a lot of the nearby condo associations has lost cars before due to the flooding that occurred. Administrator Wade gives some of the logistics of the project and what specific work is to be done. He emphasizes this will bring a lot of improvement to the storm water management on the east side of town. Administrator 

Wade also adds that this project should get started this season and then answers Alderman Morgan-Adams' question about the time frame, that it should be completed in the twelve-month range. 

ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Michelle Cameron, Terry Anderson, Wendy Morgan-Adams, Danielle Dash, Matt Dolick 

NAYS: None 

ABSENT: None 

Motion carried 5-0 

B. R-25-36 Staff Memo and Resolution Authorizing and Approving Construction Engineering Services for the Willow Trails Flood Control Project with Gewalt Hamilton Associates, Inc. for a Cost Not-to-Exceed $206,000.00, Subject to City Attorney Approval - Alderman Ward 2 Anderson moved to approve R-25-36 Staff Memo and Resolution Authorizing and Approving Construction Engineering Services for the Willow Trails Flood Control Project with Gewalt Hamilton Associates, Inc. for a Cost Not-to-Exceed $206,000.00, Subject to City Attorney Approval; seconded by Alderman Ward 1 Cameron. There was unanimous approval. 

ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Michelle Cameron, Terry Anderson, Wendy Morgan-Adams, Danielle Dash, Matt Dolick 

NAYS: None 

ABSENT: None 

Motion carried 5-0 

STAFF, ELECTED OFFICIALS, AND COMMISSION REPORTS - None 

APPROVAL OF WARRANTS - 

A. Approval of Expenditures 

General Fund $266,615.77 

Motor Fuel Tax Fund $0.00 

Tourism District $3,123.55 

Solid Waste Fund $0.00 

Drug Enforcement Agenda Fund $1,440.00 

Special Service Area #1 $0.00 

Special Service Area #2 $0.00 

Special Service Area #3 $0.00 

Special Service Area #4 $0.00 

Special Service Area #5 $0.00 

Special Service Area - Constr #6 (Water Main) $0.00 

Special Service Area - #8 Levee Wall #37 $903.00 

Capital Improvements $172,311.30 

Special Service Area - Debt #6 $0.00 

Road Construction Debt $0.00 

Water Fund $43,449.02 

Parking Fund $0.00 

Sanitary Sewer Fund $23,753.06 

Road/Building Bond Escrow $0.00 

TOTAL $511,595.70 

Wire Payments 

05.16.25 Payroll $203,541.94 

April 2025 IMRF Payment $16,530.96 

TOTAL WARRANT $731,668.60 

– Alderman Ward 5 Dolick moved to approve the warrants as presented; seconded by Alderman Ward 3 Morgan-Adams to include a TOTAL of $511,595.70, a 05/16/2025 payroll wire payment of $203,541.94, an April 2025 IMRF wire payment of $16,530.96, and a TOTAL WARRANT of $731,668.60. There was unanimous approval. 

ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Michelle Cameron, Terry Anderson, Wendy Morgan-Adams, Danielle Dash, Matt Dolick 

NAYS: None 

ABSENT: None 

Motion carried 5-0 

PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA MATTERS (FIVE MINUTE TIME LIMIT) – None 

EXECUTIVE SESSION - None 

ACTION ON EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS, IF REQUIRED – None 

ADJOURNMENT – Alderman Ward 2 Anderson moved to adjourn; seconded by Alderman Ward 1 Cameron. There was unanimous approval. 

VOICE VOTE: All AYES No NAYS 

Motion carried 5-0 

https://prospectheightsil.portal.civicclerk.com/event/36/files/agenda/2723