Will County Board Executive Committee met Sept. 2.
Here are the minutes provided by the committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Mr. Brooks led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. ROLL CALL
Chair Mimi Cowan called the meeting to order at 10:04 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 | Present | |
| Tyler Marcum | Member | Present | |
| Jim Moustis | Member | Present | |
| Judy Ogalla | Member | Present | |
| Annette Parker | Member | Absent | |
| Margaret Tyson | Member | Present | |
| Joe VanDuyne | Member | Present | |
| Rachel Ventura | Member | Present | |
| Denise E. Winfrey | Member | Present |
Also Present: M. Johannsen and N. Palmer.
Present from the State's Attorney's Office: M. Tatroe.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Executive Committee - Assignment Meeting - Aug 5, 2021 10:00 AM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Parker |
(Minutes)
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Parker |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Parker |
1. American Rescue Plan
(Mimi Cowan)
Speaker Cowan stated attached is a summary of the ARPA, to keep it fresh in everyone’s mind and for you to review the Federal guidelines, along with the PowerPoint we went through in June. Mr. Palmer and I continue to meet with organizations and individuals. Last week we met with the Joliet Chamber. The Joliet Chamber and the Naperville Chamber worked together and surveyed their members, and they gave us some reports on that. They are going to come to a future meeting and give those reports to the full Board. There are some interesting findings there. We continue to reach out to folks to see what we think might be needed. I would appreciate you doing the same. The input that we continue to receive from Board Members has been great. Next week Mr. Palmer will be presenting a possible outline of a plan; a little more granular than we started with. Then as Board Members, we can start to dig in, see what we want to tweak or emphasize, what we need to move on right away, what we can wait on, and what we need more information on. We will be flushing out the plan in the next couple of weeks. I wanted you to know it continues to move along and we will have more details next week.
Mr. Palmer stated I am going to give a high level overview of the survey. We decided not to go into the specifics at this time, because the survey is still open. The County Board put out a survey and it is available via the County Board website and our Facebook page; it is available in English and Spanish. Thank you to the Board Members and others who shared this. A lot of the Chambers and other governmental bodies have also shared this. The last time I checked, we had received over 750 responses from across the County. This was an opportunity for the public and others to express their thoughts on ARPA and what we should do with it. We tried to keep it short; nine questions. Some of the questions were prompted with things to pick from and some were open ended. For example, we asked what the respondent’s most important funding priorities were and we gave them some suggestions. We also gave them the option to suggest their own, and we received quite a few of those. Then we asked some other open ended questions, since we had their attention. We asked if they had any other concerns about County government or other suggestions. We will share the summary with you next week. We also collected towns and zip codes so you can see where the respondents are from; they are self-reporting. An overwhelming number, 87%, responded and identified themselves as residents of Will County. Some of those folks may be business owners or involved in community groups, but it is great we are getting Will County residents to respond and not from other areas. Seven percent identified as business owners and 5% identified as other stakeholders. Other stakeholders may be people who work here but are not necessarily a business owner or a student. We asked people, if they were with a group, if they would identify themselves and we will share that also. We have a good cross section of public and private sector people and nonprofits. When we report the details, you will see a lot of things you would expect; health concerns, housing, infrastructure, business assistance, child care and nonprofits were all very high, but there were other ideas. On the other concerns for Will County, there is a range of issues. Even if we don’t use this for ARPA, it may be a good guide for other things we should look at. Some of these are not things that Will County controls, so we can refer those on to the agencies or governmental bodies that handle it. It gives examples of what people are thinking. Based on the towns, cities and zip codes, we have a good cross section from across the County. We would have liked more suggestions, so we are going to keep it open one more week, then we will close it officially. That does not mean that people listening to this cannot send us their ideas; the County Board will accept ideas until we spend all of the money. Giving you the details today, without closing the survey, could prejudice future responses, so we want to close it officially and give you a full report next week.
Mr. Brooks stated my questions also applies to Item #5, so I will ask it once and not twice. As we make decisions where these federal grants go, is there a way that John Q Public can track where this money is going and who gets what? I have had a lot of people from my District come by my office or call and ask why one person got money and they didn’t get any money. I don’t know the answer. People in my District called Bronner directly, but they were frustrated. To eliminate some of the frustration, is there a way they can call and get a simple answer about the CARES funds?
Ms. Hennessy replied the CARES money, for the most part, has been spent. Are you asking that if people have questions about how we spent it that there is someone to address it? Are you asking for ARPA to have a different process?
Mr. Brooks replied yes to all of the above. I understand the CARES money is done. Is there a contact, now that we are starting with ARPA?
Mr. Palmer replied when people ask how the money was spent, I would direct them to the report the County Executive’s Office submitted, which is part of today’s agenda. It is a disclosed report of where we spent the money and it includes specifically who received the money. We are being as transparent as we can be. As far as specific people not getting funded, that is trickier.
Ms. Hennessy stated some of the responsibility for approving applications was not at the County level; we had a consultant do that. It could have been due to the timing they filed the applications. As Mr. Palmer mentioned, we can put the report attached to the agenda on the website for people to look up the information. I am not sure the easiest way to answer the questions. Can we give it some thought and come up with a way for people to submit questions on-line; then we could figure out who could answer them? I cannot answer a question as to why one small business grant was approved and another was not.
Speaker Cowan stated when I got those questions from my constituents, I e mailed Bronner. Usually they were able to give me a specific reason. Usually it was because the application was not submitted on time or their particular business was not allowed by the federal guidelines. They were able to give me that granular, specific answer. I assume we are talking about small businesses, because we did not do any individual grants. On the website, where the application was, there was an e-mail address to contact Bronner directly. I am guessing that is what your constituents did. You are right, having the full disclosure list for CARES would be a good plan. For ARPA, we need to make sure we are clearly communicating to the public what we are doing and here is what is in and here is what is out.
Mr. Brooks stated I know the CARES has passed, but I am more concerned with the ARPA. A lot of my constituents called Bronner directly, but they were as confused as mud when they got through. What I am looking for, as we go forward with the ARPA, is clearer information and a person they can call and get a better understanding. I will be honest with you, I did not get good reports from people in my community, after they talked with Bronner. That is what I am looking for as we go forward with the ARPA.
Ms. Hennessy stated the Bronner contract is over. We are going out to bid for a consultant for the ARPA dollars and we can specify the type of constituent support we are looking for.
Ms. Winfrey stated I suggest we print the CARES report in the newspapers, church bulletins and other publications, everywhere. We can break it down into the categories and at the end of each category, give a short summary of the criteria. Then the people reading it can understand how it got there. People would understand this amount of money went to businesses, this to nonprofits and this to x, y and z, based on the application and the criteria set forth. It would be helpful for people to have a better understanding of what happened.
Ms. Mueller stated Ms. Winfrey’s idea is great; we should do something like a press release. People want to see this information and by sharing it freely, people can see we are working for them. It is definitely a plus and it is important.
Mr. Fricilone asked were the federally required forms for ARPA filed on Tuesday?
Ms. Hennessy replied yes. We have not spent any of the money, so the interim report was (inaudible). We had to do a revenue loss calculation; I will be providing that to County Board staff. As far as the plan, we don’t really have a plan defined. I submitted the PowerPoint you have been using as a discussion tool.
Mr. Fricilone stated today there was another Treasury notice that due to COVID you could delay filing, but you needed to let the Treasury know. If we have some other upcoming deadlines, you might want to be aware of that. If you don’t have the information to file the next one, we might be able to delay it, based on COVID.
Ms. Hennessy stated we submitted something and added a caveat that it was a draft since we are still in the process of making decisions. They send out frequent reminders about when the next due dates are. I believe we have 60 days to finish the recovery plan. I provided the County Board Office with an example of what the plan could look like, which will require some assistance from a consultant. We don’t have that expertise on staff and I certainly cannot do that by myself.
Mr. Fricilone asked you said the revenue loss form has been completed; are we going to get it?
Ms. Hennessy stated I did a quick revenue loss, because you could not submit the report without it. I am giving a copy of the report to the County Board so you will be able to see that; remember, it is a draft.
Mr. Fricilone asked will we get that in the next day or two?
Ms. Hennessy replied hopefully.
Mr. Palmer stated I was on a NACo webinar and they were talking about the reports and related things. There is a 60 day deadline or marker Ms. Hennessy referred to, but they said you have the ability to amend your reports. If you don’t know your exact revenue loss, you can continue to work on that and amend it; the same thing with the plan. That is what we need to start working towards, with the help of a consultant. We need to get the revenue loss number firmed up soon, because that will drive some of the decisions.
Mr. Fricilone stated when we were at NACo, we asked that question because you get to see next years’ revenue loss, but have you seen anything as to how we are supposed to do that? How are we supposed to anticipate what the revenue loss might be next year and the year after, so we can capture those funds as well?
Mr. Palmer replied I was in that meeting when you asked that question. NACo staff is pretty good and has been involved in the decision making at the federal level and they were stumped by the question of how to figure future years. I have not seen anything yet, but the Treasury is still getting questions and responding. That could be a future revision to the guidelines, but I have not seen anything.
Mr. Fricilone stated maybe on the next NACo Finance call we need to just ask if they have heard anything or if anyone has given any feedback on it. That is going to be really important for the set aside we can use for revenue loss. I don’t know how you project that, because no one knows what is going to happen in the next two years.
Mr. Palmer stated the staff of NACo pointed out the revenue loss is more generous than what people initially thought it would be. That is a vehicle to fund things that are not in the scope of the ARPA. You can basically defederalize money and have it available for other projects; it is legal and they were encouraging people to do it. If you have projects that you are not 100% comfortable meeting the ARPA guidelines, you have the option to defederalize money via a legal booking or by the guidelines, and then you have the money without the strings attached. Similar to what we did with the CARES funds, we were able to book the public safety salaries and then that money was in corporate. They are encouraging people from all across the country to do this, because they were asking about different type of projects and their recommendation was to look at the revenue loss as a way to do some of those projects.
Mr. Moustis stated you are correct, the formula for revenue loss is pretty liberal. Certainly, it takes Will County beyond our real revenue loss. Knowing we are going to have a revenue loss, we need to get that number and it should be included in the FY2022 budget. I am not crazy about later amending the budget and appropriating it or dumping it into some type of reserve fund. For budget purposes, we need a number, even if it is an estimated number. Now that the County Board has the budget, we need to factor that into the budget. We need a number so we can go forward with our budget and reflect some of these federal funds that will be in the County’s portion of the budget that will most likely be spent in 2022. Can we get an estimate we can use for budget purposes? Perhaps, Ms. Howard would want to address that, but I think it is important that we address it in the budget.
Mr. Palmer stated I have had some discussions with Ms. Johannsen, Mr. Schaben and Ms. Hennessy and that is the priority now. We need to sit down with County Board and County Executive staff and really narrow in on the best estimate of that. This is tied to another agenda item on the contingency balance. I was told we should not call it contingency, because the County Board has an annual contingency. The CARES money that was defederalize is sitting in a fund at the County and we have a list that has been updated periodically of what that was committed for. That number plus the revenue recovery from ARPA are important numbers to note, because that can help guide our ARPA spending. I suggested to Mr. Schaben that we sit down with staff from the Executive’s Office and the County Board to get a handle on what has been obligated and the potential recapture of revenue loss before we make all the hard decisions on the ARPA.
Mr. Moustis asked do you think we could have that information before our next Finance meeting? Can we have some discussions on that next week?
Mr. Palmer replied to be fair to staff, I don’t think we will have the information by Tuesday. Maybe next week staff could meet for a few minutes and try to map this out. We have to prioritize this. Based on talks I have had with the community, there are some obvious ARPA things the Board may want to support and there are other things that may not be in the comfort zone of ARPA, but are still important projects. As long as we have the ability to fund them, we might want to use those dollars to fund them. I don’t think we can have it by Tuesday, but hopefully we can meet next week and get it going.
Mr. Moustis asked could we get it by the Executive Committee meeting next week?
Ms. Hennessy replied we have an estimate of the revenue loss from the calculations we did for the ARPA report. We have a number of what is left that we have been using to do CARES related or COVID support items. Hopefully, we can have some preliminary information available for the Executive Committee meeting next week.
Mr. Moustis stated since you did some preliminary numbers, could you have something for the Finance Committee meeting next week? Even if we use that number, we would have a number, understanding that it could be adjusted. It would be a guideline for the County Board as they go through the budget at the Finance Committee meeting next week. Can we see what was reported?
Ms. Hennessy replied between now and Tuesday, there is only one working day. Certainly, that number will be available. I don’t know that we will have time to have anything more elaborate than what we reported, but we would have that available.
Mr. Moustis continued at least it is a number the County Board can look at and even if we just plugged in that number for now, it would be helpful. There is not going to be a big variant from what you reported and what may be the actual.
Ms. Hennessy stated I followed the instructions for the recommended method of calculating the revenue loss. I compared fiscal years to come up with our average, and our average growth was very similar to the factor that they allowed. I will lay that out and have that available for the Finance Committee meeting. I will try to get it to the County Board tomorrow so they can add it to the agenda. We can do at least that much.
Mr. Moustis stated I don’t know if it needs to be added since it will be a discussion on the overall budget. It would just be something for us to look at and consider moving forward.
Mr. Harris stated to Mr. Moustis’ point, at the Finance Committee meeting next week, we will be discussing the revenues. The more information we have, it will help us with the discussion.
2. Consultant for ARP Work - Attachment Added
(Discussion)
Speaker Cowan stated the attachment for this item was added fairly recently. I am not sure if everyone had a chance to dig into it. This is going out for a consultant to help with ARPA. Does anyone have any comments or questions about the attachment or the plan?
Mr. Schaben stated Mr. Brooks brought up about communication, and one of the bullet points in the RFQ is called “community involvement”. That is gathering and structuring community involvement and coordinating presentations to the Board. That is communications between the public and the County as it relates to the ARPA.
Speaker Cowan asked can you to tell us what we learned over the last year through the CARES fund and how that changed or impacted what we are looking for in a consultant going forward?
Mr. Schaben replied from our perspective, one thing that would be helpful in the tracking of this process is assigning Resolutions for approvals. Whether it is the program or any expense from ARPA that we attach an actual Resolution to it. That is something we want to work with the consultant on. It will take a lot of work from a staffing perspective and also in discussions at the Board setting about drilling down into each of the individual programs and actually attaching a Resolution to it, so we have some sort of reference benchmark out there. The other component is communications. Bronner did the best they could with the staff and expertise they had to do community outreach and communications to the community and the residents, but that is not the focus of their firm. If we do a small business program where a lot of communication needs to happen to let people know about it, there is additional support that would probably be needed than what is included in this RFQ. This firm would act as a project lead, but additional support will be needed, as we stand up programs and as we stand up projects, especially on the communications front.
Speaker Cowan stated those are two really great points that we have all been aware of one way or the other, so it makes a lot of sense.
Mr. Fricilone asked we are sending this RFQ out; how are we picking the firm? Will a Committee be involved? Are we having the Executive Committee be involved? The Executive Committee makes sense to me. Will we have an Ad-Hoc Committee? Since the Executive Committee is going to deal with how we distribute the funds and to whom, to me it makes sense that the Executive Committee would have the best handle on how the company we are picking can handle what we need.
Speaker Cowan stated that is a good question and maybe that is something we talk to the Executive’s Office and get an answer to.
Mr. Schaben added we have not gotten to that point. I have been working on putting the RFQ together and this is where we are right now.
Speaker Cowan stated you don’t need our approval to send the RFQ out, but what I am hearing from Board Members is, they would like to see the final version before it goes it goes out. I think people might want a little more time to look at what we have and see if there are any other comments on it. Would that be okay with you?
Mr. Schaben asked do you want to set a hard date? We could allow a week for comments or changes to come in and then set a date when we will finalize it. We will provide a copy to everybody.
Speaker Cowan stated we want to move on this. Perhaps for next week’s agenda we could have a final copy and that gives people a week to review it. They can contact you or Mr. Palmer with suggestions or questions.
Mr. Schaben stated if any Board Member has changes, go through Mr. Palmer and he and I will coordinate and communicate, and we will get a final draft for next week’s Executive Committee meeting.
Ms. Mueller stated I agree with Mr. Fricilone, the Executive Committee should be reviewing this RFQ, with whoever we hire for a consultant.
Mr. Moustis stated my question is probably for the State’s Attorney’s Office, since I am confused. Can the Executive’s Office independently do an RFQ without direction from the County Board? It was my understanding that the Board has to make a determination to go out for an RFQ, then it goes to the Executive’s Office. I thought the Board could set parameters within the RFQ when we send it over. I think there is County Board involvement. I would like some clarification on that.
Mrs. Tatroe replied when there is a need to procure something for the County, other than just something for the Executive’s Office, there would have to be basic direction from the County Board. However, it is not legally necessary for the County Executive to bring the bid documents to the County Board to be approved before they actually issue them. The suggestion we have given is, it is generally best to make sure there is some desire on the part of the County Board to move forward on something before the Executive would issue an RFP.
Mr. Moustis asked can the Board put parameters or include something in an RFP when it goes out? I understand the County Executive puts it out, but certainly, there is a role for the County Board to play, to say here are some of the parameters or things we would like to see included in an RFP. Whether it is communication or some other emphasis, is that appropriate?
Mrs. Tatroe replied it would have to be very high level. It would not be for the County Board to look over the RFP and say I don’t like this or I don’t like that. You can give general direction; we want a consultant and we want a consultant for x, y and z purposes and then it is up to the County Executive to draft that RFP and send it out. The problem is if the Executive’s Office issues an RFP and there is something that does not meet what the County Board would like to see, then the likelihood is that the County Board will say no, we are not going to hire the contractor, because it is not what we want. There has to be collaboration.
Mr. Moustis stated Mr. Schaben stated there was discussion with Mr. Palmer and the Board on developing the RFP. I believe there should be something from the Board that directs the County Executive’s Office to go out for an RFP.
Speaker Cowan stated if Board Members have a couple of days to look at this and if you have any suggestions, it can be on the Executive Committee agenda next week. We can assume it is a final version, but before we make a motion to direct the Executive to go out for this RFP, people could make a motion to change something about the RFP.
Mr. Moustis stated what I am trying to get at is not necessarily the details of the RFP. There will be collaboration and discussion on that. My main point is that the County Board gives direction to the Executive’s Office to go out for an RFP.
Ms. Winfrey stated I agree that the discussion or review of the RFP needs to come to the Executive Committee. It is my understanding there is a desire for transparency. So given that, I certainly think the RFP would come to the Executive Committee for a review to make sure we are all in agreement with that. Are we looking for two contractors? One to focus on the communication itself and the other to administer the money?
Mr. Schaben replied this RFQ is for one consultant. As things develop, there might be a need to bring on additional consultants for the ARP project. The RFQ today is to identify one firm as per the specifications in the RFQ.
Ms. Winfrey asked will they administer the money? Will they operate in the way Bronner has in the past?
Mr. Schaben replied yes.
Ms. Winfrey continued with Bronner, we did not really get communications at the level we needed in the community. It seems we may need a separate focus group to make sure people at the user level get the information they need, for the money to be more effective.
Mr. Schaben replied that is correct. The RFQ today is not as focused on the communication component as I alluded to earlier; that would come later as the bucket of funds and how the funds will be allocated is flushed out.
Mr. Palmer stated when we hired Bronner, we understood there were other services needed and we could augment their contract. They brought on AXION to cut the checks, which was a subcontract to Bronner, so that definitely could happen. Our original thought was to keep Bronner on for the ARPA project. However, Bronner had some staff leave and the County Executive’s Office recommended that we go back out for a bid. The County Board leadership agreed we needed to get someone onboard who was ready, able and staffed to do this work. There is nothing against Bronner, it is just that we are going out for a clean bid. Mrs. Tatroe said it very eloquently, the Board can give direction, but the Board, during my time here, has never done a Resolution formally authorizing bids. It was more of an informal process; the Executive’s Office gets input from the Board, crafts the RFP. The Board has always been involved in the selection and the Board approves the money and the actual consultant. I think if we stick to a similar model, it works. As Mrs. Tatroe said, the Board has to approve the contract and the money, so it makes sense to work together and get it done.
Speaker Cowan stated everyone take a look at the RFQ and let Mr. Palmer know if you have any questions. He will coordinate with the Executive’s Office.
3. Creation of Agricultural Areas Committee - Status Update - Attachment Added (Update)
Speaker Cowan stated there has been an update attached.
Mr. Schaben stated the two applications we have at this time are in the County Board. They are applications for the creation of an Ag area and the modification, which should be created this week. We are creating a webpage where residents can download the application and it has a description of how the Committee is created, dissolved and modified and what an Ag area Committee is. It provides a comprehensive overview and it will be under our Land Use Department. When the site goes live, I will send a link to County Board for them to share.
Mrs. Ogalla stated I am glad to hear there is going to be webpage, because it is difficult to find on the Land Use Department’s webpage; you have to search and if people don’t know what to do, they can’t find it. I noticed the application says it must exceed 100 acres, but it has to be 100 acres or more.
Mr. Schaben replied 100 acres is the threshold. That is clarified and the website will have all of that information. I apologize if the application doesn’t specify that.
Mrs. Ogalla stated I want it to be easy to understand. If Mr. Fricilone and I were farmers and our land is next to each other; I have 50 acres and he has 75 acres, we can join together and make an Ag area. I don’t have to have 100 acres myself, when we combine our land we would have 125 acres and that would qualify us.
Mr. Palmer stated what you sent to me is a one page proposed modification form; that is all the Board Office has officially received. Is there more?
Mr. Schaben replied you need the other application which is the actual creation and I will get that over to you.
Mr. Palmer stated all we have on the agenda is the one page application form. Mrs. Ogalla has been working with you, but we want to make sure all Board Members have it in the event someone asks them questions.
4. Update on County Board Contingency Fund Balance
(Melissa Johannsen)
Mr. Palmer stated this is something that was requested by Board Members. But after talking with Mrs. Johannsen and the County Executive’s staff, we need an off-line discussion to really drill down and get all the information put together and then we will come back to the Board. We don't have anything official to report today. We have received reports from the Executive's Office on what money was left. What we are talking about is the previously known as CARES money. We are going to do that and that is part of what Mr. Moustis was talking about. We will have that as soon as possible and bring it back.
5. CARES Fund Reporting Information from County Executive's Office (Karen Hennessy)
Ms. Hennessy reviewed the Executive Summary in the agenda packet and stated as suggested by Board Members, maybe this is what we make available to the public. We can put this and all the details on the website.
Mr. Fricilone stated number one, we need to tell Stepping Stones and Guardian Angel, we are not waiting until the end of 2021. There are only four months left and they need to get this dealt with. Then if we are minus $25,000, we can move that money over from the contingency that was defederalized. I don’t know what their issue is that they can’t spend it, but we need to find out. This is the form that I have been asking for since we had our Congressional Delegation meetings. Maybe it is my fault, but I promised them we would get them something like this. It gives them an overview on what we spent the monies on, so they can see we were good stewards of the money they gave us. This is perfect. We don’t need to make this a memorandum, we need to make it as nice of a sheet as we can and send it to all of them. Whether they look at it or not, they know what we have done with the money. Just like Mr. Brooks was talking about, it pretty much tells everybody how the money was spent. Back to the $25,000, what do you have to say about that?
Ms. Hennessy replied on the Finance agenda, I submitted a discussion item for Stepping Stones with a couple of recommendations. I agree with you, I don’t know that we want to wait until December for them to spend the money. Perhaps we could allocate it some other way or earmark it for ARPA dollars, so we can move forward and close this. Another thing we found out, in the last two weeks from EMA, is the FEMA reimbursement has already been paid with federal dollars, so we can’t submit it for a FEMA reimbursement. Those two items are likely to go away and we would just pay for part of the renovations with the funds that are available. We would not have a negative; we would cover that somewhere else.
Mr. Fricilone asked you are saying in your first chart that the $237,180.56 that we were going to get back, we are not getting back?
Ms. Hennessy replied we already paid the $237,180.56 using CARES dollars. You can’t now request another federal agency to cover that expenditure. Even if we were to move it out of CARES to somewhere else, there is no way to eliminate the financial transaction history; it is frowned upon. We had federal dollars to pay this $237,180.56 and it will stay in the CARES fund. When we pulled this together, we were thinking we would be able to move it somewhere else and then submit it for FEMA reimbursement. We have found we can’t do that, so this number will just go away. The $180,000 for Stepping Stones and Guardian Angel, depending on what the Finance Committee determines next week, that might go away and then we would just have the Phase 3 renovations to pay for and that should use up all of the funds.
Mr. Palmer stated Mrs. Adams pointed out this is the next item on the Executive agenda. It is on Executive because the CARES Committee is done and they were authorizing expenditures of CARES funds. Procedurally, the Executive Committee supersedes any other Committee. If you are not ready to talk about this, we could move it to next week.
Ms. Hennessy stated I asked staff what that was, so I am prepared. Do you want to finish answering questions about this and then move on to it?
Mr. Palmer stated I will defer to the Board, but Ms. Hennessy and I had conversations off-line. To Mr. Fricilone’s question, we can draw a line and say what we want to say as a Board and the Executive’s Office, but there are some unique circumstances with these two remaining funds. My recommendation to staff is to not keep the CARES fund open just for them, but to try to find a way, in a reasonable amount of time to resolve this; not years, but maybe months or later this year. We should close out the account so you can file the final reports and move on. I don’t know if you are the person or if it is Mr. Schaben to speak to these particular cases, but there are other factors in terms of funding and movement during COVID. My opinion is these two agencies should not lose this funding, they are doing their best, but they have other limitations. Again, that should not be a reason to keep the CARES fund open.
Ms. Hennessy stated Bronner had been working with the social service agencies, Stepping Stones in particular, is doing a capital project and they are struggling to get goods, raw materials and workers to do work. From my perspective, the options would be to give them until November 30th and whatever they spend between now and then, we reimburse them; but that means leaving the program open until December. The other option is, if the Board wants to declare that we would cover this under ARPA, then we just move the reimbursement over and we will have to make sure it fits in one of the allocations the Board determines. Those are the two options the County Executive’s Office proposed. I will leave it up to the Board to give us direction on that.
Speaker Cowan asked just to stay focused on the agenda, because other people have questions, since that is our next agenda item, can we put a pin on that and come back to that discussion?
Ms. Winfrey stated thank you Ms. Hennessy for this information. It is a great tool for Board Members and it gives them an idea of all the money we spent. This information may be more involved than what we need in a press release for John Q. Public. An example would be in the bars, restaurants and small business category, we might do a very simple statement “a total of X number of dollars were given to small businesses, which included restaurants, bars and other small businesses”. We have one total, not the breakdown of the three rounds, which is very simple for people to see and then list the criteria. Then you are not going into a lot of detail about what happened behind the scenes, because that is not necessarily helpful to the general public.
Speaker Cowan stated that is a good idea.
Mrs. Ogalla stated I like pie charts, because I think people can see that information nice and easy. The pie chart on page 10 has seven slices, but the list of what the colors mean in the pie chart only has five.
Ms. Hennessy replied there were a couple of groups that were lumped together. I could change that, but some of these were combined. That is why there are more categories in the chart than there in the graph. I think other nonprofits might include some of those. It is showing seven pieces, but it is not showing the definition for them. I can fix that.
Ms. Ventura stated I disagree with Ms. Winfrey and I feel this should be posted on-line. In a press release we should summarize it a little so it can easily be posted. Are the pie charts and the breakouts going to be posted on our website? I would like the public to see as much transparency as possible.
Ms. Hennessy stated the intent was to put the full document on-line; the summary and the detail of who got paid. That is how we started updating the website, then we ran into an issue with keeping it updated. The intent is the detail of who got paid would be out there.
Ms. Ventura stated it will be a PDF they click on; it won’t be graphs where they go to a page and they will be able to see everything.
Ms. Hennessy replied yes, it will be a PDF of the summary and a PDF of the actual list of payments.
Ms. Ventura stated I am okay with that. To Ms. Winfrey’s point, I am totally okay with printing a press release that summarizes this or as Mr. Fricilone mentioned sending it to our legislators and having it more condensed; but when it comes to being able to get more information, I think it is important to have it on the website for those who want more information can get it. I agree with Mrs. Ogalla, the pie charts are the way to go, because the visual helps break that down for me.
6. Closing Out of CARES Act Fund #2711
(Karen Hennessy)
Mr. Fricilone asked the way we have the money right now, it is still in CARES and it has to be dealt with by the end of the year. Do we have the option to defederalize it at this point? If it is invoices we are waiting for, is there a way they can do pro forma invoices from the people doing their construction, so we could submit those? I am not sure what the federal guidelines are on what the invoice has to look like.
Ms. Hennessy replied it is a reimbursement; they actually have to expend the funds. They would have to pay their contractor and we would reimburse them for it. We could find something to reimburse the County for and put that money aside somewhere; it might be cleaner.
Mr. Fricilone stated you are right, it is certainly cleaner if we could just pay their reimbursement. However, if they are not going to get it done and if we don’t finish this off, we have to give the money back and they are out.
Ms. Hennessy stated the easiest thing to do would be to recognize that this money is available with the ARPA funds for these two organizations and use the rest of the CARES money for the other expenditures we are ready to pay.
Mr. Fricilone asked what else are we ready to pay that fall under CARES?
Ms. Hennessy replied we have not paid for the Phase 3 renovations yet. That was approved by the Board, but we are holding the invoices because we are hoping to finish up the CARES funding doing that.
Mr. Fricilone asked is that as much as the other two items we have?
Ms. Hennessy replied it is about $400,000 for the Phase 3. There is $180,000 remaining for Stepping Stones and Guardian Angel.
Mr. Fricilone asked where were we going to get that $400,000 from?
Ms. Hennessy replied if we did not do it here, we would use the defederalized money. But we don’t have to do that because we have this available.
Mr. Fricilone stated I understand it is easier to use the defederalized money for us than trying to give it to an outside agency. But that does create some issues, of us spending our money, in our budget, for other agencies.
Ms. Hennessy stated as a County, we don’t have the ability to just pay these agencies for nothing. We have to reimburse them through one of these federal programs. If they are not able to comply with the deadline and the requirements of the CARES dollars, the opportunity we can give them is if they can get it done, we have the ARPA money. I would think this is a small amount of the $130 million that we have to spend in the next few years.
Mr. Fricilone stated we have not decided what programs we are doing and if this does not strictly fall into the program, then it looks like we carved something out of ARPA just for them and someone else will say “I am the same as them, why can’t I qualify for something”. I think the best scenario is they have to get this done by November 30th and get paid, otherwise we lose the funds.
Ms. Hennessy stated by November 30th, they have to submit for reimbursement whatever they have incurred. Then, if there are some CARES dollars left, we could find something COVID related at the County we could use the funds for, if they are unable to fully expend it.
Mr. Fricilone stated we should be planning now and not waiting until November 30th to decide what we want to spend it on. We should have a contingency plan so we are ready to go on it.
Ms. Hennessy stated November 30th gives us a month, because the deadline is December. They have to submit to us by November 30th so we can reimburse them.
Mr. Fricilone stated it gives us a month to file, but not a month to figure out what we are going to do with it if they can’t use it.
Speaker Cowan stated if that will need County Board direction, we have to have a meeting to do that. The timeline becomes pretty tight.
Mr. Palmer stated there are a lot of questions and things Mr. Fricilone brought up that we could check out between now and next week’s meeting. We can talk off line about what we can do legally. There are certain statutory things that the State’s Attorney’s Office has advised us we can’t spend funds on. There are some exceptions, when there is an emergency declaration in place, and that is what I would like to talk to the State’s Attorney about. I think what you are saying is don’t use ARPA money. What are our options for other sources of funds and if that is not a possibility, then we have to go to them. To leave CARES open until November just for these two does not seem like the best course. If that is our only option, it is our only option. However, if there is another way besides the options Ms. Hennessy has laid out, perhaps we could find them.
Mr. Fricilone stated even if we could do it legally, taking money out of the corporate fund for them, then everyone else will ask “where’s mine” and that all starts. It is CARES money and if they can get it spent, great and if not, then we have to use it for something else and they may be out. I know they are trying hard to get it done.
Ms. Ventura stated I echo Mr. Fricilone. I am very uncomfortable using ARPA dollars. If we were to do something like that, what I would like is that we spend the CARES money for something on the County Board. Then, we would not need to use ARPA for County Board expenditures. I think we would pass a Resolution that showed that, so there was no question on how these dollars were spent. There would be a very clear directive from the Board about how this happened, so we are not muddying the waters. It sounds like the better option is to go back to these agencies and say you need to prepay your supplies, construction workers and your consultants or whoever by November 30th and file your reimbursements by this date. They are creating the problem, they need to create the solution. If they are not willing to create the solution, then it is really not our problem. I feel for them, but we have regulations we have to follow too. Why are we the ones skirting around to solve these things and messing up our books? At the end of the day it is their responsibility too. I want to be lenient on this, but I also want to be fair. If we are going to make exceptions for one, all of a sudden why didn’t we extend the deadline for the others? We have to play hardball and say you have to prepay whoever you need to prepay, but November 30th is the deadline for us. We will reimburse everything at that point. If there are extra dollars and we want to apply them to remodeling, that is fine. But, we also need to recognize when we discuss ARPA, that we are very clear on how we do that. I am uncomfortable doing it at this point until we fix all of these other plans.
Mrs. Traynere stated DuPage Township would love some more money. We are doing a feasibility study on building a food pantry. We have a roof that is in really bad repair and we already spent money on projects that we were not reimbursed for that were definitely COVID related. If you need a place to put money, I have some bills.
Mr. Brooks stated I am on the Stepping Stones Board of Directors. I put my hand down earlier because Ms. Hennessy answered a lot of our concerns. Stepping Stones is trying to do all they can to meet those deadlines. However, they ran into circumstances beyond their control in getting merchandise and equipment. They are working to meet those deadline. We have been having meetings around the clock to try and get those things done. I appreciate all the comments today and it gives me some direction to take back to them to help us with that building.
VI. OTHER OLD BUSINESS
VII. NEW BUSINESS
1. Update on Radio System - Attachment Added
(Tom Murray)
Mr. Murray reviewed the attached PowerPoint presentation.
Mr. Fricilone asked are there any future costs we need to be planning for?
Mr. Murray replied at some point we will want to talk about possibly replacing the radio system. The average life is between 10 to 20 years; I think more of 15 to 20 years. In the next eight to ten years, it would be a good idea to start thinking about what the next radio system might look like. Other things we looked at and we try to budget for is the replacement of the radios the different County agencies use. They are portable, mobile radios and we make sure they are in best operating condition they can be. We were able to purchase a number of mobile and portable radios with CARES Act funding, so we have a good inventory on hand for replacing any that might be broken through normal wear and tear. We are always mindful of the age of our generators; they are all very young at this point and we feel very comfortable with that. The other major expense we may have is the replacement of our site batteries. Their lifespan is eight to 12 years, so in five to seven years we might want to think about that. Otherwise, we try to cover the day-to-day maintenance with our usual capital operating funds.
Mr. Fricilone stated it would be great to get a spreadsheet with all of those future things, so we can put it in a big sheet to show us five, seven and ten years out what is going to be needed, so you are not coming the year before and asking.
VIII. COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENT REQUESTS
A. Land Use & Development Committee
T. Marcum, Chair
1. Overturning the Decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission and Approving Appeal #APCD-21-004 by Joseph D and Jane M. Gombosi, Owners of Record and Jeff Sidell, Agent; for Zoning Case # ZC-21-050 in Lockport Township, Commonly Known as 14357 High Road, Lockport, IL, County Board District #7
(Brian Radner)
B. Finance Committee
K. Harris, Chair
1. Appropriating Restore, Reinvest, and Renew (R3) Planning Grant
(Karen Hennessy)
2. Appropriating Restore, Reinvest, and Renew (R3) Direct Support Grant (Karen Hennessy)
3. Internal Budget Transfer to COVID Support Budget
(Karen Hennessy)
4. Transferring Appropriations within Various County Budgets
(ReShawn Howard)
5. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2021 for the Year 2022 to Pay Debt Service on $57,380,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Transportation Improvement Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2010, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
6. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2021 for the Year 2022 to Pay Debt Service on $4,435,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Refunding Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2012, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
7. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2021 for the Year 2022 to Pay Debt Service on $5,480,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Refunding Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2014, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
8. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2021 for the Year 2022 to Pay Debt Service on $12,665,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Refunding Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2015A, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
9. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2021 for the Year 2022 to Pay Debt Service on $34,720,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Building Will Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2016, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
10. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2021 for the Year 2022 to Pay Debt Service on $60,485,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Building Will Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2019, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
11. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2021 for the Year 2022 to Pay Debt Service on $170,800,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Building Will Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2020, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
12. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2021 for the Year 2022 to Pay Debt Service on $39,245,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Building Will Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2021, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
C. Public Works & Transportation Committee
J. VanDuyne, Chair
1. Granting County Aid in Construction of a Bridge over Forked Creek on Scheer Road as Petitioned by Green Garden Road District, County Board District #2 - Added
(Jeff Ronaldson)
2. Authorizing an Intergovernmental Agreement between the Village of University Park and the County of Will for Placement of License Plate Reading Cameras Located on County Highways in the County of Will - Added
(Jeff Ronaldson)
3. Authorizing Approval of Supplemental Professional Services Agreement for Design Engineering Services (Phase II) with Globetrotters Engineering Corporation for Roadway and Appurtenant Work on Laraway Road (CH 74) at Cedar Road (CH 4), County Board District #12 - Added
(Jeff Ronaldson)
4. Discussion of Feasibility Study with City of Crest Hill for Weber/Knapp Area - Added
(Jeff Ronaldson)
D. Diversity & Inclusion Committee
M. Tyson, Chair
E. Public Health & Safety Committee
R. Ventura, Chair
1. Declaring Homelessness a Public Health Emergency
(Rachel Ventura)
F. Legislative & Judicial Committee
D. Winfrey, Chair
1. In-Car Cameras for Sheriff's Vehicles
(Sheriff's Department)
G. Capital Improvements Committee
H. Brooks, Jr., Chair
H. Executive Committee
M. Cowan, Chair
1. Cytec/Solvay Ordinance Issue
(Nick Palmer)
2. Setting Minimum Pay for Will County Employees at $15.00 per Hour (Discussion)
3. Adopting Revised Will County County-Wide Hazard Mitigation Plan (Harold Damron)
4. Authorizing the County Executive to Negotiate and Execute a Contract with Tulsa Inspection Resources-PUC, LLC for Pipeline Inspection Services of the RNG Pipeline Construction from Prairie View Landfill to MGT Interconnect Location
(Christina Snitko)
5. Declaring Surplus and Authorizing Sale of Real Property Acquired by Condemnation
(Kevin Lynn, Jeff Ronaldson)
6. Establishing All-In Cost Estimate for the Renewable Natural Gas Plant at the Prairie View Landfill and Recycling Facility
(Mitch Schaben / Tim Mack)
7. Authorizing the County Executive to Execute an Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Journal Technologies Inc., for Data Migration for the eCourt Administrative Adjudication System
(Mitch Schaben / Mike Shay)
8. Realigning Terms of Oakwood Cemetery Association Board
(Mitch Schaben)
IX. OTHER NEW BUSINESS
X. REQUEST FOR STATE'S ATTORNEY'S OPINION
XI. ACCEPT COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENT REQUESTS
Speaker Cowan stated we have a couple of additional assignment requests. Could I get a motion to add to the Land Use Committee agenda a request for refund of fees from Plumbing Express? Can I get a motion to add to the Executive Committee agenda authorizing a contract renewal with Total Parking Solutions for multi-space parking terminals and authorizing service and maintenance contract with Total Parking Solutions for multi-space terminals?
Mr. Ronaldson stated I texted Mr. Van Duyne and he requested that we add the City of Wilmington's license plate reader Resolution to the Public Works & Transportation agenda.
1. Motion to add to the Land Use & Development Committee Agenda a Resolution for Refund of Fees from Plumbing Express.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Judy Ogalla, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Parker |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Parker |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Parker |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Parker |
Mrs. Adams announced there were no public comments.
Mrs. Ogalla asked where information could be found where they are with establishing who will be on the Ag Committee?
Speaker Cowan asked Mr. Palmer to send an e-mail to Mr. Schaben and this issue will be addressed next week.
Mr. Fricilone stated several years ago, in Finance, I requested that the number of full time employees under each group, be put into the budget book, which they are now doing. What I would like to get, and I know they do it as part of the budget process, what the counts were last year for the departments and what the counts are for this year; along with how many vacancies are in each department. This will help us see if we are increasing employees. Then when you look at the budget book you will see why numbers went up or down. I am sure Ms. Howard has that list.
Ms. Howard indicated she could provide the requested information.
XIII. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Speaker Cowan stated if you have social media accounts, please push out the ARPA survey one more time. We are looking to close that next Wednesday night, so let's get a few more responses in.
XIV. EXECUTIVE SESSION
XV. ADJOURNMENT
1. Motion to Adjourn at 11:46 AM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member SECONDER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Parker |
Alerts Sign-up