Will County Board Executive Committee met Nov. 10.
Here are the minutes provided by the committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Ms. Mueller led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. ROLL CALL
Chair Mimi Cowan called the meeting to order at 10:54 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 | Present | |
| Margaret Tyson | Member | Present | |
| Joe VanDuyne | Member | Present | |
| Rachel Ventura | Member | Present | |
| Denise E. Winfrey | Member | Present |
Present from State's Attorney's Office: M. Tatroe and K. Meyers.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Committee of the Whole - Public Hearing - Oct 4, 2021 6:30 PM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
1. American Rescue Plan (Mimi Cowan)
Speaker Cowan stated Ms. Mueller, Mr. Fricilone, the County Executive, Mr. Blackburn, a number of staff members and myself interviewed six firms for an ARPA consultant last Friday. We are waiting for a recommendation from the County Executive’s Office. We do not have a ranking yet of who we want the Executive to negotiate with. We would like to hold space for this item on the County Board agenda for next week. Then if we are ready to move forward and authorize the County Executive to negotiate, we would be able to do that next Thursday. The goal would be to do that on Thursday and they would be able to negotiate and bring a contract forward in December for us to approve, with a January, 2022 start. Are there any specific questions about that? I want to make sure we are all on the same page.
Mr. Schaben stated the selection committee requested to see pricing proposals from three of the applicants and we asked them to return those by close of business on Monday. Our hope is to reconvene the selection committee on Tuesday, if possible, to make the determination.
Mr. Brooks stated this selection committee you have, is it following the norm as we do with the Capital Improvements Committee or any other committee where leadership narrows it down and brings it to the Board? Is your leadership committee the only ones that will make the selection to come to the County Board for a vote?
Speaker Cowan replied this is being handled similar to the way we handle other RFPs and the process for outside contractors. Myself, Ms. Mueller and Mr. Fricilone are part of the voting body; as well as the Auditor and the County Executive. We listened to the six presentations and, as a group, we decided we needed a little bit more information before we ranked the firms. The Executive went back to get that information for us, so we can have that information, reconvene in whatever fashion we need to, rank the groups and then bring the groups forward to the County Board to authorize the County Executive to negotiate with the first group and if that does not work out, then with the second group, as normal.
Mr. Moustis stated I do not recall seeing the RFP. I am sure it is comprehensive, but I would like to see what the scope of the company would be.
Speaker Cowan asked Mrs. Adams or Mr. Palmer to get a copy of the RFP and send it out to County Board Members.
Mr. Palmer stated I will make sure we resend it to everybody so they have the original RFQ. We can also send you the list of the firms that bid and the firms that were interviewed; that will be helpful also.
Speaker Cowan stated in the coming months we will have presentations from Land Use on the various projects we discussed and a presentation from the Heritage Corridor Convention and Visitors Bureau along with some of the economic development requests.
2. Request by CED for Funding for CEDS (Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy) Plan (CED)
Speaker Cowan stated we had a conversation last week about funding for the CEDS Plan. We are going to hold off on this. I think there are more conversations that need to be had. We have more information that needs to be worked on by the CED. We will bring this back, maybe, in December for further consideration.
3. Supporting a 2-1-1 System through the United Way of Will County (United Way)
Speaker Cowan stated we heard the presentation from the United Way on funding for the 2-1-1 system. At the Finance Committee meeting they had a conversation about this and added it to the budget. I don't believe we need to approve this again, because there is money in the budget should we pass the budget, as is. I wanted to give people a chance to comment or ask any questions about this system.
Ms. Ventura asked even though we added to the budget, do we have to officially vote to adopt this program? Are we saying we are going to move this to the full County Board and at that meeting we will vote to adopt this measure?
Speaker Cowan stated we could ask the Executive Committee to take a vote on this to demonstrate whether or not we support the funding of this in the budget.
Ms. Ventura stated we should adopt something since this is a policy.
Mr. Palmer stated at the Finance Committee there was a vote to include this in the budget and the direction for staff was to include that in the final budget when presented next week. If that is the case, you are going to vote on this next week as part of the overall budget. Otherwise, nothing precludes us from taking further action at a future Executive Committee meeting. As long as it makes it into the budget next week, it will be approved for one year. We talked about that at committee that we can only appropriate for one year at a time.
Mr. Fricilone stated as Mr. Palmer said, we can only approve this for one year. As Ms. Martinez presented, the United Way is going to be looking at ways to supplement the cost in future years. We will have to decide, in the future, how much we are putting in our budget for it. The idea was to get it started as soon as possible, by putting it in the budget. I spoke with Ms. Martinez yesterday and by putting it in the budget, if approved, on December 1st she can start signing contracts with the suppliers that were presented to us, so she can get the process going and get this started faster than if we used ARPA funds for it. We would have to, in future years, put this in our budget, maybe not to the extent we are now, because they are going to be doing some fundraising. The idea is to get this started as soon as possible and get this in our budget for one year and get the program rolling.
Mr. Palmer stated upon council with Mrs. Adams, we may want to do a Resolution so we have formal documentation of support for this and establishing that we are paying for it the first year. I know it is being funded through the budget, but that way we have a mechanism to track it. We can include in the language about future years of allocations that will be determined in the future. To Mr. Fricilone’s point, if they are able to fundraise and don’t need our additional funding, then so be it. We have been doing that more this year, as far as documenting things via Resolution. It does not hurt, it is just one more agenda item for the Board Meeting. I recommend we do a Resolution, just so it is memorialized in a Resolution.
Mr. Moustis stated I agree with Ms. Ventura’s point and Mr. Palmer supporting that. We should officially support development of a 2-1-1 system and I think it is a good idea to do that.
Mrs. Traynere stated I got the presentation yesterday in an e-mail, obviously it is not the same as being there. Was any type of study or data collected that shows there is a need for this? In large, urban areas like Chicago, there are so many different organizations, so much congestion and just a lot of different issues that don’t affect the suburban areas. We have townships and I don’t think we have any place where we do not have an elected officials that could connect residents with something that would be needed. Certainly, we have a plethora of different groups that are helping now, we just don’t have this phone system, but we have texting, e-mail and regular phones. I see this as an obligation we are going to have to keep going and with this continual concern about CPI and other taxing increases, I am not certain we should be taking on additional programs. I remember very clearly Mr. Moustis’ concern about having the Will Ride and how we were setting ourselves up for continual funding for that. That was proven in yesterday’s Finance Committee meeting. There is a cost to these things and if we are not cutting something else, I don’t know that it behooves us to add new programs; in light of the very clear agenda to lower taxes.
Mr. Brooks stated when Ms. Martinez made the presentation, it was a very lengthy meeting, a lot of remarks were made, and I agree with every one of them; a lot of people said a lot of good things. As a Pastor of the church, we are also a resource center. I sit on the Board of the United Way. Twelve years ago Mr. Hennessy gave me a resource pamphlet and since the pandemic, over half of them have shut down. Those were the nonprofit agencies that help people. Some of them combined with DuPage County, Kendall County or whatever, but over half of them on that sheet are gone. I thought the 2-1-1 would be a very good idea, because it will fill the void during the pandemic when the needs are there, but the agencies are not there anymore. I did not say it at that meeting, but I 100% support the 2-1-1 system. I think it will fill a major void.
Speaker Cowan stated the 2-1-1 is not a resource, it is actually the resource sheet you are talking about. People can call 2-1-1 to get the information and the managers will know which organizations are opened and which are closed and it will be more updated.
Mrs. Ogalla stated we always want to find new program that are needed and fund them. I am concerned with the funding source going forward and not wanting to raise taxes to the max. Next year the inflation rate will be much higher and the CPI will be much higher than it was this year, so there is concern there for me. We have the cannabis dollars sitting in a special fund that we never decided what we were going to spend them on. To me, this might be a related type of issue that we might want to consider using those dollars to fund. They are going to do fundraising, once it gets going and she does not think she will need this type of funding source from us. In the past, I said we should put together a package to consider using the cannabis tax dollars for. Maybe for three years we allocate so much money to these programs. Then at the end of those three years, we could look at those programs and see if we want to re-allocate the funds to different programs or continue with the programs or projects we are supporting. I think that is an area we could look at to do the funding.
Ms. Mueller stated I want to say I am definitely in support of this 2-1-1 system. As a County Board Member, I have found myself spending a lot of time helping folks who need services and tracking down where they can get them. This is going to be an excellent resource for the residents of our County and how we can serve them. As Mrs. Ogalla said, they presented that they would need us to help them in the beginning, but they would be fundraising to cover this in the next two or three years. I am definitely 100% behind this system.
Speaker Cowan asked does someone want to make a motion today, to support the program as an idea? When we get to next week’s Board Meeting, it is going to be part of the budget. At that point, you can either support it being part of the budget or you could make an amendment to have it not be part of the budget and we could then move forward with funding it with ARPA funds, under the assumption we all seem to be in support of the program. The conversation is really, do we support the program and next week we can delve into where the funding comes from.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey |
(Discussion)
Speaker Cowan stated I am going to hand this over to Mr. Palmer. There were some questions last week and he has some data and information for you today.
Mr. Palmer stated I was able to go to our local economist, Mr. Doug Pryor and he was able to pull some data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. I just received it yesterday, otherwise, I would have distributed it. I am going to say up front, I don’t know how valuable this may be, but they have numbers on public sector, local government salaries, but it does not break it out by positions, so it includes everyone; police officers, public works, clerks, etc. They do break it out by County and I can distribute this. For Will County, the annual average wage for the first quarter of 2021 was $71,708 and that is comparable to our peers. DuPage County was actually a little lower; Kane County was $70,148; but that is the average for public administrative local government officials. In 2020 the annual wage was $72,124, so it dropped from 2020 to 2021. Because it is not localized enough for elected officials versus staff or specific positions in local government, I am not sure that it is as valuable, but it is an average annual wage. I did not get any additional questions. I am not sure where we are going with this, but I just wanted to share the data on average wages from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Speaker Cowan stated the question is do we want more time for discussion? Does someone want to make a motion about the direction we are going? I am open to get the Committee’s feeling on this.
Mr. Van Duyne stated I did not think it was a good idea to give the County Board Members a raise during this time and I feel the same way about our countywide officials. If it is okay with the Committee, I would like to make a motion that we hold the line on the countywide elected officials’ salary.
A motion was made by Mr. Van Duyne, seconded by Ms. Ventura, to hold the line on the countywide elected officials’ salary.
Mr. Harris stated I think we should look at the salaries for the elected officials and dive into them. In particular, the Sheriff. The Sheriff is probably underpaid, no matter how you look at it. Whether you look at population or square miles, we should look at that and give a compensation package that is appropriate for the responsibility he has. If you look at population, he received 16 cents per person and that is still the lowest of all the surrounding counties; who average 27 cents. I would be supportive of increases.
Speaker Cowan stated there will be a Resolution at the full Board Meeting.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [11 TO 2]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey NAYS: Harris, Ogalla |
VII. NEW BUSINESS
1. Metra Presentation on 2022 Proposed Operating & Capital Program & Budget (Metra)
Speaker Cowan stated unfortunately I have to leave in a little bit, so I wanted to move three things around on our agenda today and then I will turn things over to Ms. Mueller for the remainder of the meeting.
Items #9, #10 and #11 on the agenda were discussed prior to this item.
Speaker Cowan left at this juncture.
Mr. Don Orseno gave an update on Metra's 2022 proposed operating and capital program and budget.
2. Division of County Board Districts into Three Groups (Discussion)
Ms. Mueller stated per State statute, it is the Board’s responsibility to break out these terms. The County Clerk’s Office is going to hold the lottery on November 18th during the Board Meeting to pick the terms for each district.
Mr. Palmer stated this is part of the reapportionment process. Ten years ago we did it during a Board Meeting. It is by lot and no one has an inside track. Per State statute, we will break the Board into three groups and you will get either a 4-4-2 term, a 2-4-4 term or 4-2-4 term. Over ten years you have to break it up into those type of terms. The Clerk’s Office does this to be a neutral party. It is pretty straight forward. If there are any questions, let us know. We were recommending that the Caucus Chairs pull the term, so you can blame them if you don’t get the right term. At the Board Meeting we will put the Ordinance on the floor and get a second and then we will ask the County Executive to pause, or allow the lottery to go forward during that item. You will get a sheet that will say the terms and elections for the various districts. Then we will be able to vote on the final Ordinance. Per the State statute, you try to break it up as evenly as possible so one group will be four districts, a second group will be four districts and the third group will have three districts.
Mr. Fricilone stated since we know we are going to 4-3-4, why not do four districts first group, three districts for the second group and four districts for the third group.
Mr. Palmer stated that is what the lottery will determine.
Mr. Fricilone stated you still have to decide for each group how many you are going to do. A 4-3-4 does not say which districts, it just says there are four districts.
Mr. Palmer stated it is the same thing.
Mr. Fricilone asked are we first going to do a lottery on what the break out is, 4-4- 3 or 4-3-4 or 3-4-4?
Mr. Palmer stated it is done at the same time. There will be 11 picks and if you pull District 1 and they get a 4-4-2; that becomes their term. If District 2 pulls and they are 2-4-4 that will be that term. It is basically a blind pull. No one gets an advantage on either side. Because some could strategize that if I get a four year term this year, then it is better. It is all by a blind pull, it is by lottery and that is why the State statute sets it up that way. We are not going to do five in one category and two in another. The law says you are supposed to break it up as equally as possible.
Mr. Fricilone asked are you going to have two buckets; one with the district and another with the terms?
Mrs. Adams replied no. We will have a hat with 11 slips. Four of them will have 2- 4-4; four of them will have 4-2-4 and three of them will have 4-4-2.
Mr. Fricilone stated that is what I am saying. How do we determine that it is going to be 4-4-3? Why not 4-3-4?
Mrs. Adams stated that should be a discussion right now, how you divide that up.
Mr. Fricilone stated we have not decided on how many of each we are having. One has to be four, one has to be three and one has to be four. Then you pick the districts and they fall into those areas.
Mrs. Adams stated you have to determine which is going to have three in the group and which ones are going to have four in the group.
Ms. Ventura stated I was going to make the recommendation that we have ten years so the 4-4-2 allows for most planning for the shortest district. Since we have three of one group and the others have four, I think we all agree this is a lot of work for a two year term. So that is the least popular. I understand how you are doing the lottery. If you are asking the numbers, I think the one with the two year term first has the least amount in the hat.
Mrs. Adams stated we will have the Ordinance written that the first group will be three districts with 2-4-4 term; four districts with 4-2-4 and four districts with 4-4- 2. I just want to make sure everyone is clear on that. We will need a motion to set that in the Ordinance and then next Thursday leadership will draw the numbers one through 11 and whatever they get will be put on the sheet that is attached to this Ordinance.
A motion was made by Mr. Fricilone, seconded by Ms. Ventura to have the Ordinance written that the first group will be three districts with 2-4-4 term; four districts with 4-2-4 and four districts with 4-4-2. On a rollcall vote: Mueller, Brooks, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, Van Duyne, Ventura and Winfrey. MOTION CARRIES
Mr. Fricilone stated I still think you need two buckets; one with all the terms and one with all the districts. You pick a district and then you pick a term.
Mrs. Adams stated I understand, we will have two buckets so it is a total lottery and District 11 does not just get what is left. We will pull the districts and then the terms.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan |
Ms. Mueller stated Mr. Schaben is going to speak on this, but we are going to save space on the County Board agenda, in case this is ready for the Board Meeting.
Mr. Schaben stated basically, the selection committee is still working through this process. But in order to keep this on target for approval at the November Board Meeting, we are asking to move this along to the full County Board. We hope to have the rankings from the selection committee beforehand.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Margaret Tyson, Member AYES: Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member AYES: Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan |
Mrs. Adams stated after speaking with Mrs. Tatroe today, it is currently set at 77 and increasing by six for a total of 83.
Mr. Moustis stated it is in the Resolution, but it is still worth mentioning that this does not mean that we guarantee the funding of 83 Assistant State's Attorneys. It is just the number we set, by statute. I want to emphasize it does not mean we are going to fund 83.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [11 TO 1]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member AYES: Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Winfrey NAYS: Ventura LEFT MEETING: Cowan |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member AYES: Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan |
Mr. Moustis stated we have had this program for a number of years, but we have never had an update on the effectiveness and how this is working. It would be nice, at some point, to get an update on how it is working. Perhaps we could hear from the Land Use Department, Animal Control and the Sheriff’s Department on how this is helping us with the ordinance violations.
Ms. Mueller stated it has been noted.
Mrs. Ogalla stated I have had conversations with different employees regarding situations with this process. They feel that it is not achieving the goal of what was intended. Many times, especially for Land Use, they have tried to work with the person where there is an issue and then they go to adjudication and the person is given more time and it seems to never end. We definitely need an update. In addition, how long has Ms. Gandurski been in this role? When would we consider looking for someone else?
Mr. Palmer replied I would have to check to see how long Ms. Gandurski has been there. She has been there more than a few years, but not for the whole time. We have only had one officer for the past couple of years. Ms. Gail Reich, who is the next person; is a secondary person back up to them. The County went through an RFQ process, and both of these individuals were interviewed and selected. If you are asking if we have gone out to see if there are qualified people, this is the result of the RFQ; two qualified candidates, with Ms. Gandurski being the primary and Ms. Reich being the secondary.
Mrs. Ogalla stated I did not know we were doing that. Is either Ms. Gandurski or Ms. Reich currently serving in this role?
Mr. Palmer replied Ms. Gandurski is currently our Administrative Adjudication Officer.
Mrs. Ogalla stated but we don’t know how long.
Mr. Palmer stated we are going to check.
Mr. Schaben stated the last RFQ for this position was done in 2015. Ms. Gandurski has been serving in this position for the last six years.
Mrs. Ogalla asked was she serving prior to that as well?
Mr. Schaben replied no, she was not. To follow up on Mr. Moustis’ question; for the last year we have been working on the Administrative Adjudication process. We have been meeting with Land Use and Animal Control, which are two of the larger agencies that deal with this process, because we have heard their complaints. They have suggested changes that we have been working with those agencies on. We are not ready to bring any recommended changes forward yet. We are still in a discovery phase at this point. We agree there are some opportunities to make some improvements on how that operation will function.
Mrs. Ogalla asked how long is this contract for?
Ms. Mueller replied staff is telling me it is for one year.
Mr. Moustis stated when we talk about the timeline, before we had the Adjudication process, it went through the State's Attorney's Office and the courts. Then it was very lengthy. Perhaps when we get an update, the State's Attorney's Office can make a comment. Understand, if it is not done through Adjudication, it goes through the courts. It can be very lengthy and in some cases it took years to get to a resolution. Even though it may not be as efficient as you would like, it is still more efficient than going through the courts.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member SECONDER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member AYES: Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan |
Mr. Brooks left at this juncture.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Jim Moustis, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
This item was discussed at the beginning of New Business.
Speaker Cowan stated the Executive's Office is still working to tweak the CED contract, there are still some things to be negotiated. We would like to postpone this to the December Executive Committee meeting.
| RESULT: POSTPONED [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Jim Moustis, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: VanDuyne |
(Discussion)
This item was discussed after Item #9, at the beginning of New Business on the agenda.
Speaker Cowan stated if you look at the attachment, we need to put a number into the Resolution. We currently pay our state lobbyist $52,800 per year. I would entertain a motion to insert $52,800 into the Resolution.
Ms. Ventura asked can you repeat the amount you want to insert and explain why?
Speaker Cowan replied it is their current contract amount; $52,800 per year. We just need to decide on the amount for their next contract.
Ms. Ventura asked are you suggesting the same amount or are you asking for a raise?
Speaker Cowan replied I am suggesting the same amount.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair SECONDER: Jim Moustis, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: VanDuyne |
This item was discussed after Item #10, at the beginning of New Business on the agenda.
Speaker Cowan stated this is authorizing a professional services contract with our federal lobbyist, Smith Dawson & Andrews. We currently pay them $8,000 per month for their federal lobbying efforts on our behalf. My understanding is the County actually gave them $10,000 per month up until 2008, when because of the financial crisis, Smith Dawson agreed to pull back their rate by 20%, to $8,000, with the understanding that when the economy bounced back, we would go back to the $10,000 per month level. Personally, they have been incredibly helpful this year. Mr. Fricilone, Ms. Mueller and I have had a number of meetings with Smith Dawson and their team, and they have been incredibly helpful in getting the earmark process going for us. With the infrastructure bill that just passed, we stand to receive a considerable amount of money in Will County and I think we will really need their assistance in that process. I would like to entertain the idea of bringing them up to $10,000 per month, their previous rate. I will open this up for conversation.
Mr. Moustis stated you summarized it pretty well. I will also attest to the fact that over the years they have done a tremendous job for Will County and we have had a real return on investment with Smith Dawson & Andrews. When they took a reduction in their fee, it was with the understanding that we would restore them back to the $10,000 per month, at some point. It probably should have been done sooner. I support the $10,000 amount, which was their original contract. If you look at it, it has been reduced for ten years. We told them or indicated to them, through a handshake agreement, that we would restore them to their original contract amount. This would not be an additional amount from the original contract. I support bringing them back to their original contract amount. I realize it was previous Boards in charge when they took the reduction, but it was with the understanding that we would restore them to the original $10,000.
A motion was made by Mr. Moustis, seconded by Mr. Fricilone, to make the amount for the FY2022 contract with Smith Dawson & Andrew $10,000 per month.
Mr. Fricilone stated I agree with Mr. Moustis. What is even more important than the work they have done for us over the years is, it is going to get even more intense now with the Infrastructure Bill being passed and who knows what else is coming down the line. We need even more in DC to make sure we are in line to get some of these monies that will be available. I definitely agree.
Ms. Winfrey stated I absolutely support the increase and would like to see it restored. Just today they were going to do some work to help us take full advantage of the NACo Presidency for Will County.
Mrs. Ogalla stated I am getting conflicting messages here. We are not giving salary increases to anybody due to the circumstances going on, but we are going to increase this back to what it had been for the federalist lobbyist. I am conflicted on this. We are saying I would like an apple; no I don't want an apple.
Mr. Brooks stated the key words are, restore their salary back, because they took a cut. Let the record show that Ms. Winfrey and I were here in 2008, when we made that reduction. I do remember that Mr. Moustis, I do.
Mr. Moustis stated I could not remember who was here.
Speaker Cowan stated as Mr. Moustis pointed out, the return on investment has been substantial and I think going forward we are going to see more of that. I am excited about those possibilities and working with them.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [12 TO 1]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey NAYS: Ogalla |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Jim Moustis, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Jim Moustis, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
Ms. Ventura asked which department is declaring these vehicles surplus?
Mr. Lynn replied these vehicles are at the Sheriff's garage and they are all old vehicles that have been replaced. If there are usable parts, they are taken off.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Jim Moustis, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
Mr. Schaben and Ms. Sojka reviewed the presentation in the agenda packet.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Margaret Tyson, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
Mrs. Adams announced there were no Proclamations this month.
IX. APPOINTMENT(S) BY THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE
1. Appointment(s) by County Executive (Mitch Schaben)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
XI. REQUEST FOR STATE'S ATTORNEY'S OPINION
XII. COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. Land Use & Development
Mr. Marcum stated we don't have anything special this month. We are going to start looking at our solar Ordinance to see if we need to update anything. If you have any thoughts on that, let us know.
2. Finance
3. Public Works & Transportation
Mr. Van Duyne stated I have nothing else to add; just a reminder about the public meetings I mentioned last week.
4. Diversity & Inclusion
5. Public Health & Safety
6. Legislative & Judicial
7. Capital Improvements
8. Executive
XIII. PUBLIC COMMENT
Mrs. Adams announced there were no public comments.
XIV. ANNOUNCEMENTS/REPORTS BY CHAIR
XV. EXECUTIVE SESSION
XVI. APPROVAL OF THE COUNTY BOARD AGENDA
1. Approval of County Board Agenda (Approval)
| RESULT: APPROVED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
1. Motion to Adjourn at 12:24 PM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Mueller, Fricilone, Harris, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey LEFT MEETING: Cowan, Brooks Jr. |
Alerts Sign-up