Will County Legislative and Policy Committee met Feb. 13.
Here is the minutes provided by the Committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
Chair Suzanne Hart called the meeting to order at 9:05 AM
Suzanne Hart Chair Present
Ray Tuminello Vice Chair Absent
Kenneth E. Harris Member Present
Tim Kraulidis Member Absent
Tyler Marcum Member Present
Donald A. Moran Member Absent
Judy Ogalla Member Late
Annette Parker Member Present
Lauren Staley-Ferry Member Present
Also Present: J. Moustis and H. Brooks.
Present from State's Attorney's Office: M. Tatroe.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Mr. Brooks led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Legislative & Policy Committee - Regular Meeting - Jan 9, 2018 9:00 AM
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Kenneth E. Harris, Member
SECONDER: Tyler Marcum, Member
AYES: Hart, Harris, Marcum, Parker, Staley-Ferry
ABSENT: Tuminello, Kraulidis, Moran, Ogalla
IV. MISCELLANEOUS LEGISLATIVE REPORTS
1. Legislative Update from Curry & Associates
V. OLD BUSINESS
VI. NEW BUSINESS
1. Disc Re: Membership to Illinois Association of County Board Members
Mrs. Hart stated we belong to multiple Illinois associations. We have discussed whether to join or continue membership on all associations, ICCU, Illinois Association of Counties and the IACBM. The Executive's Office has some invoices and is awaiting a decision.
Mr. Palmer indicated he was looking for direction. For years, multiple organizations have discussed consolidating under one organization similar to NACo with a group for leadership, large urban caucus, legislative and rural caucus. The ultimate goal is to advocate and fight for county issues. When IML speaks in Springfield they have a large voice because they are unified. With all these different groups, the counties don't have that. The Executive believes unifying under one group would be good. We do not actively participate in all the organizations. I have been holding a couple of bills, because of talk of a unified structure and not paying a bill for an organization that may not exist.
Mrs. Hart stated the IACBM bill is minimal for what we get. I am active with the group, talk with Ms. Kelly Murray and it is very informative.
Mr. Moustis stated the IACBM is a strong organization for downstate and rural counties. They regularly give nice legislative updates.
Mr. Palmer stated the dues for UCCI are $5,000 annually but we usually get some of that back for participation.
Mrs. Traynere gave details the UCCI training she attended as a new Board Members.
Mr. Palmer stated IAC is an umbrella organization with membership from UCCI and Metro Counties, at this time the organization is a defunct. We have not been a dues paying member for the past several years. There are only four or five counties part of that currently. If the larger organization happens, I believe they will fold into that.
Mr. Moustis stated IAC gets funding from Nationwide; they have a good revenue stream, with Cook County getting a majority of the funding. They all play a different role and I don't know if they will all collapse into one.
Mr. Palmer stated $800,000 of the $1 million in funding was going to Cook County. If you participate in Nationwide, they give a rebate to the county.
Mrs. Hart stated they were planning to give money to the Forest Preserve Foundation and hospital and start at zero funding.
Mr. Moustis stated we have our own internal difficulties and conflicts with who represents us at the associations; is it the County Board or the County Executive? I have concerns when the Executive represents us, he is not a legislative, policy person. He can bring it back, but he cannot take a legislative position for this county or this County Board. Sometimes people get the impression what the Executive supports is what the Board supports and that is not always the case. We need to coordinate our own efforts so we are on the same page. It is not who is sitting there, it is that we have a unified position.
Mr. Palmer stated the County Executive has never said he speaks for the County Board. When people have made the mistake of saying the County Board, I let them know we do not speak for the Board. The Federal Agenda, we have a joint effort, the State Agenda is a County Board product. The Executive has the prerogative and maintains he can take a position, he has to be clear it is not a Board position.
Mr. Moustis stated we need to coordinate our effort to make sure we are on the same page.
Mr. Palmer stated periodically Mr. Walsh and I have attended the countywide elected officials meeting in Chicago. Mr. Healy and Ms. Simms gave a presentation about this and I asked if you were aware. Will County should have a position on this. With the concept of this organization, there could be a place for countywide officials to be a caucus, with a relationship with County Board Members who serve on the LUCC or Rural Caucus. There has been discussion of having a collar county group with a lobbyist focused on just collar county issues. The issues of the collar counties and Cook County are in alignment and when fighting at the federal or state level we should be on the same page. Metro Counties had good intentions for the larger counties, I think the issues were more staffing and communication issues. If you do a LUCC in the organization, you will have the same counties together. St. Claire and Madison and college counties are big counties with the same issues. Do we want to be part of an organization that includes those counties? They will not have the same issues as the Metro Chicago counties, but there are issues, especially with the State that will be the same.
Discussion of adding the County Executive to the State Agenda took place.
Mr. Moustis stated the concept of Metro Counties was good. The other large counties, may have some similar issues but they don’t have other issues. An issue with Metro Counties was one county could veto anything and nothing ever went through. Cook County did come along, our issues became more unified and everyone took a more regional look at the legislation impacting everyone.
Mr. Palmer stated there is potential as Leaders change. Ms. Toni Preckwinkle is more aggressive in working with the collar counties and Chicago has reengaged more in the economic development concept because it is a regional effort. Mr. Lawler recently stated “we know Will is impacted by the freight, because of the Freight Study; and said their success is balanced on our success”.
Mrs. Hart stated when we go to NACo, we go as a state. Cook County carries a lot of weight at NACo.We had issues with Nationwide and what they did for us is something they would have only done with a Chicago, LA, New York, but they did it for Will County because of Chicago.
Mr. Moustis stated Ms. Preckwinkle has evolved. At her first NACo meeting she said “I only care about Cook County”. Over time she has embraced regional issues and understands the success of Will County helps with the success of Cook County.
Mrs. Hart stated we need to keep this dialog going. Until we know what is going on, we should keep these memberships.
Mr. Moustis stated not only should we keep these memberships, we should be active, especially, at the state level going to meetings in Springfield or Bloomington. It gives us an opportunity to participate at a low cost. I still think we need an organization to represent the collar counties and Cook County. I think the Chicago Regional Growth Initiative has helped us come together. That has given us a new perspective of cooperation.
Mrs. Ogalla arrived at this juncture.
Mr. Brooks stated there are two black organizations and when Ms. Winfrey and I attend their meetings we hear repeats of the national issues.
Mr. Moustis stated some of the special interest groups do repeat a lot of what NACo has to say; but there is some very particular focus on issues and I think it is important. I want to know the problems and how can we incorporate them. There are other specialty groups. I think someone should probably attend the Hispanic groups; they have specific issues, we have a large Hispanic population in Will County and we should be aware of the issues. If anyone is interested in joining, they should let us know.
Mr. Palmer stated we will pay the UCCI invoice.
2. Establishing 2018 Federal Legislative Agenda & Priorities
(Nick Palmer) Mr. Palmer reviewed the draft Federal Agenda attached to the packet.
Mr. Moustis asked is there going to be additional grant money from the federal government for substance abuse?
Dr. Burke replied they are allocating $6 billion.
Mr. Moustis asked should we acknowledge grant money is going to be available?
Dr. Burke stated they are block grants and come through the State.
Mr. Palmer stated I believe it is covered comprehensively. The first page of the substance abuse issue is the overview, Will County need, number of deaths, and our initiatives. We added information about the Problem Solving Courts to demonstrate a collaborative approach on all fronts. A review of the agenda continued.
Mr. Moustis asked have the new rounds of grants been funded?
Dr. Burke responded no, it was proposed by the President.
Mr. Moustis stated we should mention we are supportive of the $6 billion moving forward and it should be appropriated in the budget.
Mr. Palmer stated throughout the agenda we say “it is essential the funds flow into Illinois and Will County through these grants programs”. We have broad language, it is a legislative process that will take time and will continue to evolve. When we go to DC in April, we will have the current debate and will be submitting letters of support. We will tailor our message to where they are in the process.
Mr. Moustis stated if we are in general support of the NACo initiatives, we should add a page saying we are supportive of the NACo legislation, with no detail.
Mr. Palmer stated we could add a handout inside the agenda. Their conference is in two weeks and some of that could change. A review of the agenda continued.
A discussion of the Revised Sheriff’s Technology took place.
Mr. Moustis asked will we distribute the Freight Study to the delegation or take it with us?
Mr. Palmer answered we will take copies. Many of them received it when we were out there.
Mr. Moustis stated at the American Council of Engineering Companies awards, they acknowledged it is a significant piece of work; it was singled out as the most significant in its category. Mr. Palmer stated our vendor received the high honors award. They did not win the overall work. The Chicago Riverwalk was the overall winner; it was a $1 billion project. That recognition is important for us from a marketing and education standpoint. Mr. Randy Blankenhorn, Mr. Bob Schilerstrom from the Toll Authority, Mr. Kirk Dillard from RTA, many Cook County and Chicago officials and the big engineering companies were there. They see us moving forward and being recognized for the significant work we have done. We should mention that. Mr. Moustis suggested having the group come and present a duplicate award to the County at a Board Meeting. It is significant and highlights why this work is so important.
Mrs. Ogalla stated it is good we did the Freight Study and received this award, but there has to be follow through. I want to make sure we make efforts to be inclusive in all the things we are doing.
Mr. Moustis stated the reason for initiating the study was not only to help the logistic industry but to make it better for our residents to mitigate the impact.
Mrs. Hart asked should the Freight Study be included in the Federal Agenda; as it was in the State Agenda?
Mr. Palmer replied I don’t think it should be part of the Agenda. Last night Mr. Greuling and some Board Members presented the plan at Crest Hill. We have a meeting scheduled in eastern Will County with the Board Members and Mayors. The Mayors out there have worked together to start the process with truck routes. We are also meeting with the township officials. We are trying to bring it all together. We are starting there because the Mayors and Township Officials have been interested in participating. It is a smaller area, not as negatively impacted and we want to learn from the past mistakes. The Board has talked about prioritizing the truck routing, overweight and oversized permits. Implementation is the key, doing a study and not implementing it doesn’t do much.
Mr. Moustis stated I believe signage, truck routing and permitting are things we can implement quickly.
Mr. Palmer stated as we go through this process, we will sharpen our focus on which projects need to be included on the list, what gaps are in the system that need to be improved and those could become an item for a future Federal Agenda.
Mr. Moustis discussed the April trip to DC, Board Members attending and agencies to visit.
Mrs. Hart stated I would like to add the FAA and also invite Mr. David Silverman.
Mr. Palmer reviewed the agencies the Members met with last year.
Mr. Moustis stated one year we met with the DOJ. They suggested grants we should apply for we were unaware of. There may be grants for the opioid crisis through the DOJ. They may deal more with enforcement, but there could be something we are unaware of. There are two components to the opioid crisis, enforcement and treatment. We tend to focus on the treatment, but keep in mind enforcement might be able to reduce addictions, by making it less available on the streets. We should ask Mr. Garson for suggestions. It is important who we visit; I don’t want to revisit the same agencies annually.
Mr. Palmer suggested the DOJ, Federal Highway, FAA and the Department of Ag. We have talked about exports, trade missions and reverse trade missions. I will talk with Mr. Garson and see what ideas he has. Our efforts with Waste Management is a separate issue and is not in the agenda.
Mr. Moustis stated that should not be part of the Federal Agenda, it is a completely different issue and needs its own focus.
Mr. Palmer stated we are working on this and have a call in with Representative Kinzinger’s Office. The recommendation was made to not put it in the book. We can have off line conversations and see where it will go. There have been discussions with the environmental groups about what they would like because of Midewin and future land preservation around Manhattan-Arsenal Road. We tell people that is not easy to get land transferred. The Army does not give up land unless they get something big in return. The land around Manhattan-Arsenal Road is not being built and it probably won’t be. The status quo is not hurting anyone, but there has been a push by Open Lands and Sierra Club. We have had discussions with them about desires to get land long term preserved. Materials from the former arsenal site and Midewin come into the landfill for free. It was a compromise; the Army still has buildings and materials to decommission and dispose of, they do that for free as part of the deed for the landfill.
A brief discussion took place regarding the control tower at Lewis Airport.
Mr. Palmer added Lewis Airport has been accepted into the controllers program. Once they have a tower, the bricks and mortar in the amount of $6 million; the Feds will fund the air traffic controllers. It is finding the capital dollars to build the tower. They have talked about the economic benefits of having a staffed towers.
Mrs. Hart stated there are other smaller airports with a tower.
Mr. Moustis asked Lewis Airport, according to the FAA is one of the top airports eligible; is it a matter of funding?
Mr. Palmer replied it is funding for the capital; if they had the funding they would build the tower and the FAA would staff. There has been conversations with the State, but the State does not have the revenues sources to fund. There could be private funding sources available.
Mrs. Hart indicated the Village of Romeoville has committed $1 million.
Mr. Moustis stated we have historically supported the airport. In the past we gave them money for their match for runway construction. We have been supportive of the airport. Do they have a revenue stream to finance? The only revenue stream I am aware of is fuel sales. Maybe additional fuel sales could support some debt. The DuPage Airport is so busy, I don’t think they could take in another plane.
Mrs. Ogalla stated they needed the extra space and moved the Civil Air Patrol from there to Bult Field.
RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS] TO: Will County Board
MOVER: Tyler Marcum, Member S
ECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member
AYES: Hart, Harris, Marcum, Ogalla, Parker, Staley-Ferry
ABSENT: Tuminello, Kraulidis, Moran
VII. OTHER NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Olson stated the State is trying to impose a cap on the Naperville recycling facility, greatly restrict the facility and putting it in jeopardy of closing. The EPA is not looking at the sites based on the amount of waste coming in, they deciding based on Chicago using 150,000 and Naperville using 530,000 would have a cap of 250,000 and Rockford with 370,000 and no cap. The EPA feels pressure to get all the sites under fiscal restraint. We could ask for a dedicated amount of funding for the household hazardous waste permanent facility program. This will ensure they don't take money from Naperville for the downstate areas. Many of our residents use this facility. It would take away two of our events and we would have to pay $60,000 a year. We are saving money by giving them $25,000 and sending our people to them. We want the site to stay open. I would like permission to talk to the other entities getting funding from the state for their hazardous waste facilities and work on legislation putting money into a fund they cannot sweep. It is too late for spring, maybe it could be passed over the next year.
Mr. Moustis asked how are we coming with the electronic recycling revenue? Are we still in limbo as to how the money is being distributed? Are we picking up the expenses locally because they don’t have the something in place?
Mr. Olson stated there is two types of funding. The State does not provide any funding for electronics. It all comes from the manufacturers and they are very difficult to bargain with. They want it wrapped and sent to a facility they want. They still cover a good amount of the electronics we drop off. They don’t cover the cost of wrapping, we hire someone to do that. In the past we did not have to do that; residents could just drop off their items. We have seven or eight sites allocated to us through the law passed last year and we will try to work under. We will stay within our own cap so we don’t overspend. The hazardous waste collections come from tipping fees. They get $2.22 per ton and have a surplus of $6 to $7 million. There is no reason why they should cap the sites. The only reason I can see for the capping is to put the money downstate because the current sites are Rockford, Chicago, Naperville and Lake County.
Mr. Moustis asked do we need to bring our legislators aware of this?
Mr. Olson stated the EPA would not mind our help as they do not want to lobby for themselves.
Mr. Moustis asked who changed this? Was it with the agency or legislator?
Mr. Olson indicated he would get the answers. It was an arbitrary decision to redistribute the funds. There may have been direction from the Governor to the EPA to manage the different budgets. We would like to get more money for our enforcement program, but they are not allocating that at this time.
Mr. Moustis asked was this done by an executive order? Was this done by the executive branch or the legislative branch? Is there actual legislation to change this?
Mr. Olson replied it is within the EPA, but I can’t tell you the exact person who gave the order to cap the facilities.
Mr. Moustis stated it has to be on the executive side and we need to talk to the executive branch and put some heat on there.
Mr. Olson stated by State law the City of Chicago gets a certain amount of money and the EPA has no say over it. The household hazardous waste facilities within Illinois have a budget, it is fixed and you know where it is going because it is in the State law. No one can arbitrarily say you are getting 250,000 even though you don’t use it and you are getting 250,000 even though you use 530,000. The amount of waste is the determining factor. It is not 250,000 no matter if you use it or not. They made a rash decision by deciding everyone will get the same. I think they are rethinking that concept. They are trying to do some budget management, but it does not make sense.
Mr. Moustis stated if you are going to pursue legislation that will say how the executive branch is going to distribute funding or how they will redo the appropriations to make more specific on how it is used; that is a tough road. It may not be the best avenue.
Mr. Moustis asked Mr. Olson to find out the best approach based on Mr. Hassert’s opinion.
Mr. Olson stated the only way you will know 100% is if it is in the law; otherwise it is arbitrary. They have $5 million in surplus. I will start the discussion and report back to the Committee.
VIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION
IX. PUBLIC COMMENT
X. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT / ANNOUNCEMENTS
XI. ADJOURNMENT
1. Motion to Adjourn at 10:27 AM
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Judy Ogalla, Member
SECONDER: Tyler Marcum, Member
AYES: Hart, Harris, Marcum, Ogalla, Parker, Staley-Ferry
ABSENT: Tuminello, Kraulidis, Moran
https://willcountyil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=15&ID=2916&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up