$400,000 Question: Freeport Council Asked to Renew Greater Freeport Partnership Deal Despite City Manager’s Recommendation

August 16, 2026 | Freeport, IL

Presented by Brian Keller

FOR THE PEOPLE | F4F NEWS

Investigative Reporting, Editing & Publication

Joshua T. Atkinson

Chairman | Fighting4Freeport

Freeport taxpayers have another $400,000 question waiting for their City Council Monday night.

And this one comes with an unusual contradiction.

On Monday, August 17, the Freeport City Council is scheduled to consider Resolution #R-2026-106, which would authorize the automatic renewal of the city’s agreement with the Greater Freeport Partnership for another year.

The current agreement provides the Greater Freeport Partnership with $400,000 annually, subject to appropriation by the City Council, for economic development, planning and development, Main Street, tourism and marketing, and business-to-business services.

But while the resolution before council says renewing the agreement is in the best interest of Freeport and its citizens, an August 13 memo from City Manager Rob Boyer recommends something very different.

Boyer recommends that the City Council stop the agreement from automatically renewing.

That’s a pretty significant difference.

$3.3 Million Since 2018

According to Boyer’s memo, the City of Freeport has invested approximately $3.3 million in the Greater Freeport Partnership since 2018.

Under the current agreement, GFP receives $400,000 annually from the city.

The agreement also authorizes an additional $25,000 performance bonus based on agreed-upon deliverables.

But Boyer’s memo reveals something taxpayers should pay attention to.

No benchmarks were established for fiscal year 2024 or fiscal year 2025, and no performance bonus has been paid during the current agreement.

That raises an obvious question.

If taxpayers are investing hundreds of thousands of dollars every year in economic development, how exactly is Freeport measuring what taxpayers are receiving for that investment?

Economic development isn’t something that can always be measured by a single number.

But $400,000 a year isn’t a small investment either.

Taxpayers should be able to identify the objectives, benchmarks, deliverables, and measurable results attached to that money.

And Now $180,000 Is Disappearing

There’s another problem.

One of the funding sources supporting the city’s GFP agreement is about to disappear.

According to Boyer’s memo, expiration of the Lamm Road Tax Increment Financing District will eliminate approximately $180,000 in annual revenue currently being used to fund the agreement.

Those revenues will instead be redistributed to the affected taxing bodies.

That $180,000 represents approximately 45 percent of the city’s current $400,000 annual GFP contract.

In other words, nearly half of the revenue currently supporting this agreement is going away.

Yet the resolution appearing before council Monday would authorize the agreement to automatically renew.

The City Manager Says Don’t Auto-Renew

This is where Monday night’s agenda becomes particularly interesting.

Boyer’s memo does not recommend immediately terminating the Greater Freeport Partnership agreement.

The existing agreement remains in effect through December 31, 2026.

Instead, Boyer recommends preventing it from automatically renewing for another year.

Why?

Because the city faces a deadline.

Under the existing contract, either party must provide written notice at least 120 days before the agreement expires if it does not want the contract automatically extended.

According to Boyer, the city must provide that notice no later than September 2, 2026.

Providing notice would not terminate the current contract.

Instead, Boyer says it would preserve the City Council’s ability to “evaluate available funding and determine the appropriate scope and structure of future economic-development services.”

That’s an important distinction.

Giving notice doesn’t mean Freeport can never work with the Greater Freeport Partnership again.

It doesn’t even necessarily mean the relationship ends December 31.

It means the city retains the ability to evaluate and renegotiate the arrangement rather than simply allowing the existing agreement to roll over automatically.

And with approximately $180,000 of the agreement’s current funding disappearing, evaluating that arrangement would seem to be a pretty important conversation.

And Boyer Isn’t Just the City Manager

There is another important piece of context surrounding Boyer’s recommendation.

Rob Boyer has also served on the Greater Freeport Partnership’s Board of Directors.

On GFP’s own website, Boyer described his motivation for serving on the Partnership board as stemming from what he called a “dual commitment” to representing the city’s interests while contributing to the Partnership’s success.

He described the city and Partnership as working “hand-in-hand” and wrote about his desire to help the organization facilitate economic growth and prosperity in Freeport.

That makes his August 13 recommendation particularly significant.

This isn’t simply a City Manager looking from the outside at an organization receiving $400,000 annually from the city.

Boyer has had a seat inside both organizations.

As City Manager, his responsibility is to Freeport and its taxpayers.

Through his service on GFP’s board, he has also had direct exposure to the organization, its mission, priorities, and work.

And despite that perspective, his recommendation to the City Council is not to allow the existing $400,000 agreement to automatically renew.

Instead, he recommends preserving council’s ability to evaluate available funding and reconsider the appropriate scope and structure of Freeport’s future economic-development services.

That should get council members’ attention.

But the Resolution Says the Opposite

Then there’s Resolution #R-2026-106 itself.

The resolution states that the city finds it is “in the best interest of the City and its citizens” to allow the agreement to automatically renew.

It would authorize and approve that automatic renewal and give the City Manager authority to execute whatever documents are necessary to complete it.

So taxpayers are left with an unusual situation.

The City Manager’s August 13 memo recommends:

Do not allow automatic renewal.

The resolution appearing on Monday’s agenda says:

Allow automatic renewal.

And the City Manager making the recommendation has served on the board of the organization receiving the money.

That discrepancy deserves an explanation before any vote is taken.

What Exactly Are Taxpayers Buying?

This shouldn’t become a debate about whether economic development is important.

Of course it is.

The real question is whether Freeport taxpayers are receiving sufficient value for what they’re spending — and whether City Council has enough information to make that determination.

Since 2018, according to the city, approximately $3.3 million has been invested in GFP.

The current contract costs $400,000 annually.

Nearly 45 percent of the revenue currently supporting that contract is disappearing.

And the city’s own memo acknowledges that no performance benchmarks were established for FY 2024 or FY 2025.

Before another automatic renewal, taxpayers deserve some answers.

What measurable economic-development results has the city’s investment produced?

What specific services and deliverables does $400,000 purchase?

What benchmarks will be established for 2027?

How will the city replace the approximately $180,000 disappearing with the expiration of the Lamm Road TIF?

Will the General Fund be expected to make up the difference?

Could the city negotiate a different scope of services at a lower cost?

And perhaps most importantly:

Why automatically renew a $400,000 agreement before answering those questions?

This Isn’t Necessarily About Ending the Partnership

That distinction matters.

Voting to prevent automatic renewal isn’t the same as voting to eliminate the Greater Freeport Partnership.

In fact, based on Boyer’s memo, it would give the City Council something extremely valuable:

Options.

The city could evaluate its finances.

Council members could examine GFP’s performance.

They could establish measurable benchmarks.

They could renegotiate the price.

They could change the scope of services.

And they could determine what Freeport actually needs from its economic-development organization in 2027.

Then they could negotiate an agreement based on those answers.

Allowing the existing agreement to automatically renew would instead continue the current arrangement for another year.

Monday Night’s $400,000 Question

Resolution #R-2026-106 is scheduled for consideration Monday, August 17, and will be presented by City Manager Rob Boyer.

The resolution itself asks council members to authorize automatic renewal.

Boyer’s accompanying memo recommends that they don’t.

That contradiction alone should stop this from becoming a routine agenda vote.

But Boyer’s history with GFP makes his recommendation even more noteworthy.

This isn’t someone unfamiliar with the organization asking council members to reconsider the deal.

This is someone who has served on its Board of Directors.

Freeport has invested approximately $3.3 million in the Greater Freeport Partnership since 2018.

There may very well be a strong case for continuing that investment.

If there is, make it.

Show taxpayers the results.

Establish the benchmarks.

Explain how the city will replace the disappearing revenue.

Explain why $400,000 remains the appropriate amount.

Explain why the resolution says automatic renewal is in Freeport’s best interest while the City Manager’s memo recommends preventing exactly that from happening.

And then let the City Council make an informed decision.

Because when you’re spending $400,000 of taxpayer money every year, “it automatically renewed” shouldn’t be the reason the check gets written again.

Make the case.