While Freeport Declines, City Government Expands

Three new positions approved as taxes rise, services strain, and transparency questions grow

April 9, 2026 — Freeport, Illinois

A Meeting That Said More by Saying Nothing

Monday night’s Freeport City Council meeting delivered a clear message—though not through debate, discussion, or explanation.

It came through votes.

Three separate ordinances were introduced to create new city positions:

A full-time Information Technology Technician.
A full-time Police Department FOIA Officer.
A part-time Deputy City Clerk / FOIA Clerk.

Each carried financial implications. Each raised operational questions. Each reflected an expansion of city government.

And yet, as they came before Council, a familiar pattern emerged.

Limited discussion.
Procedural acceleration.
Votes that moved forward regardless.

Ordinance #2026-21: A Position That Wasn’t Needed—Until It Was

The first ordinance created a new full-time Information Technology Technician position.

What makes this request notable is not the position itself—but its origin.

City staff had previously requested funding for a nuisance inspector position. That request was approved. Now, just months later, staff has determined that position is no longer needed.

Instead, those funds are being redirected.

The justification presented was that improvements in nuisance compliance could be achieved through technology rather than personnel, with the IT Department absorbing that responsibility.

At the same time, funding for the position will also come in part from Water & Sewer Funds, based on the expectation that the role will support those operations.

This raised a significant concern that went largely unaddressed.

At the time of this vote, the City of Freeport was still within days of a citywide boil order lasting more than 24 hours—a crisis tied directly to water infrastructure.

At a moment when residents were being told not to drink the water, City Hall was approving the use of water system funds for an entry-level IT position.

The ordinance passed 7-0.

Ordinance #2026-22: A Police Department FOIA Officer

The second ordinance established a full-time Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Officer within the Freeport Police Department.

In the memo presented by Chief Jacquelyn Frausto, the position is framed as necessary to ensure compliance, manage requests, and reduce administrative burden on officers who are currently handling FOIA responsibilities.

During discussion, the Chief indicated that officers responding to FOIA requests “is not their duty.”

However, the context surrounding this request tells a larger story.

For months, the Freeport Police Department has significantly reduced outward communication with the public. Routine reporting has declined. Public-facing updates have become limited. Information flow has slowed.

At the same time, FOIA requests have surged.

According to statements made during the meeting, the department received 173 FOIA requests in the first 92 days of 2026—an average of nearly two per day.

That volume reflects something deeper than administrative strain.

It reflects a community increasingly forced to request information that should already be public.

The ordinance passed 5-3.

Ordinance #2026-23: Expanding the Clerk’s Office

The third ordinance created a part-time Deputy City Clerk / FOIA Clerk position, further expanding the City’s administrative structure.

According to the City Manager’s memo, the Clerk’s Office processed 213 FOIA requests in 2025, a significant increase over prior years.

The memo outlines increased responsibilities, growing contract volume, and expanded compliance requirements.

At first glance, the numbers suggest a need.

But the discussion surrounding this position raised a different issue.

This is not the first time these arguments have been made.

Similar justifications were recently used during discussions around compensation, resulting in an increase in pay for the City Clerk’s position.

Now, those same arguments are being used again—this time to justify another position.

The ordinance passed 5-2.

A Growing Government in a Shrinking City

Taken individually, each of these ordinances can be justified.

Taken together, they tell a different story.

Freeport is experiencing measurable decline across multiple areas—population, business activity, housing stability, and workforce participation.

And yet, during that same period, one thing continues to grow.

City government.

More positions.
More staffing layers.
More financial obligations.

At a time when Freeport is shrinking, the only thing growing is the cost of running it.

Analysis | Joshua T. Atkinson, Chairman – Fighting4Freeport

This is the pattern.

While the community is losing ground—losing people, losing businesses, losing opportunity—city government continues to expand.

During my mayoral campaign, I made this issue central. I warned that Freeport was moving in the wrong direction—growing government while the foundation beneath it was shrinking.

After the election, that concern was confirmed.

Through FOIA requests, financial review, and documented decisions, it became clear that the promises used to justify higher taxes were not being followed in practice.

Now we are seeing the next phase of that same pattern.

Positions approved.
Funds shifted.
Budgets adjusted after the fact.

And the process continues.

The IT position replaces one that was already approved and funded—raising immediate questions about planning and oversight.

The use of Water & Sewer funds, at a time when the City has just experienced a system-wide failure, reflects a disconnect between priorities and reality.

The police FOIA position highlights something even more concerning—not just workload, but a breakdown in communication between the department and the public it serves.

And the Clerk’s Office expansion reinforces what has become increasingly clear:

Demand for information is rising because trust is falling.

That is not a coincidence.

That is cause and effect.

At this point, the responsibility cannot rest solely with administration.

The information has been presented.
The patterns have been exposed.
The concerns have been raised—repeatedly.

And still, the decisions move forward.

Votes are cast.
Positions are created.
Spending increases.

And once again, the people elected to represent this community move in the same direction—with limited pushback and even less explanation.

This is how a city becomes distressed—and why it stays that way.