A notable highlight of the meeting was a public comment letter from longtime resident Karen M. Bruce. She expressed her frustration over not being notified about the demolition of a neighboring house and the subsequent construction of a larger home. Karen highlighted concerns about her privacy, stating, “windows can be anywhere facing my yard,” and lamented the removal of palm trees that previously provided a buffer. She articulated her feelings of vulnerability, saying, “I do consider this a violation of my privacy,” and emphasized that residents should be informed about changes affecting their properties. Additionally, Karen raised concerns regarding stormwater management, questioning the adequacy of existing measures to handle heavy rainfall and the impact of new construction on flooding risks. She expressed discontent with a perceived lack of communication and accountability from the Commission, stating, “I have yet to see a commissioner or a code enforcer checking to see that what is happening or knocking on my door or a neighbor’s door to see if we have any problems or complaints.”

The Commission acknowledged Karen’s concerns, with one member expressing empathy for her situation. The commissioner noted that Karen had approached them in distress and emphasized the need for awareness of how new constructions impact existing residents. The commissioner recognized the distress caused by the loss of views and privacy, urging fellow members to understand the perspectives of residents affected by the ongoing changes in the village.

In another discussion, the Commission tackled issues related to the police department, specifically the hiring of a new police chief. One commissioner expressed doubts about the integrity of the hiring process, noting that the selected candidate was a coworker of two individuals involved in the decision-making, raising concerns about potential pressure and conflicts of interest. The commissioner stated, “I thought it was a really… inept” process, emphasizing the need for transparency and a more rigorous selection committee that would not feel any pressure. They suggested a broader search for qualified candidates.

Another commissioner acknowledged the concerns but noted that the process had included some engagement with other municipalities and that having department heads involved in hiring decisions is not uncommon in municipal government. They defended the process, asserting that Chris, presumably the village manager, had conducted some background research and reached out for assistance while forming the committee. However, the initial commissioner maintained that regardless of the intent, the optics surrounding the process were problematic, particularly given the history of the police department within the village.

The conversation revealed a consensus that while the immediate decision had been made, there should be a commitment to revisiting and refining the process for future hires, particularly for such a critical position as police chief. The Commission was unified in its hope for a more effective and transparent process moving forward, with a strong emphasis on learning from past experiences to ensure a better outcome for the community.

The meeting also covered updates on budgetary issues. The Finance report highlighted the urgency of minimizing issues for consideration during the upcoming second budget hearing due to time constraints. Questions arose concerning the July update and whether any changes in the year-to-date numbers could affect the upcoming budget hearing. The discussion included the need for updated items in the budget, with a mention that Paul, the finance officer, would prepare relevant information ahead of the upcoming September 26 meeting.

Additionally, a discussion on signage regulations related to construction activities took place. The conversation highlighted the requirement that all construction vehicles, trucks, and heavy equipment must be removed from the construction site at the end of each workday unless permission is granted by the village. Exceptions were allowed if the building official determines that leaving the equipment overnight does not impair public health or safety. The need for clarity in the ordinance regarding parking regulations was reiterated, with suggestions to combine related sections to improve user-friendliness for residents attempting to understand the regulations.

The meeting also touched on various community projects and public safety concerns. A resident proposed a comprehensive strategy for grant applications to fund improvements at the Recreation Center, combining funds earmarked for different projects — specifically the Tot Lot and pickleball facilities — into a single $200,000 matching grant application. The aim was to create a more substantial project that could attract state funding and streamline the allocation of resources.

In addressing public safety, a concern was raised about an incident involving a person reportedly sleeping in a children’s area at the recreation center. This issue prompted discussions on ensuring the safety of these areas while considering the rights of the public to access public property. The Commission expressed a desire for “common sense” solutions to ensure the safety of children in public spaces, with discussions indicating a willingness to take action toward a safer environment for families.