Gladewood SSA Plan Advances Amid Transparency Concerns and Council Tension

Mayor’s Power Struggles and Process Questions Overshadow Ordinance’s First Reading

FREEPORT, IL – September 04, 2025

On Tuesday, September 2, 2025, the Freeport City Council held its first reading of Ordinance 2025-54, which proposes the creation of a Special Service Area (SSA) for the Gladewood Subdivision. The ordinance would dedicate subdivision roadways to the city and impose a $400 annual tax per parcel to fund roadway upgrades and ongoing maintenance.

While the measure may be a step toward rectifying long-standing infrastructure issues in the area, the meeting quickly turned into a demonstration of what has become routine dysfunction in City Hall — especially when it comes to Mayor Jodi Miller’s ongoing efforts to control, silence, or ignore members of the council who challenge her.

The Ordinance: What It Does

The ordinance seeks to do the following:

  • Establish a Special Service Area for 16 taxable parcels in the Gladewood Subdivision.

  • Accept the subdivision’s internal roads “as is” into the City of Freeport’s public street network.

  • Levy an annual $400 per parcel tax to fund improvements specific to the area.

  • Improve the subdivision’s upper and lower entrances with a 12-inch aggregate base and 4-inch asphalt surface.

The plan, according to City Manager Rob Boyer, was initiated by a petition from a majority of Gladewood residents. A public hearing was held on May 28, 2025, and no official objections were submitted during the 30-day legal period that followed.

A Slim Majority and Limited Engagement

When Alderwoman Stacy asked how many of the 16 property owners supported the SSA, Manager Boyer admitted that only “9 or 10” were in favor — just enough to constitute a majority. Stacy also inquired about the level of public participation. Boyer confirmed that a single public hearing was held and added that affected residents could have spoken then or at the current meeting.

Despite the technical compliance, several council members questioned whether the city had done enough to engage and inform the residents before moving forward with a tax levy.

The Tipping Point: A Demand for Transparency

The meeting took a more confrontational turn when Alderman Larry Sanders pressed for details on how the $400 figure was calculated. Boyer responded that he and the city attorney reviewed a estimate and deemed the amount appropriate.

Sanders, exercising his right to transparency on behalf of his constituents, asked to see the actual quote and breakdown. He wanted to understand the math: Was the cost divided evenly across the 16 parcels? What was the total estimate?

Rather than allow this entirely reasonable line of inquiry to continue, Mayor Miller interjected, citing her amended council rules and claiming Sanders had already used one of his allowed questions. She attempted to reclaim the floor from Sanders and redirect it to Boyer.

What followed was an unexpected but necessary moment of correction: City Manager Boyer clarified that he had finished answering and meaning Sanders still held the floor. This brief exchange highlighted the increasingly problematic nature of the mayor's conduct — a refusal to follow proper procedure when it doesn’t suit her personal preferences.

A Pattern of Suppression

This is not the first time Mayor Miller has interrupted or attempted to silence Alderman Sanders. Nor is it the first time she has misapplied or misunderstood council procedure. Her controversial “two-question rule,” adopted after her re-election, has been criticized for disproportionately targeting council members who speak out against her administration.

It’s worth noting that under Robert’s Rules of Order, alderpersons are entitled to a ten-minute speaking window during which they may express their thoughts, ask questions, and engage in back-and-forth discussion. Yet under Miller’s rules, time and participation are now micromanaged and manipulated.

After Sanders finished speaking and reiterated that he simply wanted transparency and clarity, Alderwoman Stacy signaled for the floor again. She was ignored. When Alderman Klemm pointed out that Stacy had a question, the mayor bluntly replied, “Yeah, she had already spoke twice.”

So much for collaborative government.

Alderman Klemm’s Perspective

Councilman Klemm offered a moment of balance, stating that the situation was “kind of a bad deal,” referring to the legacy issues with the subdivision, “but this is one of the best ways to rectify it.”

His point is valid. The underlying need for infrastructure repair is real. But the way the matter is being handled — behind closed doors, with incomplete financial information, and under restrictive council rules — is eroding public trust.

A Broken Process

This ordinance should be about fixing roads. Instead, it has become another example of Mayor Miller’s misuse of power, lack of transparency, and disregard for council norms.

Freeport taxpayers deserve to know:

  • How was the $400 fee calculated? Show the quote.

  • Why was only one public hearing held?

  • Why are aldermen limited to two questions when 10 minutes is standard legislative practice? Only to have their time taken away if a question city staff starts speaking.

  • Why is Mayor Miller consistently interrupting only certain council members?

The public isn’t asking for anything extraordinary — just transparency, fairness, and accountability.

What Comes Next

The second reading and vote on Ordinance 2025-54 will take place at the next Freeport City Council meeting on Monday, September 15, 2025. Residents are encouraged to attend, speak out, and demand the information that was withheld during the first reading.

Editorial Conclusion

There’s a difference between governing and controlling. This ordinance, while likely beneficial in outcome, is being pushed through with minimal transparency and maximum suppression. If this administration wants to be seen as competent and credible, it must start by respecting the process and the people. It is also important to note that under Mayor Miller’s continued “leadership”, in less than a year and half the 16 property owners in the Gladewood Subdivision have been forced to pay an additional 1% Sales Tax, a 1% Food Tax, and if this passes an additional $400/year tax.

In a healthy democracy, the floor belongs to the people — not just the mayor. City Council meeting are council meeting not staff meetings.