The Springfield Committee of the Whole approved a package of ordinances, grant acceptances and contract renewals Tuesday, Sept. 30, voting by voice to authorize contracts, accept federal grant funding and make budget and license adjustments.

The measures approved included contract extensions for utility services, acceptance of a U.S. Department of Energy resilience grant, adjustments to liquor-license counts, a community development block grant transfer, insurance premium payment, a one‑year professional lobbying contract and supplemental budget appropriations. The committee also approved the purchase of two Ford Mavericks for the Springfield Police Department community service officers for a combined amount not to exceed $60,570.

The measures were introduced by the city clerk and read into the record; most passed on unanimous voice consent after the committee moved the items “for consent.” For example, ordinance 2025-3-76 was described as acceptance of federal formula grant funding from the Illinois Finance Authority for $1,127,470 for the Office of Public Utilities; it passed after a motion for consent. Ordinance 2025-3-74 authorized a third one-year contract extension and additional funding of $34,968 under contract UW230315 for wood chipping and removal, with a revised total not to exceed $139,872 for the Office of Public Utilities; it passed on voice vote.

The committee approved ordinance 2025-3-87, authorizing contract PD260827 with Marl Brothers Ford Inc. for the purchase and delivery of two Ford Mavericks for the Springfield Police Department, in an item that drew brief questions from aldermen about vehicle selection, towing capacity and funding. Police officials said the Mavericks were selected so community service officers could tow equipment such as the SkyWatch camera trailer and a signage trailer; aldermen asked whether the vehicles were hybrid and about cost comparisons with Ford Focus vehicles previously used. A committee speaker said much of the cost for the purchases came from the DUI asset‑forfeiture fund. After discussion the committee voted in favor; the ayes were recorded by voice as having it.

Other items approved by voice vote included:
- 2025-3-75, an amendment to extend a software license term for Simon Power Technologies International, not to exceed $132,012 for the Office of Public Utilities
- 2025-3-77, a supplemental appropriation of $32,845 for the Office of Public Works
- 2025-3-78, increasing one Class E liquor license for Parkway Cafe at 2715 N. Dirksen Pkwy
- 2025-3-79, reducing one Class AA liquor license due to closure of Tierra Furmint LLC at 204 S. Sixth St.
- 2025-3-80, shifting one Class C liquor license to Class B for Casey’s General Store No. 2285 at 3001 Ridge Ave.
- 2025-3-81, transfer of appropriation authority for the Community Development Block Grant in the amount of $900,000 for the Office of Planning and Economic Development
- 2025-3-82, payment of $199,947 to Arthur J. Gallagher Risk Management Services Inc. for insurance premium renewals for the Office of Budget Management
- 2025-3-83, supplemental appropriations for year-end budget reconciliations for FY2025
- 2025-3-84, renewal of a one‑year lobbying services agreement with Basham Government Solutions LLC, not to exceed $75,000 for the Office of the Mayor
- 2025-3-85, an amendment to Chapter 110, Article 37 of the 1988 Springfield City Code regulating temporary street closures for residential block parties
- 2025-3-86, a two‑year warranty extension for 99 Jetpack S410G5 laptop mobile computers for the Springfield Police Department, $71,775 to PCN Strategies Inc.

Clerk statements and committee procedure indicated the items were presented as consent items; many motions were stated as “move consent” or “motion for consent,” seconded, and passed by ayes without recorded roll-call tallies in the transcript.

The approvals complete the committee’s routine business items and allow departments to proceed with the specified contracts, budget transfers and purchases. Several aldermen used the general-business portion of the meeting to raise unrelated operational questions following the consent votes.

Votes on each ordinance were recorded in the meeting minutes as voice votes in favor; no recorded roll-call tallies were read into the transcript during the consent sequence.