School Transportation Costs Continue to Rise as State Aid Covers Only Half the Bill

by Sarah DeMaranville

Every school day, Geneseo CUSD #228 buses travel hundreds of miles transporting students to and from school, athletic events and extracurricular activities. While the State of Illinois helps pay for those services, district financial records show that state funding covers only about half of the district's transportation costs—leaving local taxpayers to make up the difference.

A review of Geneseo's recent Annual Financial Reports and budget documents shows that transportation expenses have continued to rise in recent years, while the state's contribution has remained relatively flat as a share of total costs.

State aid covers about half of transportation expenses

According to the district's FY2025 Annual Financial Report, Geneseo received approximately $1.37 million in state transportation aid while spending nearly $2.64 million operating its Transportation Fund.

That means state transportation aid covered approximately 51.7% of transportation expenditures.

The previous year tells a similar story.

In FY2023, the district received about $1.21 million in transportation aid while spending $2.34 million, with state funding covering approximately 51.9% of transportation costs.

While state funding increased in dollar amounts between FY2023 and FY2025, transportation expenses increased at nearly the same pace. As a result, the state's share of overall transportation costs remained essentially unchanged.

Costs continue to rise

Transportation has become one of the district's steadily growing operational expenses.

Between FY2023 and FY2025:

  • Transportation expenditures increased from $2.34 million to $2.64 million, an increase of approximately 13.2%.

  • State transportation aid increased from $1.21 million to $1.37 million, an increase of approximately 12.7%.

The district has also approved higher transportation contract costs for the current school year, citing increases in route costs, mileage and extracurricular transportation.

For FY2026, the district projects approximately $2.8 million in transportation expenditures.

Transportation fund projected to operate at a deficit

Budget projections show the Transportation Fund is expected to continue facing financial pressure.

For FY2026, the district projects:

  • Transportation Fund revenue: approximately $2.36 million

  • Transportation expenditures: approximately $2.80 million

That leaves a projected operating deficit of approximately $437,000.

Even when accounting for all Transportation Fund revenue—including state aid, local property taxes and other revenue—the district expects expenditures to exceed available revenue.

The Transportation Fund also operated at deficits in previous years, including approximately $255,000 in FY2023 and $243,000 in FY2025.

A long-standing concern

District officials have warned about transportation funding for years.

In its FY2017 budget document, Geneseo noted that Illinois was reimbursing districts for only about 71 to 72 percent of their calculated transportation entitlement, estimating that the district was losing roughly $300,000 annually because state appropriations did not fully fund the statutory formula.

The district cautioned at the time that Transportation Fund balances were expected to continue declining because of the reduced reimbursement.

Although today's funding calculations differ from that earlier entitlement measure, the district's financial records continue to show that transportation remains a significant local budget challenge.

Why it matters

Unlike many other budget areas, student transportation is largely unavoidable.

School buses must continue operating regardless of fluctuations in diesel fuel prices, labor costs, vehicle maintenance expenses or bus replacement costs.

When transportation costs rise faster than available revenue, districts must rely more heavily on local resources or existing fund balances to continue providing the same level of service.

For Geneseo taxpayers, the district's financial reports illustrate an ongoing reality: while the State of Illinois remains an important funding partner, local revenue continues to play a substantial role in ensuring students can safely travel to and from school each day.

Sources

  1. Geneseo CUSD #228 FY2025 Annual Financial Report

  2. Geneseo CUSD #228 FY2023 Annual Financial Report — Full Version

  3. Geneseo CUSD #228 FY2026 Budget Cash Summary

  4. Geneseo CUSD #228 2024 Tax Levy and Financial Projections Presentation

  5. Geneseo CUSD #228 FY2017 Budget Document

  6. Pinks’ Bus Service Transportation Contract Proposal for the 2026–27 School Year

  7. Geneseo CUSD #228 May 2026 Board Materials

Geneseo Weighs Future of Aging Wind Turbine After Generator Failure

A failed generator on one of Geneseo's two municipal wind turbines has prompted city officials to begin what could become one of the most significant energy infrastructure decisions the City has faced in years.

Rather than asking the City Council to choose a course of action immediately, Electric Director Eric Rowold used Tuesday night's Committee of the Whole meeting to outline the condition of Wind Turbine No. 1, explain the financial implications of several possible paths forward, and begin framing what will likely be months of analysis before a final recommendation is made.

The discussion centered on a question that extends well beyond replacing a broken generator: Should the City invest in extending the life of a 17-year-old turbine, retire it altogether, or pursue an entirely different approach to local power generation?

Generator Failure Raises Bigger Questions

Wind Turbine No. 1 is approximately 17 years old and was originally designed with a 20-year life expectancy, although Rowold said it may be possible to extend that lifespan to 25 or even 30 years.

Doing so, however, would require much more than simply replacing the failed generator.

"We need to look at the structural concerns," Rowold said.

That includes evaluating:

  • the foundation and tower,

  • the blades,

  • the main bearing,

  • the pitch system,

  • the yaw system,

  • the electrical system,

  • the braking system, and

  • numerous other components that have experienced nearly two decades of wear.

Rowold noted that replacing only the generator could expose the City to another expensive repair if another major component fails shortly afterward.

"You could change a generator today and have blade bearing failure tomorrow," he said.

Aging Equipment Creates New Challenges

One of the largest concerns discussed Tuesday wasn't simply age—it was parts availability.

Rowold explained that although the manufacturer still supports the turbine model, newer versions have replaced Geneseo's equipment.

As a result:

  • replacement parts are becoming harder to source,

  • fewer technicians specialize in older models,

  • European parts must meet U.S. certification requirements before installation,

  • and international shipping, tariffs and customs delays have increased uncertainty.

"The longer that we go with the wind turbine, the more we're going to have troubles sourcing some of those parts," Rowold said.

What the Turbine Produces

Despite its age, Wind Turbine No. 1 remains an important part of the City's electric system.

According to Rowold, the turbine produces roughly:

  • 3 million kilowatt-hours annually

  • about $420,000 worth of electricity each year

  • approximately 5 to 6 percent of the City's total energy needs.

If the turbine remains offline, purchasing that same electricity from MISO would increase annual costs by roughly $150,000, although Rowold noted market prices fluctuate significantly.

He also emphasized another benefit of locally generated power.

"When you're looking at $420,000, that energy is produced locally, there's no fuel being burnt and we're not paying transmission," he said.

Insurance Covers Much—But Not Everything

Replacing the generator is expected to cost approximately $955,161, according to estimates from Vestas USA and West Engineering.

The City's insurance carrier has already approved approximately $855,161, leaving the City responsible for a $100,000 deductible.

Officials are also awaiting a separate business interruption claim worth approximately $50,000 for lost electrical production while the turbine remains offline.

Even if the City proceeds, replacement won't happen quickly.

Rowold said delivery of a new generator is currently estimated at eight to ten months, with supply chain disruptions continuing to affect availability. The replacement generator would carry a three-year warranty.

Could Solar Replace It?

Council members asked whether expanding the City's solar array might eliminate the need to repair the turbine.

Rowold said replacing the turbine's production with solar would be difficult.

The City currently operates roughly one megawatt of solar generation on about five acres.

Replacing the turbine's output would require roughly three additional megawatts.

"You would have to cover every inch of that ground," Rowold said, noting the site's rolling terrain and reduced winter sunlight also limit production.

While additional solar could be added, he said it would not fully replace the turbine's output by itself.

"Do You Revive the Dead Duck?"

Council members spent much of the discussion weighing the long-term value of investing additional money into aging equipment.

Councilmember Martin Rothschild summarized the dilemma with a memorable analogy.

"The biggest thing is that we have a dead duck sitting there," Rothschild said. "Do you revive the dead duck or do you just put him to rest? That's the ultimate question."

Rowold stressed that he is not advocating for either outcome.

Instead, he said staff is trying to understand the full condition of the turbine before recommending whether replacing the generator makes financial sense.

"I am not," Rowold replied when asked if he wanted to abandon the turbine. "I am only showing you what the concerns are."

Decommissioning Remains an Option

If the City decides not to repair the turbine, removing it would also come with significant costs.

Rowold said preliminary estimates place decommissioning at approximately $214,000.

That proposal would involve cutting the tower down rather than dismantling it piece by piece.

The estimate includes:

  • removing and recycling the tower,

  • removing the generator,

  • disposing of the blades,

  • site cleanup,

but does not include removing the concrete foundation, which would remain underground.

Wind Turbine No. 2 Also Nearing End of Design Life

The discussion also highlighted that Wind Turbine No. 2 will soon face many of the same questions.

Although it continues operating, Rowold said both turbines are approaching the end of their original design life.

Earlier this year, the City hired consultants to begin evaluating long-term options, including:

  • extending turbine life,

  • repowering with newer equipment,

  • decommissioning,

  • and broader electric system planning.

That planning effort originally focused on the City's electric plant and distribution system but has expanded following the unexpected generator failure.

No Decision Yet

No action was requested Tuesday.

Instead, council members directed staff to continue gathering information, including updated repair estimates and long-term financial projections comparing the costs of repairing, replacing or retiring the turbine.

Rowold said those future presentations will examine projected revenues, maintenance costs and purchased power expenses over roughly the next 25 years before any recommendation is brought forward for council consideration.

Passenger Rail Project Gains Momentum

"It's not if, it's when."

That was the message Denise Bulat, executive director of the Bi-State Regional Commission, shared with the Geneseo City Council Tuesday evening as she updated members on the long-discussed Chicago-to-Quad Cities passenger rail project.

Closing her presentation, Bulat told council members she believes "there's a light at the end of the train tunnel," pointing to recent state funding commitments and renewed regional collaboration as signs the project is moving closer to reality.

Bulat's presentation before the Committee of the Whole was intended to provide historical context and an update on where the project stands today. No action was requested from the Council.

More Than Two Decades in the Making

Bulat reminded council members that major transportation projects often require decades of planning, engineering, environmental review, and funding before construction begins.

She said the Amtrak feasibility study alone took about 10 years to complete after work began in the late 1990s. Drawing on her own experience, Bulat compared the project to the new Interstate 74 bridge between Moline and Bettendorf.

"I was working on the I-74 bridge project since 1994," she said, noting that construction was not completed until 2021.

"Transportation takes a long time," Bulat said.

Funding Picture Has Improved

While acknowledging that one hurdle remains, Bulat said the project's financial outlook is significantly stronger than it was just a year ago.

She explained that the Illinois General Assembly approved more than $400 million in gap funding during last year's veto session, providing the money needed for the project to continue moving forward.

The remaining issue is an extension of approximately $78 million in federal funding through the Federal Railroad Administration. Illinois Department of Transportation officials are seeking that extension, and Bulat said indications remain positive.

"They now have the money they need to continue to proceed on this project," she told council members.

According to the meeting packet, IDOT officials were unable to attend Tuesday's meeting because the federal funding request is still pending but plan to present to the Council once the process is complete.

Questions About Local Benefits

Councilmember Craig Arnold asked whether studies have examined how passenger rail affects smaller communities.

Bulat said she was not aware of research specific to communities like Geneseo but pointed to several potential benefits.

She said the proposed station would provide Henry County residents with a convenient place to park and travel to Chicago without driving downtown. She also suggested passenger rail could make Geneseo more attractive to professionals who work in Chicago but prefer living in a smaller community.

Bulat noted that officials in Moline have discussed similar possibilities, including retaining Illinois residents whose work requires frequent trips to Chicago.

She also emphasized that reliable service is key, noting current planning calls for two daily round trips between the Quad Cities and Chicago with a travel time of roughly three hours and 15 minutes.

That schedule, she said, would allow business travelers to work on the train instead of spending hours behind the wheel or searching for parking in downtown Chicago.

Council Reflects on Years of Planning

Councilmember Keith Kennett, who has been involved with the project since Geneseo first pursued a station, reflected on the City's early participation.

Kennett recalled traveling with former City Administrator Tracy Koteki to meetings with Amtrak and the Illinois Department of Transportation, where they met officials from communities that either had passenger rail service or were working to obtain it.

He also described taking the train from Princeton to Chicago several times and meeting commuters who lived in Princeton while working in Chicago.

"I don't think it's going to double our population," Kennett said, "but I think it is something to be aware of. That's kind of an intangible asset of having that."

Kennett also said he believes the project lost several years of momentum after state funding was withdrawn during a previous administration before eventually being restored. He acknowledged residents' frustration with the lengthy timeline but said he believes the project is now closer than it has been in years.

"The game isn't over," Kennett said. "We're in the late innings."

Questions About the City's Commitment

Councilmember Brett Barnhart questioned how long Geneseo should continue reserving land for a station if the project experiences additional delays.

Bulat responded that she expects IDOT and project leaders, including former Illinois Deputy Secretary of Transportation Doug House, to provide updated timelines once the federal funding issue is resolved. She said communities would be informed if circumstances changed significantly but emphasized that project leaders remain focused on moving forward.

"Moline already built their station," Bulat said. "Everyone is working really hard toward getting this."

"It's not if, it's when," she said. "There's a light at the end of the train tunnel."

Mayor Sean Johnson thanked Bulat for the presentation, saying council members regularly receive questions from residents about passenger rail.

"We're just a hungry community for answers," Johnson said. He added that the historical overview, resolutions, and planning milestones discussed during the presentation would help council members better answer those questions in the future.

City Council Discusses Passenger Rail, Wind Turbines, Noise Ordinance During Busy Meeting

Passenger rail, the future of the City's aging wind turbines, proposed changes to the construction noise ordinance, and downtown façade improvements were among the topics discussed during Tuesday's Committee of the Whole and Special City Council meetings.

The Committee of the Whole opened with a historical overview of the proposed Chicago-to-Quad Cities passenger rail project and the potential Geneseo station. Denise Bulat, executive director of the Bi-State Regional Commission, reviewed the project's history, current federal funding status, and next steps while answering questions from council members about the project's future and the City's continued commitment to the proposed station location. No action was taken.

See more about Bulat’s presentation and the Council discussion here.

Council members then received an update on Wind Turbine No. 1 after the failure of one of its generators. Electric Director Chris Rowold outlined the turbine's current condition, expected remaining lifespan, replacement costs, insurance considerations, and repair challenges. The discussion served as the beginning of what officials described as a broader conversation about the City's long-term options for its wind energy infrastructure.

See more about the wind turbine discussion here.

The Committee also unanimously recommended approval of a façade improvement grant for Katsch Boutique, 113 N. State St. The project includes exterior repairs, repainting, a new awning, and updated storefront improvements. The recommendation now moves to the City Council for final approval.

During public comment, Hammond-Henry Hospital CEO Wyatt Brieser invited City officials to participate in the hospital's strategic planning process as the organization prepares to celebrate its 125th anniversary.

Following the Committee of the Whole meeting, the City Council convened a Special Meeting to vote on an amendment to the City's noise ordinance. The change allows construction projects with City-issued building permits to begin work at 6 a.m. between June 1 and Sept. 30 while maintaining the existing 7 a.m. start time during the remainder of the year. The proposal was introduced in response to recent resident complaints while recognizing the challenges contractors face working during extreme summer heat.

Council members discussed several aspects of the proposal, including weather-related exceptions, enforcement, and how the ordinance would apply to different types of construction projects. The Council voted to approve the amendment, with only Councilman Barnhart voting against the change.

The meeting concluded with the Council entering executive session to discuss pending or probable litigation.

Geneseo Evaluating Future of Wind Turbine After Generator Failure

One of Geneseo's municipal wind turbines has been out of service for more than two months after suffering a generator failure, and city officials are evaluating whether to repair, replace or permanently retire the unit.

Director of Electrical Operations Eric Rowold updated the City Council in June, explaining that Wind Turbine #1 has been offline since April 30 because of a generator failure. The city has filed an insurance claim related to the damage.

City staff evaluated the failed generator and identified three possible paths forward:

  • Replace the generator.

  • Decommission the wind turbine.

  • Replace the entire turbine.

Replacing the generator would not be a quick fix. Rowold said the replacement generator would need to be manufactured in Germany, resulting in an estimated six- to nine-month lead time, in addition to what he described as a significant cost.

Despite the turbine being offline, Rowold said the failure is not expected to have a significant impact on the city's current budget. However, Geneseo Municipal Utilities is purchasing additional electricity while the turbine remains out of service.

The city is still awaiting a decision on its insurance claim. Officials have submitted a generator replacement quote from WES Engineering, a partner of Vensys US, to the city's insurance carrier.

At the same time, the city has also requested a quote to decommission the turbine, indicating officials are continuing to evaluate multiple options while awaiting the insurance decision.

No decision has been made on the turbine's future. City officials are expected to revisit the issue at Tuesday’s Committee of the Whole Meeting (7-28-26).

For now, Wind Turbine #1 remains out of service while the city continues evaluating whether repairing, replacing or decommissioning the turbine is the best long-term solution.

Sources: City of Geneseo, Regular Council Meeting – June 9, 2026 Agenda (Director of Electrical Operations Wind Turbine Update); City of Geneseo, Regular Council Meeting – July 14, 2026 Agenda (Capital Planning 26 Projects – 07.14.26).

Vorac Pharmacy Purchases Neighboring Downtown Building, Plans Expansion

By Sarah DeMaranville

Vorac Pharmacy has purchased the building immediately south of its longtime downtown Geneseo location, a move owner Nathan Vorac says will allow the independent pharmacy to continue growing while remaining committed to State Street for years to come.

The pharmacy, which currently operates at 114 S. State St., has acquired the neighboring property at 110 S. State St. from Springfield Armory. The building was previously owned by GWK Enterprises, home of Four Seasons Direct.

For Vorac, the purchase is more than simply adding square footage—it's part of a long-term vision to expand patient care while ensuring the pharmacy remains rooted in downtown Geneseo.

"As the pharmacy has continued to grow, I knew there was a possibility we would eventually outgrow our current space," Vorac said. "I have never wanted to leave our downtown location, so when the opportunity came to purchase the neighboring building, it made perfect sense."

The project became possible through a partnership with his brother, Jake Vorac, and sister-in-law, Erin Vorac.

"Once my brother Jake and his wife Erin agreed to partner with us, we were off and running," he said. "This investment ensures we'll be able to continue serving our community from downtown Geneseo for years to come."

Planning for the Future

Vorac said the expansion reflects how community pharmacy has evolved over the years.

Nathan Vorac, Owner of Vorac Pharmacy

In addition to filling prescriptions, the pharmacy now provides extensive compliance packaging for patients living independently and those in care facilities, services that require specialized equipment and dedicated workspace.

"We also need additional room for private patient consultations and vaccinations," Vorac said. "Expanding into the neighboring building allows us to better serve patients while improving our workflow."

Current plans call for the pharmacy to occupy the entire first floor of the newly acquired building, while Jake and Erin Vorac plan to renovate the second floor into multiple apartments.

Although plans are still in the early stages, Vorac hopes to relocate the pharmacy's retail area into the new building once renovations are complete.

Renovations Still in Early Stages

Significant work remains before construction begins.

"We are currently engaged with architects and contractors to come up with a plan and budget for the work that needs to be done," Vorac said.

Because planning is still underway, customers should not expect immediate changes.

"We are hoping to begin work in a few months, so nothing immediate," he said. "We still have to work out the plans before we can begin construction."

While no new pharmacy services are planned in the short term, Vorac said the additional space will provide flexibility as healthcare continues to change.

"We don't have any immediate plans to introduce new services, but the additional space gives us the flexibility to grow as our patients' needs continue to change," he said. "It also allows us to improve the way we deliver the services we already provide."

The expansion could also create additional employment opportunities as the business grows.

"The additional space positions us well for future growth," Vorac said. "As our patient base continues to expand, we'll have room to hire additional employees without being limited by our current space."

A Commitment to Downtown

For Vorac, the investment is also a reaffirmation of his commitment to Geneseo's downtown business district.

"We aren't going anywhere," he said. "I knew since high school that I wanted to own this pharmacy in my hometown."

Vorac purchased the business from longtime owner Rich McClimon after working alongside him and learning the profession.

"I was fortunate to work for and learn from Rich McClimon before purchasing the business from him," he said. "I hope to continue that tradition for many years to come."

He said the support the pharmacy has received from the community made investing in downtown an easy decision.

"Geneseo has been incredibly supportive of my family and our business, and this investment reflects our commitment to remaining a part of downtown and serving this community well into the future."

Looking ahead, Vorac said his vision remains centered on maintaining the personal relationships that distinguish independent pharmacies from larger chains.

"I want us to continue growing while providing the personalized service our patients have come to expect," he said. "I believe independent community pharmacies can offer a level of care and personal attention that's difficult to match. Our patients choose us because of those relationships, and my goal is to make sure we continue providing that same level of service for many years to come."

Ultimately, Vorac said the project is about improving the patient experience while contributing to the continued vitality of downtown Geneseo.

"Our goal isn't simply to have a larger building," he said. "It's to create a better experience for our patients and provide our staff with the space they need to continue delivering the level of care our community expects from us. We hope we can contribute to the continued success of the downtown area while allowing us to better serve our patients for many years to come."

Inside Project Big River – Part 2 — Safety, Risks & Emergency Planning: What Could Go Wrong, and How Would Henry County Prepare?

In Part 1 of this series, we explained what the proposed Big River–Lapis carbon sequestration project is and how it would capture carbon dioxide from ethanol production before storing it deep underground.

One of the biggest reasons the Henry County Board approved a one-year moratorium on new carbon sequestration projects, however, wasn't about how the technology works: It was about public safety.

County officials have repeatedly said they want more time to understand potential risks, develop emergency response plans, and ensure first responders are prepared before additional projects move forward.

So what exactly are those risks?

Carbon dioxide can be dangerous

One of the biggest misconceptions is that carbon dioxide (CO₂) is toxic like chlorine or ammonia. It isn't.

CO₂ is a naturally occurring gas. Humans exhale it every time they breathe, and plants use it during photosynthesis.

The danger comes when large amounts of carbon dioxide displace oxygen. That makes CO₂ an asphyxiant.

Instead of poisoning the body, it reduces the amount of oxygen available to breathe. When oxygen levels become too low, the brain and other organs can no longer function normally.

Why carbon dioxide behaves differently than natural gas

Many people compare carbon dioxide pipelines to natural gas pipelines, but the gases behave very differently.

Natural gas is lighter than air. So when it’s released outdoors, it generally rises and disperses into the atmosphere.

Carbon dioxide, on the other hand, is about 1½ times heavier than air.

So when CO₂ is released in large quantities, it tends to sink and collect in low-lying areas such as:

  • Ditches

  • Creek beds

  • Culverts

  • Basements

  • Low spots in fields

  • Depressions in the landscape

Weather conditions can also affect how long the gas remains concentrated before dispersing.

Because carbon dioxide is colorless and odorless, people may have no warning that oxygen levels are dropping.

What happens if someone is exposed?

The effects depend on both the concentration of carbon dioxide and the length of exposure.

Early symptoms may include:

  • Headache

  • Dizziness

  • Shortness of breath

  • Confusion

  • Increased heart rate

As oxygen levels continue to fall, symptoms can progress rapidly to:

  • Difficulty walking

  • Impaired judgment

  • Loss of consciousness

  • Suffocation due to oxygen deprivation

Unlike smoke or natural gas, there may be no visible cloud or odor alerting someone to the danger. Animals can also be affected.

Can carbon dioxide stop vehicles?

Yes, a concentrated cloud of cardon dioxide can stall a vehicle. Internal combustion engines require oxygen to burn fuel.

If a vehicle enters an area where oxygen has been displaced by highly concentrated carbon dioxide, the engine may stall because combustion cannot continue.

This possibility is one reason emergency planners study carbon dioxide releases differently than many other industrial incidents.

A stalled emergency vehicle could delay rescue efforts if responders entered an area with elevated CO₂ concentrations before conditions were fully assessed.

The incident that changed the conversation

Much of today's discussion about carbon dioxide safety references a single event.

On February 22, 2020, a carbon dioxide pipeline ruptured near Satartia, Mississippi. The release created a dense cloud of carbon dioxide that settled into low-lying terrain.

Residents reported difficulty breathing, confusion, dizziness, and loss of consciousness. Some people became disoriented while attempting to drive away.

According to investigations by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), dozens of people were treated by emergency responders, and approximately 45 people were transported to hospitals. Several vehicles reportedly stalled after entering the oxygen-deficient area because their engines could no longer sustain combustion.

The incident prompted additional scrutiny of carbon dioxide transportation and emergency response planning across the country.

How is the Big River project different?

While Satartia is often cited during discussions about carbon dioxide safety, the proposed Big River–Lapis project differs in several important ways.

The Mississippi incident involved a long interstate carbon dioxide pipeline transporting CO₂ across multiple states.

Project Big River would instead use a flowline of less than one mile connecting the Big River Resources ethanol plant directly to a nearby underground injection site.

Because the transportation distance is significantly shorter, supporters argue the project presents a different risk profile than a regional pipeline network.

That doesn't eliminate risk, but it changes the types of scenarios emergency planners evaluate.

Why is Henry County's Office of Emergency Management involved?

Emergency management is responsible for much more than tornadoes and floods.

Henry County's Office of Emergency Management (OEM) coordinates planning for hazardous materials incidents, industrial accidents, transportation emergencies, severe weather, and other events that could require a coordinated multi-agency response.

Even if the likelihood of a carbon dioxide release is considered low, OEM's role is to prepare for the possibility.

County officials have said they want emergency plans in place before any project becomes operational—not afterward.

What kinds of plans are being discussed?

According to Lapis Carbon Solutions, emergency planning includes coordination with Henry County OEM, local fire departments, and other responding agencies.

Planning may include:

  • Identifying potential release scenarios.

  • Modeling how carbon dioxide could move under different weather conditions.

  • Developing notification procedures.

  • Coordinating evacuation routes if necessary.

  • Establishing communication between agencies.

  • Conducting emergency response exercises.

  • Reviewing specialized equipment needs.

The company has also said it intends to share carbon dioxide dispersion modeling as part of the planning process.

What would first responders train for?

Responding to a carbon dioxide incident differs from responding to a fire.

Training could include:

  • Recognizing symptoms of oxygen-deficient environments.

  • Using atmospheric gas monitoring equipment.

  • Establishing exclusion zones.

  • Identifying areas where CO₂ may accumulate.

  • Coordinating rescues without exposing responders to unnecessary risk.

  • Communicating protective actions to the public.

  • Working within the county's Incident Command System alongside fire, EMS, law enforcement, and emergency management.

The goal is to ensure responders know how to safely assess conditions before entering an affected area.

Why did the County Board approve a moratorium?

County officials have emphasized that the one-year moratorium is not a permanent ban on carbon sequestration.

Instead, they have said the additional time will allow Henry County to:

  • Better understand the technology.

  • Review emergency preparedness.

  • Evaluate public safety considerations.

  • Gather technical information.

  • Determine whether additional local regulations are appropriate.

Supporters of the moratorium say it gives the county time to prepare before additional projects move forward.

Supporters of the project argue that planning and permitting requirements are already extensive and that the Big River proposal's short flowline makes it fundamentally different from large interstate pipeline systems.

Those differing viewpoints are at the center of the ongoing public discussion.

Coming Next: Part 3

In the final installment of this series, we'll examine the debate surrounding Project Big River—why supporters believe it could strengthen the region's agricultural economy, why critics remain concerned about safety and long-term impacts, and how Henry County officials may balance those competing perspectives as the project moves through the permitting process.

City of Geneseo July 28 Committee of the Whole & Special Meeting Preview

Geneseo city officials will hold both a Committee of the Whole Meeting and a Special City Council Meeting on Tuesday, July 28, with discussions ranging from passenger rail and downtown improvements to a proposed amendment to the city's construction noise ordinance.

The Committee of the Whole begins at 6 p.m. in the City Council Chambers and will be followed immediately by a Special City Council Meeting to consider action on the proposed noise ordinance before moving into executive session.

Unlike regular City Council meetings, the Committee of the Whole is primarily intended for discussion and information gathering. While one item is expected to move forward with a recommendation for approval, most of the evening's agenda is scheduled for discussion only.

Passenger Rail Project Update

One of the evening's most anticipated discussions will focus on the Chicago-to-Quad Cities passenger rail project and the proposed Geneseo station.

City Administrator Brandon Maeglin's report says the discussion is intended to provide council members with a comprehensive historical overview of Geneseo's involvement before any future decisions are made regarding city-owned property or participation in the project. Denise Bulat, Executive Director of the Bi-State Regional Commission, is expected to provide the presentation.

The report outlines several milestones in the project:

  • The City formally endorsed passenger rail service in 2009.

  • Geneseo purchased the proposed station property in 2017 for $260,000.

  • The Spring Street railroad crossing closed in 2021 as part of corridor planning.

  • Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) has indicated Geneseo would have design input on a future station and would oversee construction contracting before being reimbursed by the state. Long-term maintenance, however, would become a municipal responsibility under a future intergovernmental agreement.

The report also provides an update on the federal funding situation.

According to city documents, IDOT recently met with the Federal Railroad Administration seeking an extension on the remaining $78 million balance of the original $177 million federal rail grant, which expires July 31. The report states the remaining funds continue to include the proposed Geneseo station within the project's scope.

Because that extension request remains pending, IDOT officials will not attend Tuesday's meeting. The agency has committed to presenting publicly after the federal decision is finalized.

No action is scheduled on the rail discussion.

Wind Turbine No. 1

The Committee will also begin discussing options for Wind Turbine No. 1 following the failure of one of its generators.

According to the agenda, Electric Director Rowold will begin outlining potential options for the City Council regarding how to address the failed generator. No vote is scheduled.

Katsch Boutique Façade Grant

Council members are expected to consider recommending approval of a façade improvement grant for Katsch Boutique, located at 113 N. State Street.

The application seeks up to $5,468.88 in 50/50 matching funds through the City's façade improvement program.

According to the application, the project includes:

  • Repairing deteriorated façade boards

  • Repainting the storefront

  • Replacing a worn striped awning

  • Repairing deteriorating wood

  • Updating front window vinyl lettering

The total project is estimated at $10,937.75, with the goal of creating "a new, vibrant and attractive exterior."

Special Meeting to Consider Construction Noise Ordinance

Immediately following the Committee of the Whole meeting, the City Council will convene a Special City Council Meeting to consider Ordinance O-26-13, which would amend the City's loud and unnecessary noise ordinance.

Currently, construction work and the operation of loud machinery in residential areas are prohibited between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.

The proposed amendment would keep the 7 a.m. start time as the standard, but create an exception allowing construction associated with city-issued building permits to begin at 6 a.m. between June 1 and September 30 in residential areas.

According to the agenda report, the proposal follows recent complaints about early morning construction activity. City staff note that 6 a.m. starts have historically been common during the summer months, allowing construction crews to avoid extreme afternoon heat while improving worker safety and productivity. Staff said the amendment is intended to balance those operational needs with the peace and quiet of residential neighborhoods.

Following consideration of the ordinance, the Council is scheduled to enter executive session to discuss pending or probable litigation before returning to open session and adjourning.

Bills Total More Than $233,000

Council members are also scheduled to review and approve approximately $233,236.70 in city and utility bills.

The largest category is Electric at $157,830.60, followed by Public Safety at $23,599.60, Health Insurance at $9,846.02, and Streets at $8,941.84.

Public comment will be accepted at both meetings for agenda items, with additional public comment available near the end of the Committee of the Whole meeting. Under City ordinance, speakers are limited to three minutes.

See the full agenda packet here.

See the special meeting packet here.

Bullying in Geneseo Schools: What District Policy, State Law, and Local Data Show




By Sarah DeMaranville

Geneseo Community Unit School District #228 documented 24 bullying-related reports during the 2024–2025 school year, according to records submitted to the Illinois State Board of Education. Twenty-one of those reports were ultimately recorded as verified allegations.

The reports, obtained through district records, provide a snapshot of where bullying complaints occurred, the types of allegations involved, and how the district documented investigations and parent notification requirements.

While the reporting forms do not describe individual incidents or measure the overall climate within the schools, they offer a closer look at how bullying complaints are handled locally.

Illinois law requires every public school district to maintain a bullying prevention policy, investigate reports, and establish procedures for reporting incidents. Geneseo Community Unit School District #228 implements those requirements through Board Policy 7:180, which outlines how reports are investigated, how families are notified, and what interventions may be used.

District Superintendent Dr. Laura Delgado said creating a safe learning environment remains one of the district's highest priorities:

"In the Geneseo School District, it is our absolute priority to ensure every student feels safe, respected, and valued at school. Bullying is an issue that every school district in America faces to some degree, and ours is no exception. In our schools, we take every report of bullying seriously and are committed to addressing concerns promptly, fairly, and with compassion. A shared goal among our staff, students, families, and community is to provide learning environments that foster a sense of community, safety, and care. Creating that kind of culture requires all of us working together, and it remains one of our highest priorities."

Here's a closer look at what the district's records show, what Illinois law requires, and what parents should know.

What do Geneseo's records show?

For the 2024–2025 school year, district records document 24 reported bullying-related incidents. Of those reports, 13 occurred at Geneseo Middle School, six at Millikin Elementary School, five at Geneseo High School, and none at Northside or Southwest Elementary Schools.

The district's reporting forms also categorize the types of allegations associated with each report. Thirteen reports did not identify a protected-category allegation. Among those that did, the most commonly reported allegation involved sexual harassment (five reports), followed by race, color, or national origin (three), retaliation (two), disability (one), and sex or gender (one). No reports listed religion as the alleged basis.

District records further indicate that 21 of the 24 reports were verified allegations. None were identified as cyber-related. Seventeen reports were marked as adhering to district bullying policy, and 15 documented parent notification within 24 hours.

What is bullying under Illinois law?

Illinois law defines bullying as severe or pervasive physical or verbal conduct—including written or electronic communications—that can reasonably be expected to:

  • Place a student in reasonable fear of harm.

  • Cause a substantially detrimental effect on a student's physical or mental health.

  • Substantially interfere with academic performance.

  • Substantially interfere with a student's ability to participate in or benefit from school services or activities.

The definition includes cyberbullying, meaning behavior through text messages, email, social media, online gaming, websites, blogs, or other electronic communication.

Illinois law also allows schools to address certain off-campus conduct if it substantially disrupts the educational process or orderly operation of a school. Importantly, the law does not require school employees to monitor students' personal devices or social media. Instead, administrators may investigate after receiving a report.

What does Geneseo's policy say?

Board Policy 7:180 prohibits bullying, intimidation, harassment, and hazing and encourages students, parents, volunteers, and staff members to report suspected incidents. Reports may be made verbally or in writing to administrators or any trusted staff member. Anonymous reports are accepted, although the policy notes anonymous reports alone cannot serve as the sole basis for formal disciplinary action.

Parent notification within 24 hours

The district states that parents or guardians of all students involved in an alleged bullying incident will be notified within 24 hours after administrators become aware of the student's involvement, consistent with state and federal privacy laws.

When appropriate, families are also informed about counseling, school psychological services, restorative measures, and other available interventions.

Investigations

The policy directs administrators to:

  • Begin investigating promptly.

  • Make reasonable efforts to complete investigations within 10 school days.

  • Notify the building principal as soon as possible.

  • Meet with parents to discuss investigation findings and actions taken.

  • Provide information about available support services for affected students.

Prevention and intervention

Rather than relying solely on discipline, the policy emphasizes interventions such as:

  • Social work services

  • Counseling

  • Restorative measures

  • Social-emotional skill development

  • Community-based services

Retaliation against anyone who reports bullying or participates in an investigation is prohibited.

The Board of Education must also formally review the bullying policy every two years, evaluating information such as:

  • Frequency of victimization

  • Student, family, and staff perceptions of safety

  • Locations where bullying occurs

  • Types of bullying

  • Bystander intervention

Those review results must ultimately be submitted to the Illinois State Board of Education.

Reporting bullying

Students and families can generally report bullying to:

  • Teachers

  • Principals

  • Assistant principals

  • School counselors

  • Other trusted staff members

Anonymous reports are also accepted.

Once a report is received, administrators determine whether the reported conduct meets the legal definition of bullying and what interventions or disciplinary measures, if any, are appropriate.

Beyond discipline: Building a safer school climate

District leaders say bullying prevention extends beyond investigating individual reports.

During a January 14, 2026, Behavioral Interventions Committee meeting, board members and administrators reviewed bullying policies alongside restorative practices, trauma-informed approaches, de-escalation training for staff, and discipline procedures across all grade levels.

According to the meeting summary, committee members also discussed bullying data from the current and previous school years, noting there were "very few incidents in Geneseo." The committee also expressed a goal of collecting and entering data more consistently across school buildings so future data visualizations could help identify trends and guide prevention efforts.

The committee also reviewed the district's online Bullying/Harassment Prevention & Intervention webpage, which provides reporting information, board policies, and a form for reporting incidents.

Know the Difference

Conflict

A disagreement or argument between students that does not necessarily meet the legal definition of bullying.

Bullying

Repeated or severe conduct that substantially interferes with a student's education, safety, or well-being under Illinois law.

Cyberbullying

Bullying carried out through electronic communication that may also be addressed by schools when it substantially disrupts the educational environment.


Follow local education coverage at The Geneseo Current