Will County Republican Caucus Committee met April 10.
Here is the minutes provided by the committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Ms. Kraulidis led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. ROLL CALL
Minority Leader Mike Fricilone called the meeting to order at 8:32 AM
| Attendee Name | Title | Status | Arrived |
| Mike Fricilone | Minority Leader | Present | |
| Judy Ogalla | Minority Whip | Late | |
| Jim Moustis | Member | Present | |
| Raquel M. Mitchell | Member | Absent | |
| Gretchen Fritz | Member | Present | |
| Donald Gould | Member | Present | |
| Steve Balich | Member | Absent | |
| Annette Parker | Member | Present | |
| Julie Berkowicz | Member | Late | |
| Frankie Pretzel | Member | Present | |
| Tom Weigel | Member | Present | |
| Debbie Kraulidis | Member | Present |
Present from State's Attorney's Office: K. Meyers.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Republican Caucus - Special Meeting - Mar 17, 2021 5:30 PM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Frankie Pretzel, Member SECONDER: Tom Weigel, Member AYES: Fricilone, Moustis, Fritz, Gould, Parker, Pretzel, Weigel, Kraulidis ABSENT: Ogalla, Mitchell, Balich, Berkowicz |
VI. NEW BUSINESS
1. American Rescue Plan
(Mimi Cowan)
Mr. Fricilone stated at the Executive Committee meeting we talked about ideas for the American Rescue Plan. I brought up, while we had a lot of good ideas, we have to look at the next plan that is coming out; the American Jobs Plan. If it passes, it will be investing in a lot of the things we talked about, including housing, broadband, water systems, transportation, workforce development, R&D job training, home health workers and VA hospitals. We have to make sure, like we did with the CARES Act, that groups are not getting boat loads of money from somewhere else and we are allocating money as well. Speaker Cowan was working on a plan, based on all the ideas we had so we could come to some decisions on how we are going to do the next allocations. The American Rescue Plan is going to be worked on at the Executive Committee. There will not be a separate Ad-Hoc Committee, like we did with CARES. If you want to keep abreast of that, you will want to attend the Executive Committee meetings. We are looking at May to potentially go to in-person Committee meetings; not the Committee of the Whole or the County Board meetings. For Committee meetings we have enough room to social distance. At the end of this meeting, let's talk about who is inclined to come and who is not so we can get a feel for who would like to do that or if they want to be virtual.
Mrs. Ogalla arrived at this juncture.
2. Discussion of County Board Agenda
Proclamations:
Mr. Fricilone reviewed the Proclamations.
Land Use & Development Committee:
Mr. Fricilone stated Land Use has not met yet. Does anyone have questions on the issues? The first one, they are talking about overturning the PZC decision. Mr. Gould and I talked about this. Last year, we authorized this landscape company to create space in an unincorporated area, abutting Lockport and Homer. It is in an industrial area. They are asking to be able to stack containers three high. Mr. Gould brought me up to speed this morning; most of the time we have said no; that two containers high was enough; so it did not look like a big container yard next to a port where you stack up containers. If you have any comments, it would be good to let the Land Use Committee know your thoughts ahead of time.
Mr. Weigel stated they just want five containers on the property and they are only allowed to have three. They would all be at ground level to hold their supplies. I don’t have a problem with it. There is no residential area around it. They did not want to pay $400,000 for a pole building and all the things they have to do for that. It is more secure for what they store than a pole building would be.
Mr. Fricilone stated if that is the case, then I would probably be in favor. I know where this is. I pulled over there the other day and it is in the middle of an industrial area in Lockport and Homer where distribution centers are popping up. There are no residential areas near it. It looks like a landscape development. If they are only doing one high, I don’t have a problem with that.
Mrs. Ogalla stated I talked with these people when they were at Land Use last month. It is definitely for the landscaping business. They will all be on the ground. The advantage is, once you put seed in and close it, mice will not be running in and out. It is a great idea and they are moveable. I suggested they paint them all the same color, put them on a solid surface and they are good with all of that. They just did not want to build anything. There is nothing around there, except warehouses at the back of the lot. This is an appeal, so we will need everybody to vote in favor of it. Is there anyone who would not support this? Mr. Balich is not here today, but he is in support of it.
Mr. Gould stated long before I was on the Board, the Board had always been consistent on these container policies. The reason is the volume of containers that come in and out of this County. I think the reason PZC turned this down was because we don’t want to set a precedence or get in a situation where these become an eye sore and we have containers stacked because we know what comes in and out of these yards. Several years ago, I had one in my district where they wanted to stack three high and the Board unanimously voted no. The Board, historically, has been very sensitive to this container issue. Developers can come in and promise a berm, but you are still going to be raising a crane and all kinds of things associated with these containers. If it is in an industrial area, it is a little different than the proposals have been in the past. From a historical perspective, the Board needs to be very sensitive to any container proposal. Once you open the door, you invite more proposals to increase the amount of containers we allow. That is why the PZC and the County Board, for a long time have been very sensitive to this issue.
Mrs. Ogalla stated they are not stacking them, they are putting landscaping materials inside.
Mr. Moustis stated there was a real concern about container storage, when we started getting the intermodals and we started getting a lot of containers. When you went down I-55 there was a sea of container storage yards, stocked six or seven high. We were concerned about storage containers, not how they would be used. We focused on storage, because they would ship the containers from Asia and they stayed here. It was less expensive for them to leave it here and manufacture new ones. It has flipped the other way, because now we ship agricultural products back to Asia. Now they are looking for containers, so we solved that problem. I think we need to be careful letting people use these. Mr. Fricilone, this is your area and if you support it, I will support it, if it is only adding two more containers. But, we do need to be pretty stingy on how we are going to let these containers be used. On the other hand, didn’t we approve them as housing material?
Mr. Weigel replied yes, we did.
Mr. Moustis continued so you can basically make a house of these containers.
Mr. Weigel stated there is a place on Briggs Street where they store roofing materials in these containers. About ten years ago, we approved allowing them to have more than three. They are all painted green and behind a berm so you can’t see them. There is a precedence since we have done this in the past.
Mrs. Ogalla stated this is not for stacking, this is to put landscaping materials inside. They agreed to paint them all the same color so they are not an eyesore. I don’t see in the Resolution that they will not be stacked, but that was the intent when I spoke with them. That is the difference here, it is specifically for a landscaping business. The cargo containers would be next to each other, painted the same color and on a surface that is agreeable to the Land Use Department. I hope everyone will support this.
Mr. Fricilone stated I am familiar with the area and I support it. I would ask Land Use to put in a condition that they not be stacked and that will take care of that part of it.
Mr. Fricilone reviewed the remaining Resolutions.
Mrs. Ogalla stated I thought there was going to be a public hearing for the text amendments, but I don’t see that on the agenda.
Finance Committee:
Mr. Fricilone reviewed the Resolutions.
Public Works & Transportation Committee:
Mr. Weigel reviewed the Resolutions.
Diversity & Inclusion Committee: No discussion.
Public Health & Safety Committee: No discussion.
Legislative & Judicial Committee: No discussion.
Capital Improvements Committee:
Mr. Fricilone indicated an update on the projects is attached.
Executive Committee:
Mr. Fricilone stated Item #1 is establishing an Agricultural Area Committee.
Mrs. Ogalla stated I want to hear why you are opposed to it. When I was first on the Board, I brought up doing Ag preservation. At that time, I was informed we did not have money for Ag preservation. I was informed, if an owner wants to put their land into conservation that was their business, but we did not have money at the County to do that. Now, this person has the opportunity to and it is his private property rights per State statutes, to make his land into an agricultural area. The first time it is ten years, thereafter it is for eight years and then they can get out, if they want to. If anyone were to inherit it, they would be able to continue or they could decide to get out of it. There is no cost to the County. It is this individual’s right to decide to put his farm into a conservation plan. I don’t understand why we would be opposed to it. We already have an established conservation area of 450 acres. This would be a way for a farmer to say what he wants to do with his property. The County needs to recognize it and people need to recognize it. People who live near the warehouses are in favor of farmland over warehouses because of the semis. This is a turning point. If we don’t look at this seriously and allow this individual to save his property, which has been in his family for 140 years; into an Ag area, what are we telling everybody in agricultural? I think we are telling them their land doesn’t matter. It does not bring in enough tax revenue for the County and therefore, we support other forms of economic development. Agricultural brings a lot to the community. It brings open spaces, which many people are very concerned about. At the Forest Preserve we gave permission to look into buying agricultural land along Jackson Creek in County Board District #2. It takes tax dollars to purchase the land and then it is off the tax rolls. Granted, they will continue to farm it until they have the dollars to bring it back to whatever state they can bring it to for Forest Preserve; that is a cost the taxpayers. This plan costs the taxpayers no money whatsoever and the property does not come off the tax rolls. The farmer will continue to pay taxes on the property, they will continue to grow crops that are put into the revenue stream and we have a lot of jobs generated. Local jobs are created from what the farmer has to do before he starts planting, when he gets the seed, fertilizer and equipment repaired. At harvest everything goes into the food chain. To me it makes sense. If we don’t say it makes sense to do some farmland preservation, we are going to be like Cook or DuPage Counties where all our land is taken up. Maybe that is what everyone wants. I would like to hear your arguments, you have heard mine. I am in support of this. We do Ordinances and things for the unincorporated areas, yet we are all thinking of the other areas that get incorporated. As an example, in Elwood we support the freight facilities. It is very disturbing to me.
Mr. Fricilone stated I thought we were waiting for an ASA opinion about eminent domain and how that relates to these Ag areas.
Mr. Meyers stated Mrs. Tatroe has a couple of opinions for you. I am not sure if she finished that one, we are waiting on a more pressing one she was writing last night.
Mrs. Ogalla asked what are we waiting on? What is the question?
Mr. Fricilone replied the question was if we needed land in an Ag area, for some reason, such as building a road; how does eminent domain come in? Does it change things? Does it delay things?
Mr. Weigel asked how does this protect the farmer? If he owns the land he can do whatever he wants with it, unless an entity wants to take eminent domain against them. I don’t know what additional protections this land needs. He owns it and he can determine what he wants to do with it. I don’t see why it is necessary.
Mr. Pretzel asked are we voting to establish a committee for an agricultural area? What are we voting on exactly?
Mrs. Adams replied you are not voting on the area, you are voting to set up the committee who would hear requests.
Mr. Fricilone asked why would we set up a committee to hear a request to be in the Ag area, if we have not set up the Ag area?
Mrs. Adams stated I thought, by statute, it was a member of the Board and farmers that make up the committee. They would hear the requests from those who want to be established as an Ag area. You need the committee first.
Mr. Pretzel asked what is involved with establishing a new committee? Do we determine how many people would sit on the committee? How do we move forward?
Mr. Moustis replied the committee is formed by State statute. Property owners can join and if they are in, there are mechanisms to get out. The committee would basically say this area can only be used as agricultural property and it cannot be interfered with. The statutes say, if you are going to do these agricultural areas, there is a structure to it.
Mr. Fricilone stated I agree with Mr. Pretzel; if we are voting for a committee then we are voting that we are okay with an Ag area.
Mr. Moustis stated absolutely, you are creating the Ag area.
Mr. Fricilone stated it is not just forming a committee, you are forming the Ag area and then the committee hears who wants to be in it.
Mr. Moustis stated this is to establish the Ag area. I was looking at this as a property right. I did not want to restrict farmers to use their property in any way they wanted. If you own the property, you don’t have to sell it. I got a letter from Mr. Schneidewind from the Farm Bureau. He thanked me for asking questions and said the Farm Bureau is supportive of farmers being able to do this voluntarily. He also said it won’t interfere with property rights, if it is being done voluntarily by a farmer. They are in support of it. Whether you like these projects or not, is immaterial for this discussion. I am concerned how it can affect public projects. I am not concerned about it stopping a warehouse from going in. It was stated, in some instances they won’t take the center line on a project like the Illiana, if they have to deal with an agricultural preservation area. There could be one in the middle of the project, and the project has to be moved at the cost of perhaps millions of dollars to avoid the agricultural preservation area. You still have the airport out there. If you put a few hundred acres strategically in the airport footprint, does that mean they can’t build the airport there? My understanding is, it does not stop eminent domain. These are the questions that came up. I think it would stop the Illiana dead in its tracks, if some day they wanted to take another look at it. Those are some of the issues.
Mr. Fricilone stated that is why we are still waiting for the ASA’s opinion on eminent domain.
Mr. Palmer stated the committee is one County Board Member and four active farmers. For the approval process, there is a 30 day notice publication and comments; the public hearing is by the Ag committee who receives the comments. Then, the Ag committee makes a recommendation for approval or denial to the County Board, with additions or exclusions. The County Board can approve or reject the proposals. The County Board has the ability to accept or reject the recommendations of this committee and can also add to or delete from the area. If we know there are public projects in the area, the Board would not approve those or delete the areas where we need to keep the ROW. There might be a way to get this done, without prohibiting public projects from going forward and creating more headaches.
Ms. Kraulidis stated it sounds like an Agricultural Area Committee would be very beneficial for multiple reasons. What would be the negative of not having an agricultural area to deal with situations like this? Why wouldn’t we have the committee?
Mr. Fricilone replied the committee would only deal with this. They would not deal with other Ag issues, only with people who want to move forward and designate their farm as part of this Ag area, which gives them a ten year umbrella to maintain it as an Ag area.
Ms. Kraulidis asked what is the negative of having this committee? Why would we not want to have it?
Mr. Fricilone responded the concern is, does this stop us if we need to have land for a road and the road is not going to be built because it is designated an Ag area. We need to know if eminent domain allows us to go after the property if we needed to build a road.
Ms. Kraulidis asked would it be this committee’s goal to work through issues like that?
Mr. Fricilone replied not necessarily. Their job would be to accept people who want to be in an Ag area. If someone gets into the Ag area and decides they want to get out of the Ag area, the committee would have to approve that as well.
Mrs. Ogalla stated you can form the Ag committee and have these questions answered there. We don’t have all the answers, but this is to form an Ag committee. It is one person from the County Board and four people who own farmland; two Republicans and two Democrats would be part of that committee. We have this established, it happened in the past and it would be bad to now tell people they can’t do it. Many people think farmland preservation is important. I don’t think it will cost hundreds of millions of dollars to change the route of the Illiana tollway around this. If you look at the plan, it came very close to the area, but it was just north of the agricultural area in Peotone Township. It did not prevent the road from being built. They had many different routes, so it did not cost them any more money to pick a different route than the route they may have wanted to go with; which was splitting up farmland in the middle of everything. I asked my eminent domain attorney I work with regarding the Peotone airport, if it could prevent them from filing an eminent domain and he said no. The State could still file eminent domain, it just makes them jump through another hurdle to do that. What is wrong with allowing farmers to do this with their own property; saying they want it to be designated as farmland? Many places do this. I think it is the right thing to do. Let’s have a conversation on it; have a hearing on it and get everyone’s perspective, rather than just saying no because we want to build. Do we want to build the Illiana? I am not sure if we do or not. Kankakee County has interest in it and they were not before. We really need to protect farmers, why would we not want to give people the opportunity to do this? If you have forest preserve land, national parks or state parks, you are not going to build a road on it either. This is basically saying the government can do whatever they choose to take a person’s property and designate it as protected but the individual person cannot do it for themselves.
Ms. Kraulidis stated I still don’t understand the negative of creating the committee and letting this be heard there.
Mr. Fricilone stated once you establish the committee, you establish the Ag area. I don’t know if I am for the Ag area, so why would I establish a committee, because I don’t know how that affects eminent domain. I know what Mrs. Ogalla is saying, but we are not getting that opinion from the State’s Attorney and I would like to see what they have to say. Mrs. Ogalla is admitting this is another hoop to jump through. If it takes us a year to take land through eminent domain now, does it take us five years if it is in an Ag area? Does it take ten years? We don’t know that yet. If we don’t have all the facts, how can we decide on something? Until I hear the State’s Attorney’s opinion, I am a no, until I get clarification on how that works.
Mrs. Ogalla stated I am going to keep fighting for my farmers. Can we postpone it until after we hear from the State’s Attorney as to whether eminent domain could be used to build a road?
Mr. Pretzel indicated he was in support of postponing it.
Mrs. Ogalla continued I don’t think this committee establishes the Ag area. The committee hears when someone wants to put their property into an Ag area. It would be discriminating against the other farmers who don’t have that opportunity.
Mr. Fricilone asked if a farmer comes to the committee and wants his 1,000 acres in the Ag area and they say yes, then what? It is establishing the Ag area.
Mrs. Ogalla stated it is establishing a hearing for it. We have not heard all the facts. We need to postpone this until we have all the facts.
Mr. Fricilone indicated he was okay with postponing.
Mr. Moustis stated I used the example of the Illiana, but let’s look at what the County does and what I have seen in the past. It is not about the Illiana, it is about us wanting to improve an intersection and we need an additional 3,000 square feet of Ag property. Now, we can’t do road improvements because this stands in the way of us taking that. There could still be eminent domain, but it certainly puts the County at a disadvantage because now there is a little more leverage and we changed the playing field so the property owner would have more leverage over the County. To put it in a more practical situation; we buy ROW all the time for County road improvements; we are not taking hundreds of acres. We use farmland for staging areas for construction of road improvements. This does not just affect the Illiana or another new road coming in. It is going to affect road improvements. A farmer will say, I don’t just have farmland, this has a higher and better use and therefore, you have to pay me for the higher and better use. I support all of that, but my point is, this is not just about the Illiana. This is a personal property right and they make their decision. I just want to know how it going to impact public projects, specifically roads. It could cause us to shift a road and it could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to shift it. It has a more practical impact. It probably would never happen. I don’t think a lot of farmers will do this because they want the flexibility to use and sell their property as they see fit for their benefit, as they should. I am not opposed to this, I am just looking to see how it would potentially affect public projects. A trucking outfit and a warehouse can always find a place and I don’t think this will affect that at all.
Mrs. Adams read a memo Mr. Duesing sent. It says that the Ag Area Committee makes a recommendation of either approval or denial to the County Board and then the County Board either approves or rejects the proposal. Then it goes to the Illinois Department of Agricultural. So the Board has the final say whether or not the Ag area request is accepted.
Mr. Moustis asked if a piece of farm property was going to go into Ag preservation and it intersected county roads, could we ask them to stipulate they would sell us ROW if needed for road improvement? Is that possible within the Ag preservation statute? If we had that ability that would certainly put my mind at ease about future county road public projects.
Mr. Fricilone stated that is a question for Land Use.
Mr. Palmer stated I think there are a lot of questions remaining. I think there would be some latitude and the State’s Attorney’s office can clarify if it is possible. On Land Use cases, we attach certain conditions. If we have the final say in approving these districts, we just say we need this road and we need you to leave the ROW for the county projects or municipal projects, then it could work, hopefully. This goes with what we are doing with the transportation studies; trying to be proactive in our planning so we have the right plan developments so there is infrastructure and roads. I think the State’s Attorney needs to give us an opinion and maybe they can look at that issue too.
Mrs. Ogalla asked since we already have an established agricultural area in Will County, if we don’t move forward and allow these other farmers to have an Ag committee created to hear and decide this, could that person sue us? Because we have an agricultural area, we have a precedence. Many years ago they felt it was needed. I don’t know why that area was chosen to be preserved as farmland because it is a very rural area. Whoever was the owner of that property thought it was an important thing to do. Could farmers sue us because we are not allowing them to be considered by an Ag committee, when we have an established area?
Mr. Meyers stated to clarify for my research, you mean farmers who want to establish one, not the current Ag area.
Mrs. Ogalla replied correct. The farmers that would like to establish one, because there is already an Ag area in Will County.
Mr. Fricilone stated we will ask the State’s Attorney to look at those issues. We should probably postpone this item if we are not going to get this information in a timely manner.
Mr. Fricilone reviewed the parameter ordinance. It does not create the bonds nor does it make us go out for the bonds, it just says we have the ability to work on it. We will get more information as to how they are going to bond, what the terms will be and we will be involved in that.
Mr. Moustis stated I understand it is a parameter ordinance, but I don’t support $55 million. I don’t think it is justified. They are coming back in May to give us additional information. They want the money just in case. Just in case what? You figure out a way to spend more money? Because you want to hold on to all of the cash reserves. The $55 million is too much. I would have felt more comfortable with $48, $49 or $50 million. In this particular case, the estimated costs have been vetted pretty well and we don’t need $55 million. I would rather see a parameter ordinance closer to what the bond issuance will be. What it should be and does not give them wiggle room to perhaps do some type of expansion of the cost. My concern is, if you do $55 million, they have $5 million beyond the RNG plant and the pipeline and they will come up with some other way to spend it on other solid waste initiatives.
Mr. Fricilone stated you can amend that on the floor if you think another number is better.
Mr. Moustis stated I will probably say it at the Board meeting. It does not mean I will amend it, but I will say it. I may say nothing, it may be a waste of my time to say something.
Mr. Palmer stated regarding Resolution #21-123, Board Members who have been here awhile have heard this before, because we were involved previously with this and other TIFs. For those who were not, the County Executive’s Office generally handles economic development issues; that is in the County Executive law. When I was over there, I was involved in a lot of these things. On the County Board agenda, there is now a letter from Plainfield speaking to this TIF and the request. There is also a packet created last year and not distributed on the TIF with some of the facts and rational behind it. Plainfield School District 202, Plainfield Library District, Plainfield Fire Protection District and Plainfield Township are all in support of this extension. Plainfield is talking to JJC this week and hoping to get them onboard. The Forest Preserve will be recommending approval to you in May. From my limited experience, a TIF is not the same as tax abatements, the money collected is redirected to structural projects directly tied to the TIF district. The unique thing about this one; they are actually giving us more money than an ordinary TIF would. They say 65% of the total property tax produced is being returned to the taxing bodies. If we don’t do this, we won’t get that amount because we won’t have an agreement in place. The reason the Plainfield downtown is nicer is because they did this TIF and reinvested the money on infrastructure and aesthetics. They are still working on parking, but they claim that during the economic downturn they did not see as much business creation over the last period of time in the TIF. That is part of their rational for this extension. Taxing bodies approve this, but they still have to go to the general assembly to get an approval to extend the TIF. That is why they need the letters of support and IGAs to work out all the details. The Plainfield representatives will be at the Board meeting and can answer specific questions. If you have things now, I can try to answer them.
Mrs. Ogalla asked what is the typical percentage that a TIF gives back in taxes? I know typically it is frozen at the start of the development; then you get those tax dollars but everything else goes toward the improvements in the TIF district. This gives us 65%; what is the difference between the two? How long has this been established? How long do they want to extend it for?
Mr. Palmer replied I don’t want to say because I am not 100% sure. I thought all the money goes into the TIF and they are only taking 35%. I will confirm that or have that addressed on Thursday. It was established in 1998 for 23 years; 23 years is the norm. There is a provision that allows you to extend for another 12 years and that requires General Assembly approval. There are quite a few TIFs throughout Will County.
Mrs. Ogalla read from the IGA the Incremental Revenues paragraph and stated I don’t see 65% in here. What money would go into taxes if this TIF was not in place? What is the difference? We have a problem with taxes in Illinois and we have to find a solution to this. I support TIFs to get things off the ground. But, these are like the tollway, we were told when the projects were paid off the tolls would go away; that never happened and the tolls keep going up. We know the tollway system has a lot of money, because they wanted to take on the I-80 improvements. When are we going to be able to give residents some property tax relief? I hope we will have those answers for next week.
Mr. Palmer stated I am not advocating for this project; but I spoke with the City Manager in Plainfield previously and since the meeting on Thursday. The alternative to a TIF is to set up a special service area or some other kind of business tax for the area. They did not want to do that because a lot of these are small, family owned businesses; they are not big boxes. They may have to go to that when the TIF expires. They believe this was a better tool to use to help those small businesses. If you have been in downtown Plainfield, you know it is small businesses, it is not a Wal-Mart or Target or chain restaurants. They have done a lot of good in Plainfield. There are other areas who have used TIFs successfully and some bad examples of TIFs not being managed correctly, but I don’t think this is one of them. I have not talked to the Board Members in that area but maybe they would like to comment.
Ms. Fritz stated I saw your e-mail about signing on to support the letter. In the past, Mr. Bennefield and I met with you and Mr. Murphy, the Plainfield Village Administrator. He showed us the plan and it looked like a really good plan. The problem is, it is going to require a number of houses to be taken and destroyed. They are not historical, they are from the 1950’s; they are long standing family properties that will be taken. It is going to be going through some natural areas and Mr. Murphy said “we were not asked, we were told this is going to happen”. It was not like they were asking us to support it, they were not asking for permission. It is needed, but I can’t publically support this because of the backlash it is going to get in Plainfield. Diageo is one of our biggest employers and they are requiring us to do this or they are going to leave. Plainfield is between a rock and a hard place on this. Between Diageo, the river, railroad tracks and the traffic in our downtown area, we have nowhere to go with the truck traffic. We literally have no options. I can’t be seen to publically support this. I will vote yes for the TIF, but I am not going to vote yes and say I support this project. We have no choice so it does not matter whether I support this or not, we have to do it and Mr. Murphy basically said the same thing.
Mr. Palmer stated Ms. Fritz I appreciate your comments. For the other Board Members, there are two issues. There is the TIF, which is Item #3 on the agenda. Then #4 is Authorizing the County Executive to sign a letter of support for an INFRA grant, which is Federal funding for the 143rd Street extension from Route 59 to 126. The issue about taking homes and property is the 143rd Street extension and the TIF is a separate issue.
Ms. Kraulidis stated there are two separate issues and we have to weigh in on both of these, is that correct?
Mr. Fricilone replied yes.
Ms. Kraulidis asked did you say the Forest Preserve is also onboard?
Mr. Palmer replied I have not talked with Mr. Schultz; but Plainfield said that it is coming to you in May. So you will probably have to consider that at the Forest Preserve in May.
Ms. Kraulidis asked besides the Village and the Township, was anyone else you mentioned in support?
Mr. Palmer replied they are listing the school district, library district, fire protection district and the township and they are talking with JJC. Those entities are listed in the letter attached to the County Board agenda.
Mr. Moustis stated if the County does not participate, it does not prevent them from moving forward with the TIF. Generally, the big ones are the schools and that is where the big tax dollars are involved. It does not prevent them from going forward whether we participate or not. We are a small portion of the overall tax. We should understand TIFs can be overly done. I can look at areas in District #1 where excessive TIFs have been done by a couple of the communities. It does put an additional tax burden on residents. If the TIF districts are not paying taxing bodies, it does not affect the overall limiting rate, it does not affect the tax limitation, it does not affect the tax burden going down, it is just the tax burden is shifted more to others. In some cases, it has been excessively done and it can have an effect on residential and commercial properties. If one business is given a break, it puts a larger tax burden on another business. I think it is understanding how TIFs affect the general tax payer and usually they don’t have that much of an affect. Usually, they create jobs or other conveniences. Diageo is an extremely important economic driver in the region.
Ms. Fritz stated Mr. Palmer pointed out these are two separate issues; but from the viewpoint of the project, they are intrinsically tied together. The Village got a big chunk of money from the Federal government to extend this road. The TIF is how they are making up the difference. They have been trying to do this project for quite some time and Diageo finally said “this is it; this is a deal breaker, either do it or we are leaving”. The TIF is the proposal for how they are going to pay for the part the government is not paying for.
Ms. Kraulidis stated that is what I thought also and I did not look at them as separate.
Mr. Palmer stated a few years ago the County participated with the Village, Diageo and others to do the work to the west of Route 59. We passed an agreement that plugged some of those dollars back in. We worked with them and that addressed the Diageo issue to the west and also some safety concerns of residents about traffic signals; because there are neighborhoods to the west. We have been working with them to move trucks off of the main streets and get them to the highway easier, as part of our freight study.
Mr. Fricilone reviewed Item #4 through #13.
Mrs. Parker stated regarding Item #13, where did he come from? I don’t think this person was an applicant.
Mr. Palmer replied I am going by what was submitted; there were 23 applicants and they were external. We can ask HR.
Mr. Fricilone stated last month we postponed this hire because we did not have a viable candidate and we do this month. From what Mrs. Parker has researched, this person did not seem to be a candidate or had been a candidate and got a letter that said they didn’t pick a candidate. It was very confusing.
Mrs. Adams indicated she would check on Monday to see if we had received a resume.
Mr. Fricilone stated I am sure we didn’t because we did not ask for it.
Mrs. Adams stated I get resumes, but don’t pass them along until Board Members ask for it.
Mrs. Parker stated it says we are appointing this person. This one seems different from the typical language we see in a replacement hire. Where did this person come from? It was an external, not internal hire. I know some of the candidates that were interviewed. How did this process go? The letter said none of the candidates were going to be selected and the job was going to be reposted. I don’t believe the job was reposted. I just want to know where this person came from.
Mr. Fricilone stated to be clear, people Mrs. Parker is aware of people who applied and got a letter that said nobody was picked and they are going to repost the job. Then all of a sudden we have a candidate come forward this month.
Mr. Palmer stated it looks like they posted twice. There is a posting from January 29th and a second posting on February 24th in the packet.
Mrs. Parker stated there was supposed to be a third posting that never happened. In the final process of interviews, no one was selected. Then the letter the candidate received from HR said no one was chosen so the job would be reposted again.
Mr. Fricilone asked Mr. Palmer to check with HR on Monday about this.
Mr. Fricilone continued next is the replacement hire for Workforce Services Director. At the Executive Committee meeting I asked why is there no resume of the person’s qualification behind this candidate, besides the basic letter saying this is the person picked from the Executive’s Office. Our job is to give advice and consent and notwithstanding how we are involved in the process. If we are going to give advice and consent, what are we giving advice and consent on, if we don’t have any information? Are we just rubberstamping what is brought forward or are we going to take a look? We were told the application was in the office and we could look at it any time. We said, for the person they are bringing forward, the application should be attached. We were told there was personal information and we said that information could be redacted. I believe those were sent out. Mrs. Adams, was it just the application for the person they are bringing forward or were all the applications sent out?
Mrs. Adams replied all we receive from the HR Department is the information for the applicant they are bringing forward; that is the only resume we have ever received. We do not get a copy for everyone who applied.
Mr. Fricilone continued what we asked was; how many applicants were there. On the bottom of the sheet attached to the agenda item it said the person’s name and salary and there were five external applicants and no internal candidates. When questioned, the Executive’s Office said “oh yeah, there was somebody internally, that must be a typo”. There were actually five applicants but one was an internal candidate. I don’t know if anyone asked what the recommendation was from the Workforce Board, if they had any. What is important about this pick is they have to meet the qualifications. The qualifications were part of the Executive Committee agenda packet. If the person does not meet the qualifications and is put in place, we stand to potentially lose our Federal grant money. It is very important when we are doing our advice and consent, we should be checking to make sure this person is qualified. Based on what I am reading, I am not sure. The person certainly has an impressive resume in the education industry. However, the qualifications say either five or ten years of workforce investment or workforce experience and/or grant writing. There was a mention on the resume that said grant writing, at The Edible Garden; I don’t know what The Edible Garden is and I don’t know what that has to do with Workforce Investment grant writing. It also did not appear to be a big portion of that individual’s qualifications. My concern is whether this person is qualified to be in this position. I don’t want to be voting for someone who is not qualified and then be embarrassed by the fact the Federal government is pulling grant dollars because we have someone in there who is not qualified.
Mr. Palmer stated we have a Workforce Service Division which is currently headed by Ms. Susan Flessner and we have a Workforce Investment Board, led by Ms. Caroline Portlock and they work together. The WIB Board oversees the Workforce Services Division, ultimately a lot of things come to the County Board for final approval, because the County is the recipient of the funds. The Workforce Board, by law, is required to be 51% or greater business partners and there are a number of public sector partners who provide oversight to the Workforce Services Board. This hire is a County Executive hire. There was an interview committee and a few WIB Board Members were involved in the interviews. The decision ultimately was the County Executive’s to bring a name forward. I don’t know the particulars of what was recommended. That is how the process works. Ms. Flessner has been there for quite a long time and she has done a great job. Ms. Pat Fera was the former WIB Director and Ms. Portlock came in when Ms. Fera retired and now Ms. Flessner is retiring. They all did a great job and Ms. Portlock is doing a great job.
Mr. Fricilone stated I don’t know how we vet the application any deeper. How do we know if this person is really qualified and if they are meeting the qualifications? Have you looked at it and compared the two to advise us, as our Chief of Staff, if they are meeting the qualifications?
Mr. Palmer stated the Board Office has the applications and the resumes for the Board Members if they want to review them. It is not the Board’s job to micromanage. I am not saying you are; you have oversight responsibility, but all you can go by is the information you are given. This is the first time in a long time we have sent out the application; it is by request. We are in a unique time, it is not like you can come in and look at the applications easily, because of COVID. All we can go by is what the post says the requirements are and what the person’s resume says. Years ago, the Board required the County Executive to put a hire consent form that says here is how many candidates and this is the best qualified; so that is their statement this is the best qualified candidate.
Mrs. Berkowicz stated it would be helpful if somebody on the Board was familiar or had been a part of this process, so they could share their thoughts and recommendations. I don’t know if there is a way for us to have joined in the review or interview process. With other commissions, like the water districts, they always bring their candidates forward with a brief summary to give us information about the person and their background. If we could ask the County Executive to provide something like this with the recent jobs that have come forward, that would be helpful. If they can’t e-mail the resume, then at least provide the details they can.
Mr. Fricilone stated it is a unique time. We are not in the office so that does change some protocols; hopefully we will be getting back into the office soon. I understand what you are saying. It is not our job to do interviews for picks for the Executive.
Mr. Moustis stated as County Board Members, in this particular appointment and others; yes we give advice and consent, but it is a County Executive pick. It is up to the Executive’s Office to go through the process and do their due diligence on qualifications and so forth and the County Executive would then deem that person qualified. We have not gotten into this, unless it was something we felt was absolutely obvious that a person may not have the qualifications. We have relied on the Executive to tell us they are qualified. We don’t get deep into the woods.
We don’t ask to be part of the interviews, we don’t go through all of the applicants; we have not done that. In these types of appointments, although it is extremely important, the County Board has a very limited role in the process and we should keep that in mind. Historically, we have approved the County Executive’s recommendations. I think this is an extremely important position, potentially sensitive because it is Federal dollars and there are guidelines that must be followed. I go back long enough to remember when the integrity of the Workforce, previously known as the Private Industrial Council Board had a spotted history in Will County. It is important that this person has integrity and follows the Federal guidelines. I don’t think as a Board we should get involved with the process or be involved in the selection process. We can ask legitimate questions about qualifications, but we should not get too involved in this and historically, we have not.
Mr. Palmer stated it is fair to ask questions because you have an oversight responsibility. The reason we have the resume process in the office is we have had Board Members who were a little more passionate about being involved and they were told that is not their place. The Board’s place is not to pick the candidates, it is to review the candidates, ask questions and provide legitimate oversight. The history was a little less positive a few years ago, but for the last 20 years or more it has been pretty good; a credit to Ms. Fera and Ms. Flessner who brought us out of those rougher times.
Mr. Moustis stated we probably have the best Workforce programs in the country. The Obama administration was not supportive and they wanted to do away with Workforce and work directly with the junior colleges. The fact that we have one of the better ones in the country is a credit to the last 20 years of taking something that was a negative on Will County and making it a very positive thing. Part of the reason that happened was because all of the politics were taken out of it over the last 25 years and that is to our credit, because we stayed in our lane and we need to stay in our lane.
Mr. Fricilone stated I agree with what you have said.
County Executive Bertino-Tarrant stated I am here to answer any questions. I heard Mrs. Parker’s questions regarding the WCDOT hire. We work with HR for everything. I am not aware of that situation and I will talk with Mr. Ronaldson to see if there was a third posting. I am not an expert on this and I rely on the HR Director to help with those decisions and he gives the recommendation. I don’t usually question him. In regards to the Workforce Services, as well as the Grant Writer, these positions went through the HR process. I know that one internal candidate applied for the Workforce Services position. HR did incorrectly identify that and it was just a human error. It was nothing from our office as we don’t deal with the paperwork. I sign what they bring to me. Workforce Services was a process that was done with my office, HR and the Workforce Investment Board. It came down to the two candidates, one internal and one external and the decision leaned toward the external because of the different experience. I spoke with Ms. Flessner before I made the decision because I wanted to hear her opinion, because it is a very technical job. There are going to be leadership positions where we will naturally want to hire (inaudible). For others, I think we need to look outside the box. The person I chose has different experience. She has been in an administrative role, she has worked with grants, but what I like best is she was part of a program that I thought worked with these programs. I thought she would bring a different perspective. I get that with a new administration people are naturally concerned and have questions. I am always available and I don’t shy away from questions. I can assure you I am very meticulous in my approach because I understand the sensitivity of my role and I am very concerned with that. Because of that, I purposely stayed away. I knew a couple of people who applied; one got an interview and one did not and it had nothing to do with me. When people ask me for jobs, I steer them to the website, because I am not going to put myself in that situation. I hope you know me well enough to know who I am. We talked to the number two candidate and let her know we hope she stays and we want her participation, but we were very upfront with everything. I understand people don’t understand the process and I don’t want you to assume because you don’t understand the process we are doing something sinister. Please, always ask.
Mr. Fricilone stated so everyone is aware, the last pick, Ms. Flessner came from the outside. They did an extensive search for her and she was an outside candidate as well.
Mr. Fricilone continued to review the remaining Executive Committee items and appointments.
VII. 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
VIII. OTHER NEW BUSINESS
IX. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mrs. Jakaitis announced there were no public comments.
X. ANNOUNCEMENTS/REPORTS BY CHAIR
Mr. Fricilone stated we need someone to serve on the Modern Housing Committee. We have one Committee Member that the timing did not work and they wanted to be off the Committee. If you are interested, please e-mail me. For those of you who were not at the Executive Committee, Speaker Cowan asked if we are interested in coming back to in-person Committee meetings in May. We are not ready yet with the protocols we need for an in-person full County Board meeting. We think we have a social distancing plan that will work for Committees. Does anyone have an opinion on coming back for in person meetings in May? Is everyone up for that? I am interested in coming back.
Mr. Moustis asked will we have the option to be in-person or remote? Mr. Fricilone replied yes, we will have to keep that option open.
Mr. Weigel and Mr. Pretzel indicated they would be willing to come back.
Mr. Fricilone stated I don’t want it to be one person who comes back; because what is the point? If everyone is open to that I will tell Speaker Cowan that it looks like we could get the Committees back so we can get together. If anybody is against getting back, please let me know. Next on my list is the cannabis money. We talked at the Executive Committee, just like we did for the American Rescue Plan, about where we think we could use this money. I continue to push the Family Stabilization Unit I have talked about in several meetings. We are going to have a Committee of the Whole on April 21st.
Mrs. Adams indicated she would send an e-mail on Monday to get confirmation from everyone to see if they are available.
Mr. Fricilone stated the Committee of the Whole will be virtual because we can’t all get together. I encourage everyone to make that meeting. Once we see the presentation from Franklin County, who presented this to us at NACo, I think you will be impressed with what they have done and how it would be effective for what we are doing and what we want to accomplish here in Will County. It would certainly be a great place for the cannabis money to go because it hits all the things cannabis money was targeted for. It may require us to put some American Rescue Plan money in that. In regards to the America Rescue Plan, a lot of ideas came forward at Executive and the Speaker is putting some options together for us to look at and how we can move forward on that.
A brief discussion took place regarding the date and time of the Committee of the Whole.
Mrs. Berkowicz asked is it possible to have our Sheriff or someone from the Sheriff’s Office come and communicate to us what they are experiencing and if this has had any impact on them? I think it would be a great opportunity for us to understand that. I hope somebody there would want to spend a few minutes speaking to Board Members. Is that possible to encourage them to do that?
Mr. Fricilone asked Mr. Palmer to ask Speaker Cowan if she would be willing to encourage them to talk with us.
Mr. Palmer asked Mrs. Berkowicz specifically which issue do you want them to focus on?
Mrs. Berkowicz replied we had a disagreement about whether or not drug use is increasing. I know in my neighborhood, we are seeing changes and the impact of it. We are seeing more car accidents and more people arrested. What I would like to know is; how is this impacting them in Will County. If they don’t think there are any issues or this has not impacted them, then that would be good to know. If it is impacting them, I would like to make sure we understand, so we can support them when we are talking about the revenues from the sale of cannabis. I want them to be in the conversation, especially if it has had an impact on them. Another thought tossed out in the Executive Committee was whether or not we should bring into the conversation other drugs or just focus on cannabis. I think we need to focus on the big picture. A lot of people when they talk about cannabis use, those people typically use multiple drugs. My position is we look at drug use as a whole; whether it is cannabis or other drug use, it is all related. How does everybody feel about that?
Mr. Moustis replied the Family Stabilization Unit will look at it in a more global aspect.
Mr. Fricilone stated the Family Stabilization Unit is a holistic approach to everything that has happened with drugs, rental assistance, food and job deficiencies; that is what the Family Stabilization Unit really talks about. If everybody can make that meeting, it will go a long way in telling you how we can approach all of these issues, all of the drug issues, all of the issues that affect the whole family, not just an individual. I think we will get a lot of information out of that and then after that we can get the Sheriff’s Department to comment. I think they will be very supportive of the Family Stabilization Unit as well.
Mr. Weigel asked what happened to the item on the Executive agenda for the Speedway in University Park and the well contamination?
Mr. Palmer stated a public hearing is required and it was pushed to next month.
Mrs. Adams stated we need a public hearing for the potable water ordinance so we moved that to May. We also moved the highway agreement, since they were both together, so they are coming in May.
Mr. Pretzel stated I agree with Mrs. Berkowicz and I would like to hear from the Sheriff’s Department as well. Has crime increased since we legalized marijuana? Where do they think we should spend some of this money?
Mr. Fricilone stated Mr. Palmer would you make sure when we have the Committee of the Whole, the Sheriff’s Department is invited to participate. Whether it is the Sheriff or the Undersheriff, I think them hearing that presentation will give them some ideas and they will be able to comment. Dr. Burke should also be on the call, someone from CDBG, everyone who is involved in all these different issues; rental assistance and food are all part of this. Anybody that touches those different issues, I think if they are on this meeting they will be very excited about the fact that we are looking forward to putting a Family Stabilization Unit together. Over the last week, Leadership has been talking about earmarks. I am going to let Mr. Palmer explain.
Mr. Palmer stated the U.S. House is talking about earmarks; the Senate has not decided whether they are going to do them or not. We have six Congressional Districts in Will County and two Senators. We have been working with the six Congressional Offices to submit requests, but because of deadlines we had to move quickly. The County Board Leadership has worked with the County Executive’s Office to vet some of these projects. These are all projects that are on County plans so the Board has previously supported or approved them. We are chasing Federal dollars, if there are opportunities. We prioritized these by District Office and we are submitting those. I will put together a memo so you will have the details of the earmark requests and the areas. Specific earmarks were reviewed. Some of these require matches so if we get the earmark and the Federal appropriation, we will have to find the matching money. If we can leverage 20% and get 80% of the request, it is a huge win. We are working very closely with Smith Dawson, Mr. Ronaldson and Ms. Schneider and the Executive’s Office to chase these dollars.
Mr. Fricilone stated each complete Congressional district is allowed to bring 10 projects or earmarks forward. Even though we may be giving them four or five per district, they have their entire district, which in many cases includes Chicago. They are going to get a boatload of these and they will pick the best ones to move forward and hopefully they will pick some of what we have given them from our area within their district to get this earmark money.
Mr. Palmer continued the relationships we have built have been paying off. Congressman Foster specifically asked us to submit a Naloxone or opioid project because he has worked with Dr. Burke. On some of the transportation projects, we have a good relationship with IDOT District 1 and they are listening. Ms. Schneider has been a real help with that. They have ten projects and hopefully we are going to get into the mix of the ten. I appreciate the help of Mr. Fricilone and others to get the letters of support. We had to get a few of them at the last minutes, but we submitted a bunch of them.
Mr. Fricilone thanked Mr. Palmer and the Executive’s Office and stated they worked their butts off the last couple of days because we had deadlines. Some of the Congressional District offices wanted things in by yesterday and they were submitted yesterday. A couple more are going in next week. We did not have time to contact everybody on the Board, but we went to Mayors and different community groups to get letters of support. Mr. Palmer and the County Executive’s Office worked very hard to get letters and all the documentation we needed. Like Mr. Palmer said, our Federal lobbyist reviewed them and told us what else we needed to put in for some of the things we asked for. Hopefully, there is more money coming our way. We have been getting a lot lately and we have more coming. Hopefully, we will hit on some of these and it would be great for all of us.
Mrs. Ogalla stated I don’t know how many people listened to the Reapportionment meeting, but I think it would be good to have an update at this meeting going forward. Regarding the cannabis dollars, I am concerned this is being taken up by the Diversity & Inclusion Committee. I think it should be a broader discussion at either a Committee of the Whole or at least at the Executive Committee to make the decision. Was the Diversity & Inclusion Committee designed specifically for cannabis dollar distribution? I don’t think so. I would hope you have a conversation with Speaker Cowan about that. When we get back to meeting in-person, I hope we get back to our specific days for meetings. Right now, it is any day of the week, every day of the week and every week of the month. We need to get back to focusing on something else. I think it is hard for people to drive in any day of the week and every week of the month. In the past we had meetings three weeks out of the month and typically Tuesdays and Thursdays.
Mr. Fricilone agreed and stated the Speaker and I have talked about this at length. Not only for us, but for staff. They have their job to do, which they can’t do when they are on meetings every day, all day long. Unfortunately with the CARES Act, American Rescue Plan, Reapportionment and cannabis tax money to deal with, additional meetings are necessary. Hopefully, once we get back, the meetings will get a little shorter because they should operate a little quicker than being on-line. That is why I encourage everybody to come together when we go back in-person next month for Committee meetings. You are right, we are going to have to get back to a much more normal schedule or we will never be able to do anything. Several years ago we got rid of the pension because we were not full-time; we have been more than full-time because of video meetings. I think the video creates the length of the meeting, not just what we are talking about. Here is hoping we can all get back to a better, solid schedule and keep the last week or two of the month open so Mrs. Adams, Mr. Palmer and Mrs. Jakaitis can do their job of getting all the information we need and putting together what we need so we can make our decisions. I am going to really encourage our Caucus to meet in-person next month. If a Saturday works, perhaps we can get together, have some breakfast and talk in-person. Hopefully, we can do that next month and we will start planning that so everybody can make arrangements accordingly.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
1. Motion to Adjourn at 10:34 AM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Frankie Pretzel, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Minority Whip AYES: Fricilone, Ogalla, Moustis, Fritz, Parker, Pretzel, Weigel, Kraulidis ABSENT: Mitchell, Balich, Berkowicz |
Alerts Sign-up