Will County Executive Committee met Dec. 10.
Here is the minutes provided by the committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Mr. Fricilone led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. ROLL CALL
Chair Mimi Cowan called the meeting to order at 10:01 AM
| Attendee Name | Title | Status | Arrived |
| Mimi Cowan | Chair | Present | |
| Meta Mueller | Vice Chair | Present | |
| Herbert Brooks Jr. | Member | Present | |
| Mike Fricilone | Member | Present | |
| Kenneth E. Harris | Member | Late | |
| Tyler Marcum | Member | Present | |
| Jim Moustis | Member | Present | |
| Judy Ogalla | Member | Present | |
| Annette Parker | Member | Present | |
| Margaret Tyson | Member | Present | |
| Joe VanDuyne | Member | Present | |
| Rachel Ventura | Member | Present | |
| Denise E. Winfrey | Member | Present |
1. WC Executive Committee - Board Agenda Setting Meeting - Nov 12, 2020 10:00 AM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Tyler Marcum, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Harris |
(Ad-Hoc RNG Facility Committee)
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Jim Moustis, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Harris |
VI. NEW BUSINESS
1. RTA FY2021 Budget Presentation
(RTA)
Ms. Leanne Reddin introduced Mr. J. D. Ross and Ms. Bea Reyna Hickey, presented the RTA 2021 budget and gave an update on the current programs and service concerns due to COVID. Details are available on their RTA website.
Ms. Ventura clarified we have set the Will County budget and this is the RTA setting their budget, deciding how they are shifting their budget and presenting it to us.
Ms. Reddin stated the County does not pay us money directly. Sales tax are collected within the County, collected by the State and delivered to the RTA region. We set the funding allocations based on expected revenue. We give the information to the three operators and then they plan their respective budgets. This presentation represents the consolidation of the regional budget of the RTA and three operators for 2021.
Ms. Ventura continued based on the lower ridership, is there a shift in priorities? Is there a plan to deal with that? What can we do at the County level to help? I am a proponent of public transportation and I want to make sure we are pushing for and funding that. How can we help with your plan that might be different than what has happened in the past?
Ms. Reddin replied we are in a three step process and all three operators have made adjustments. We have done three budget amendments during 2020 to address the changes in ridership and revenue. We are statutorily required to put together our 2021 budget by the end of this year. Another step is the push for additional federal aid. We are planning to pass a budget with big asterisks and a big hole. It is predicated on trying to find additional relief funds. There are a lot of conversation going on at the federal arena. We are hoping for the best and planning for the worst. We will be pushing for additional revenue sources to weather the storm so we are here and operating when ridership returns. Metra and Pace made significant cuts to their operating budget. The three operators have done a lot of work in adjusting their operations and planning how they can save money and stretch money. Early in 2021 we will begin an effort to think about the longer term strategic recovery and what will our region, transit and the workforce will look like.
Ms. Ventura stated I think it would be helpful if our Legislative Committee pushed for funding in the State and Federal agendas.
2. Authorizing Letter of Intent Setting Forth the Essential Terms for Amendments to the Host Agreement with Waste Management
(Discussion)
Speaker Cowan stated items #2, #3 and #4 are linked and will be part of the discussion at the Committee of the Whole on Monday. We want to be able to do these as a group. We don’t have a ton of specifics, but we want to get these on the agenda because we are hopeful we will have the details we need to move forward on Thursday. This is a time sensitive matter.
Mr. Palmer stated if the Board is okay with this, we will continue to finalize the outstanding details and have everything for Thursday.
Mr. Harris arrived at this juncture.
Motion to Save Space on County Board Agenda for Waste Management Agreement
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
Mr. Olson stated this is our off-taker agreement, the revenue we will get from the sale of gas from the landfill. We are working with Waste Management because we want to make sure we have all the gas. When we put 100% toward that we will maximize our revenue. There are some blanks in the contract, because we have not approved Item #2. We will fill in those blanks once we have an agreement on the Waste Management gas. We will fill in the minimum amount we would commit, be the fixed priced we agreed to and would be in the neighborhood of 66% of the volume, but it will vary. The maximum amount would be tied to the maximum amount going through the RNG Plant. We would affix the MMBTU for the maximum that would go through the plant. The designed approved in May by the Board was 4,500 scfm coming out of the landfill and expandable to 6,900 scfm. The change will cost an extra $4 million upfront, but will probably save $9 million or more in the long run; the Board felt that was the way we should go. US Venture is the off-taker we agreed to work with. They have been extremely easy to work with to extend these dates because we have had a long period without an agreement with Waste Management. The deadline, before any penalties is June 1, 2022. It is getting tight because we do not have the SCS Agreement in final form. They have added some additional items. I would like the Board to give us flexibility and allow a negotiate and execute option. I e-mailed SCS last night because I have not received the final version of their Agreement. The fixed price of $11.25 is well above the market and we want to keep that. We might end up changing the date or having a clause that will allow for some consideration. We are going through a pandemic and there are reasons some of this is being extended and they have been accommodating for that. This agreement pays us for the gas we put into the pipe. We already have the pipeline and the interconnector agreements approved by the Board. Once we know about that we will begin that process as well. All of this hinges on items #2 and #4.
Mr. Moustis stated I am not in favor of giving authorization to negotiate and execute. Occasionally, there might be a situation for that, but this is not one of them. This is a very important project with a lot of money involved. Certainly, you can negotiate, but the Board should see the agreement before it is executed. If there had to be an expedited timeline, maybe I could agree to having Leadership look at it or it could come back to the Executive Committee. Since we are meeting remotely, we can get together pretty quickly. Minimally, it should require the review of the Executive Committee before it is executed. The State’s Attorney’s Office advises us, so make sure their office along with Mr. Helston, has time to fully vet it. I don’t think such an important project should not get the final approval from the Board.
Mr. Olson stated I understand what you are saying and it makes sense. However, if we have to wait until a full Board meeting, I don’t want to lose the chance to keep this agreement with US Venture. It is possible everything will come together and next week we can insert the numbers, and maybe we could execute the agreement. Mr. Guzman has reviewed and approved this agreement. We have gone back and forth many times with this agreement. The reason I sent it to you was because they have approved it. It is just the blanks cannot be filled in until the Waste Management agreement is in place or we have an agreement the Board has approved.
Speaker Cowan stated we understand the time pressure and we could easily call a special meeting to let the Board weigh in.
Mr. Moustis stated I am sure our Speaker will do the best she can to accommodate the timeline, but it should come to the full Board
Mr. Olson stated I understand, this is a very big thing for the County. If you can do a meeting quickly I doubt we will lose any time.
Mrs. Ogalla stated there is a lot of information and if you have not been attending meetings all along, this is confusing. There are so many parts I think we need to look at it and understand before we give permission to do anything. Staff always wants to move forward quickly, but staff is not accountable, we are. I would also support not doing that.
Speaker Cowan stated that is precisely why we are planning the Committee of the Whole on Monday to shed light on what has happened, how it happened and why it has happened. Hopefully, we will have further details to fill in what we want to happen so that when we get to the Board Meeting Thursday, all Board Members will have a better grounding on where we are at, where we want to go and how we want to get there. If we don’t have all the details, we will hold off.
Mr. Moustis asked are we are putting on an a motion to negotiate? Are we placing this on the agenda as a negotiated agreement to be executed by the Board?
Mr. Palmer stated the motion is to negotiate and if we can hammer out all the details, the Resolution can be amended to say execute the agreements. If they are still negotiating they will have to bring it back to the Board. There are some pieces that are waiting to fall into place and if they fall into place everything could be approved together.
Speaker Cowan stated this is to hopefully, get the completed agreement put on the Board agenda for a vote next week. If we do not get all the details then we will do something else. This is in the hopes we get all the details so then we can have a full conversation and decide whether we are moving forward.
Mr. Moustis clarified this is not giving them permission to negotiate and execute, it has to come back for the Board to execute or approve the agreement.
Mr. Palmer stated originally Mr. Olson asked for authorization to negotiate and execute a contract. Mr. Moustis is saying no, we are giving you the ability to negotiate and get it to final form, but until you have it in final form, it is not finalized by the Board. Mr. Olson would have to bring it back to the Board for final action and that is consistent with what Mr. Moustis is saying. Occasionally, we get Resolutions that are to negotiate and execute, then the Board is done and the
Executive Branch finishes the work separately. Most of the time it has been negotiate, bring a final draft to the Board and they take final action. If we get it to final form before next Thursday, the Resolution would be amended to say execute because it is done. They have to negotiate to get it to final form so the Board can take final action on it.
Mrs. Tatroe stated what you really want to do is put this agreement on the agenda to be approved. I believe they already had authority to negotiate, which is why they are in the middle of negotiating now. You do not need additional authority to negotiate. If it is not finalized by County Board, then you will vote to table it.
Mrs. Parker clarified we will see the final negotiated price at Thursday’s Board meeting.
Speaker Cowan added if we don’t we will motion to table.
Mr. Olson stated we have the minimum and maximum price and we cannot do that until we get the Waste Management agreement.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Dean Olson)
Mr. Olson stated this an agreement with SCS and Harbour. SCS was hired through an RFP process to do the design work and Harbour is doing the build. The Board wanted Harbour because of their experience with the labor agreements and they have done many successful projects for the County. We have a draft agreement but I wanted a final version for you. I only had a redline version before this meeting and that is why you do not have the agreement. The attorney for the company was ill causing a delay. They are having problems with the labor agreement, which they have known about since the beginning. Harbor resolved those on Friday. They have inserted a new clause related to that and Mr. Guzman will have to look over the clauses they added. Once it is all there, we will give you a clean version. When we give them notice to proceed, their schedule is 14 months. I wanted to have this approved this month because then it goes to SCS’s Board and we could give them the notice to proceed in January. If it is pushed back to the January Board meeting, then this will be pushed back to February. We hope to be able to give you a clean version by next Thursday.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
Ms. Ventura asked is this something we do and we are expanding? Is this something new where we are reading license plates to give tickets?
Speaker Cowan stated we are not doing anything. The cameras are operated by the Villages of Monee and Frankfort and their police departments. This agreement gives them space to do it.
Mr. Ronaldson stated these are the first that will go on the county’s highway system. They may be in the county, but within the municipality.
Ms. Ventura asked are these mostly for speeding tickets? What is the goal?
Mr. Ronaldson replied they are not related to tickets at all. It is a way to read license plates. It populates in the system the police departments have if they are looking for a particular license.
Speaker Cowan stated from the presentations, it a system where an alert would be put out and they could track in real time, a stolen vehicle or a vehicle suspected of carrying an abducted child and find it.
Ms. Ventura stated I understand the importance of that. I feel this is a huge overreach of our government to track the whereabouts of citizens. I am a strong no. I don’t know how the people in Frankfort and Monee feel about this, but I don’t want the government tracking us.
Ms. Mueller stated I agree with Ms. Ventura. I have been a no since we started discussing this. I have some issues with the tracking and the data. The public should know if their data is stored in a law enforcement agency’s database and there is not enough we can do to protect that right now.
Mr. Weigel stated there has been several carjackings in the Frankfort, Mokena and New Lenox area. Criminals come in from Chicago and Cook County in stolen cars. With the license plate readers law enforcement can apprehend them before they steal someone else’s car. They murdered one person while taking their car. This is a very important project. They already have license plate readers on some village roads, not county roads. They would like to expand the program into different areas, such as Laraway Road, for vehicles coming into New Lenox, Mokena and Frankfort. They would store the information for 30 days and it would only be used by the police departments. There are a lot of strict rules in the agreement as far as use of this information. The Public Works and Transportation Committee forwarded this to you for approval and they are in favor of it. I urge you to vote for this for the welfare of the citizens in this area.
Mr. Balich stated I agree with Ms. Ventura and Ms. Mueller; I don’t want the government to know anything about me. It is wrong to have a program where they can track you. The more the government knows about what is happening, the more secure we are supposed to feel, but I don’t want the government tracking me. I don’t want them to know where I go and what I do. I am always going to vote no against the government.
Mr. Van Duyne stated I agree 100% with Mr. Weigel, everythingverything he said is accurate. It has been through the Transportation Committee and a majority of the committee wanted to move it along for approval. Anyone with a cell phone or credit card, the government already knows, in real time, where you are at all times. This provides information to police departments for very violent crimes. They are not looking for people speeding. There is a license plate number entered into the system for one particular vehicle or individual that has done something very heinous, they are looking for. I am in favor of providing our police departments with every tool we can to stop these people.
Mr. Brooks stated I am torn between the two sides. I can see both sides, the good and bad. In law enforcement the more cameras, the more crime they can solve. I think that outweighs all the other aspects. I agree with everything everyone says; too much government, too much tracking, but it does help law enforcement solve crimes. I will be a yes on this.
Mr. Moustis stated if you are worried about data collection, throw away your cellphone, never get on the internet or Facebook. You are tracked everywhere by your phone. This is not to keep personal data on individuals. It is to do observation on traffic to help prevent crime and solve it in a quick manner. I will be in support of this. It is not the government collecting data, it is the Google and Facebooks of the world.
Mrs. Ogalla asked is this data is real time? If something happens in Monee and the vehicle travels past a camera and is headed for Frankfort, in real time the information will be gathered and forwarded on to the police in both areas.
Mr. Ronaldson replied the way it was explained, is the alert will come up in the system and it is real time.
Mrs. Ogalla asked are these devices easy to see?
Mr. Ronaldson replied it would depend on where exactly they place them. It is a six inch camera on a sign post they can put in the ROW. We will help determine exactly where it is placed so it is safe, but it is just a camera on a post.
Mrs. Ogalla asked will the public know where the cameras are? Will it be open to the public? These criminals come from the City and will it be known or searchable by them? Can the locations be changed?
Mr. Ronaldson replied we will know where they are at because there has to be an individual permit at each location. The first locations are listed in the Resolution. If you wanted to dig for it, you could find the information. There will not be a sign saying camera ahead.
Mrs. Ogalla stated if we identify where they are; criminals will avoid the area for that reason.
Mr. Ronaldson stated if law enforcement agencies thought the locations were compromised they could petition us to move them.
Mrs. Berkowicz stated they are not tracking residents or people driving . The purpose is only to be able to access the information in the event of a crime. That is not monitoring and tracking people’s whereabouts. The tracking information is already going out with all of our electronics and cellphones. The main purpose of law enforcement is to keep us safe. They are dealing with the ease of transportation between the cities and this provides vital of equipment for them. Most of our municipalities have seen an increase in crime; kidnapping, carjacking and such and it is alarming to people. Because this is very sensitive to people and they are concerned about personal rights and privacy, is it possible for the County to put a survey on their Facebook page and ask for input from the residents? Ask them how they feel about providing law enforcement with the ability to access information in the case of a crime. Perhaps we could take the data and assure the concerned individuals. I think the safety of our residents is crucial and our law enforcement needs the resources that are available to help them prevent, prosecute and solve crimes.
Speaker Cowan reiterated this is not a project of the County or the Will County Sheriff’s department. The County nor the Sheriff is accessing this data. These are cameras owned and operated by the municipalities. We are not taking part in this. We are potentially lending them the space to host the cameras.
Ms. Koch stated vehicle crime in particular, is a big concern and Mr. Moustis and I hear that throughout our District. Even though we don’t know what the tactic will be, we should offer this tool to law enforcement officers as an additional tactic to possibly reduce vehicle crimes and I don’t think it is especially invasive to the citizens. I think it might help more than harm. If it does nothing, then we can revise our opinion later. Since this is not a County project, I think us offering the ability for local law enforcement to offer this tactic is fine by me and I would urge everyone to vote for it as well so we can offer this to the law enforcement agencies to reduce the vehicle crime.
Mrs. Parker stated this was voted down the first time in Committee. Why is it being approved now? Are people more confident and comfortable that the information will not be stored? What was the change?
Speaker Cowan replied I am not sure there was a change; we asked for more information and they provided it. We said we would give members an opportunity to review the additional information. The municipalities have an agreement with the company who has the cameras and does the video hosting and they don’t store data more than 30 days. That was one of the questions we asked. That is an agreement and could change between the municipalities and the company at any time. Those were some of the details we wanted more information about and we brought it back for further discussion.
Ms. Ventura stated I understand the need for safety, but we have seen ourther civil liberties stripped back I the name of safety. Particularly, the Patriot Act; the NSA did whatever they wanted with the data, including tracking Americans. We cannot guarantee they are only storing this for 30 days and the police are the only ones that will see it. As for the social media, the Federal government is tracking the data and whether it should be broken out and we have yet to see how that plays out. The big difference is, it is a choice versus being forced upon you. It is a private company versus the government. Our tax dollars run the government and the government makes those choices for the people versus people making those choices. If I want to use Facebook, that is a personal choice and if I choose to stop using it, I can stop. It is not our government forcing something upon us, using taxpayer dollars. As far as allowing the space, I would like to see more information from the local areas doing this. If they have done it for a year or two, can they show a direct correlation? To me this is just oversight and there are plenty of roadways they can put the cameras on and I don’t see why the County needs to be the one providing the space. If they work with the State Police, they can use it on state highways and it would seems those are more likely traveled versus the County roads. I think there are a lot of steps that could be taken before this. We have to decide if this is a choice we are making for our residents. Safety and freedom is on both ends of this and there is a fine balance in between. I don’t feel this is an appropriate way to go, especially with the way government has used data in the past.
Mr. Fricilone stated the local governments asking for this have already approved it for use in their municipalities. They are asking us for authority to put these cameras on county roads that go through their municipalities. As representatives of their citizens in their municipalities they have approved these cameras and they are using cameras within their municipalities, they are on roads they are in charge of. They are asking us to allow them to put a camera on county roads that run through their municipalities so their municipality is covered. They have approved it, representing the citizen they have of those municipalities. I am in favor of this.
Mr. Weigel stated the reason this was turned down, was to get more information. It was a vote to not forward it to the County Board at that time because we did not have enough information. It was not because they did not like the idea, they just did not have enough information. As far as collecting license plate information, every time you go on the tollway your license plate information is collected by the government, the Tollway Commission and we don’t know what they do with it. These things are all over, they are not something new.
Mr. Balich stated I don’t have to use the toll road, carry my cellphone or use Facebook, but if you are driving down the street most people are not thinking their license plates are being tracked. It is one more step toward government overreach. It is wrong. I dead against this.
Mrs. Tatroe stated there is one provision in the contract still under review by our office; that is the requirement that they destroy data within 30 days. The concern we have is that it is a violation of the local records act. You need permission from the State Archivist to destroy it and they can only be destroyed only after a certain amount of time. We put in a call to the State Archive to see if there are special guidelines with regard to this type of data. It may stay the same or it may change depending on what information we get.
Speaker Cowan asked do you expect to have that information by next Thursday?
Mrs. Tatroe replied I hope so. Usually, we get responses quickly. We made the call several days ago and left a message. To my knowledge, we have not gotten a call back, but we will try to call again today.
Mr. Moustis sked what are we really looking at here? This is not about cameras that read license plates. The municipalities are part of the public and the municipalities and the residents of those municipalities own the ROW along with the rest of the taxpaying public. We allow numerous uses for our public ROW, whether it is fiber optics, pipelines, poles and 5-G. There are people who don’t like 5-G; are we going to allow that on our public ROW. This is about the use of public ROW. Whether you agree or disagree with the purpose of it, is secondary. That is like saying you are against fossil fuels so we should not allow any pipelines in the ROW; or I think fiber optic or overhead lines cause cancer, let’s not let that go in. This is about the use of a public ROW and whether it is appropriate or not for the public ROW to be used for that purpose. I think that is what we should be looking at. We let a lot of uses on our public ROW for the private sector, this is for the public sector and those people who live in municipalities have every right to that ROW as does anyone else.
Speaker Cowan stated I have stated publically I think there needs to be state law that dictates how this information is stored and used. It is not just used in the moment, it is used after the fact. I have deep concerns about the privacy rights of individuals as many other Board members have stated. The agreement is between the municipality and a company and can be changed at any time. I would strongly encourage any municipality who wants to do this to seek a state law first that protects the rights of citizens regarding this technology. Someone said this is not monitoring and I think that is a subjective opinion. I think some people would absolutely consider this monitoring when it is taking a video of all the cars going by and storing the information; that seems like monitoring to me. The difference between your cellphone and credit card data is that the government needs a subpoena to access that information. There have been notable cases where people have committed heinous crimes and the government cannot get into the cellphone without a subpoena. This is quite different that that; this is everyone being monitored. In terms of social media, yes you are being tracked, but that is an opt-in process you can choose to opt-out of it. I have deep reservations about this going forward. If this was the Sheriff’s Department asking to do it for the County, I would absolutely be a no until there was a state law in place to dictate how the data would be used, how it would be accessed and how it would be stored. We are not the ones doing this, we are offering our space, which I feel a little gray area about and I am torn. I am not exactly sure I am going to vote.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [9 TO 4]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member SECONDER: Tyler Marcum, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne NAYS: Cowan, Mueller, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [9 TO 4]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Joe VanDuyne, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne NAYS: Cowan, Mueller, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Marguerite Kenny)
Ms. Janine Farrell reviewed the zoning case.
Mrs. Adams announced no one from the public signed up to speak on this case.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Marguerite Kenny)
Ms. Lisa Napolis reviewed the zoning case.
Mrs. Ogalla asked what do they intend to use the accessory building for? Ms. Napolis replied their proposed use is for personal storage.
Mrs. Adams announced no one from the public signed up to speak on this case.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Lisa Napoles)
Ms. Lisa Napolis stated this morning we received a request to table this until January by Mr. McGrath who is representing the owners in this case.
Mrs. Adams suggested having the item remanded to the Land Use Committee for January. Otherwise, it will stay at the Executive Committee.
Mr. McGrath stated my client needs to review this since the variance was denied and may go a different route. I am asking that it be remanded back so we can determine what we want to do.
Mrs. Adams announced no one from the public signed up to speak on this case.
| RESULT: REMANDED [UNANIMOUS] Next: 1/12/2021 10:30 AM TO: Will County Land Use & Development Committee
MOVER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Janine Farrell)
Ms. Janine Farrell reviewed the zoning case.
Mrs. Adams announced no one from the public signed up to speak on this case.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Janine Farrell)
Ms. Janine Farrell reviewed the zoning case.
Mrs. Adams announced no one from the public signed up to speak on this case.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Jim Moustis, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [12 TO 1]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey NAYS: Ogalla |
(Brian Radner)
Mr. Marcum stated usually we do not usually approve these unless there is a special circumstance. Is there a special circumstance for this?
Ms. Farrell stated the applicant applied for the zoning action. It never went to public hearing. We reviewed the case, and did all the work on it and prepped it for public hearing then we received comments from the Health Department saying the proposed building was too close or on top of the septic field. Because of that the applicant decided to withdraw his request.
Ms. Ventura stated you mentioned we normally do not return fees unless it is something that the County has done because the work has already been done. I am assuming work was done, so I will be a no on returning the fees because there was nothing done on our part in error.
Mrs. Ogalla asked were they not aware this was too close to the septic field at the time they were proposing this? Is there any other place they could locate this on the property?
Ms. Farrell replied at the time of application, we always talk with the applicants about the approvals that will be needed throughout the building process, which includes the Health Department. There are other places within the property it could be moved. The building could have been downsized so the variance would not have been needed and it could have fit somewhere else on the property. It is my understanding the applicants wanted a very specific building and a very specific location. When that was not able to be achieved due to the septic field he decided to withdraw the request.
Mrs. Ogalla asked was the septic field existing? Are there any other buildings on the property?
Ms. Farrell replied yes the septic field was existing. There is a residence on the property.
Mrs. Ogalla asked when you have a conversation with the property owner is it made clear that they cannot build on or near the septic field?
Ms. Farrell replied yes, we advise them of that.
Mrs. Adams indicated there was no one wishing to speak on this matter.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [0 TO 13]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Judy Ogalla, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member NAYS: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Colin Duesing)
Mr. Duesing reviewed the attached PowerPoint presentation with proposed text amendments.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Colin Duesing)
15. Authorizing and Appropriating Funds for the Purchase of Bodycams for the Sheriff's Department
(Chief Viduna)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Judy Ogalla, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Jen Alberico / Julie Shetina)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Judy Ogalla, Member SECONDER: Joe VanDuyne, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Judy Ogalla, Member SECONDER: Joe VanDuyne, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair SECONDER: Margaret Tyson, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Margaret Tyson, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Margaret Tyson, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Jim Moustis, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Margaret Tyson, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
Ms. Ventura asked for an explanation of this Resolution.
Mr. Tkac explained these are for 13 under counter cash drawers at the Clerk's Office.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Dave Tkac)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Dave Tkac)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Dave Tkac)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Dave Tkac)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair SECONDER: Jim Moustis, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Dave Tkac)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Dave Tkac)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Margaret Tyson, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Dave Tkac)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Thomas Murray)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Thomas Murray)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Wendie Garlich)
Ms. Ventura asked for additional information on this Resolution.
Ms. Garlich stated we have had this grant for the last eight years. In July the Board authorized me to apply for these grant funds.. This Resolution is to authorize the execution of the grant agreement.
Ms. Ventura asked are these for the Pace service?
Mrs. Ogalla stated this program is for transportation for the elderly. We get grant money for various areas. Some of it is specific to the older Americans and the other is for people with disabilities. We use the grants to pay for the service.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Wendie Garlich)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair SECONDER: Margaret Tyson, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Discussion)
Speaker Cowan stated we have had a Disaster Proclamation in affect related to COVID for some time. The plan going forward is to extend it by quarters. Hopefully, we will not need to extend this beyond March 31st.
Mr. Palmer stated we did this declaration earlier this year and it gives us qualifications for funding available from the State. It officially states we are dealing with a disaster, whatever it may be. I heard we are going to extend three months and assess where we are. We can continue to extend them, as we have already this year. The most recent declaration took us through the end of the year and this declaration will take us to March 31, 2021. It allows us to qualify for other funding streams by the fact Will County has declared a Proclamation of disaster.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair SECONDER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Bruce Tidwell)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Pace)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Margaret Tyson, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
Mrs. Adams indicated there were no Proclamations this month.
49. Appointment(s) by the County Executive
1. December Appointments to Boards and Commissions 2020
(County Executive)
Ms. Ventura asked for clarification on which appointments are moving forward.
Mr. Palmer stated per the County Board rules, the County Executive’s Office is to supply a list of all the expected appointments for the upcoming year. It is to give you a heads up of the appointments expiring. I believe the new County Executive’s staff has reviewed the list and found some defunct Boards or people who have not been reappointed and are still holding, so they may have added some names, which is the large list you may be referring to. There were two sets of appointments submitted in November by Ms. Winfrey and the current County Executive has approved those. There were some edits and the new letterhead was put on. The compensation information is on the forms now, per the County Board rules. The Investment Board nor the Joliet Arsenal Board, receive compensation. There is no action required when the County Executive provides the full list of upcoming appointments. The County Executive’s Office maintains a list of all appointments and if you have someone who is interested in being appointed, they can submit their name to the County Executive for consideration. All the information is on their website.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
Speaker Cowan asked to save space on the County Board agenda for the following Resolutions: Award of Contract to Schwartz, Setting the Salary for the County Executive's Legal Counsel and Correcting Clerical Error on Ordinance #20-407.
Speaker Cowan stated the third Resolution is entitled; Resolution Correcting Clerical Errors in Ordinance #20-407, the Annual Budget and Appropriation Ordinance for FY2021. When we passed the budget at the full County Board meeting, there was a clerical error. We need to take steps to rectify that.
Mrs. Tatroe stated after the November meeting, it came to our attention that the attachment to the Budget Ordinance was not the correct attachment. It was not the budget that was passed out of the Finance Committee, so we have recommended the County Board put it back on their agenda. We have also recommended and publication has been ordered to notify the public that there will be a discussion and a new Ordinance on the County Board agenda to correct the clerical error to the budget. This will ensure the numbers you thought you were voting on are actually there.
1. Motion to Save Space on the County Board Agenda for Resolution Awarding Contract to Schwartz for Building Demolition
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Tyler Marcum, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
Ms. Ventura stated there was something brought up at one of the Committee meetings and Mrs. Tatroe said she was starting an opinion, but it was put on hold because it needed staff's direction. I spoke with Mr. Palmer to see if that was going to the Board. I have some edits to a Resolution previously submitted. Could I get an update? Is an opinion going to be sought on that.
Mrs. Tatroe stated there has been an opinion requested and we are working on it. We have not yet issued it, but we will be.
IX. COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. Land Use & Development
2. Finance
3. Public Works & Transportation
4. Diversity & Inclusion
5. Public Health & Safety
6. Legislative & Judicial
7. Capital Improvements
8. Executive
X. PUBLIC COMMENT
Mrs. Adams announced there were no public comments.
XI. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT / ANNOUNCEMENTS
XII. EXECUTIVE SESSION - NECESSARY TO DISCUSS PENDING LITIGATION
1. Motion to go into Executive Session for Discussion of Pending Litigation at 12:35 PM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
Due to technical issues with the WebEx program, there was no Executive Session held at this meeting.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
1. Approval of County Board Agenda
(Discussion)
| RESULT: APPROVED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Tyler Marcum, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
https://willcountyil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=15&ID=3927&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up