Will County Capital Improvements Committee met Dec. 7.
Here are the minutes provided by the committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Ms. Coleman led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. ROLL CALL
Chair Herbert Brooks Jr. called the meeting to order at 10:02 AM
| Attendee Name | Title | Status | Arrived |
| Herbert Brooks Jr. | Chair | Present | |
| Joe VanDuyne | Vice Chair | Present | |
| Julie Berkowicz | Member | Present | |
| Natalie Coleman | Member | Present | |
| Gretchen Fritz | Member | Present | |
| Donald Gould | Member | Present | |
| Meta Mueller | Member | Present | |
| Annette Parker | Member | Present | |
| Jacqueline Traynere | Member | Present |
Also Present: Speaker Cowan, D. Winfrey, and N. Palmer
Present from the States Attorney's Office: M. Tatroe
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Capital Improvements Committee - Regular Meeting - Sep 7, 2021 10:00 AM
Will County, Illinois Posted: 2/3/2022 Page 1
Minutes Will County Capital Improvements Committee December 7, 2021
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Meta Mueller, Member SECONDER: Joe VanDuyne, Vice Chair AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
1. Morgue Project Update/Financial Summary
(County Executive's Office)
Mr. Brooks stated first up today we have Mr. Tkac talking about the Morgue Project update.
Mr. Fricilone stated I have a question before we start the update. I just want to get clarification of what the role of this committee is on the morgue at this point. We have turned this over to the Executive’s Office; so, what is our role now. Are we just going to get a presentation and an update? I know that there is some more money that is needed; is that going to be at Finance Committee?
Mr. Brooks replied that too, but we need to set that here.
Mr. Fricilone asked why, that’s out of our purview at this point.
Mr. Brooks asked at Finance Committee.
Mr. Fricilone stated at Capital Improvements; we don’t have any role at Capital Improvements on the morgue. We aren’t owner’s reps like we were at the other buildings, which I keep trying to explain. The Executive oversees the building.
Mr. Brooks said but it is still a Capital Improvements project. Let’s let Mr. Tkac go forward and hopefully we can get some answers for you before the end of the meeting.
Mr. Tkac stated I’m here to talk today about the efforts that have occurred with the project team, meaning the project architect, the construction manager, and the end user in this case the Coroner’s Office. We have tried very intensely to bring this project into line with the established budget. We’ve be unable to do so for several reasons. That is what we are here to talk about today. To go into a little bit more detail with that and with respect to the project; and with our summary of where we started and where we are today and what got us from point A to point B. I would like to introduce Jason Dwyer.
Mr. Dwyer said thank you Mr. Tkac it is nice to be here with you in person; it feels like it has been ages since we have given you updates on the Court House Project going back a couple years now. Today I want to give you a full status update; sort of where we are; and what we have been working on; what we have identified. As Mr. Tkac mentioned we have identified a budget concern on the project based on the initial established budget, where we stand right now from the design work done to date. I will walk you through an update of where we’ve been and where we are going in the project. Basically, in the overall schedule we have completed the detail programing on the project. We are just about to complete the Schematic Design Phase. This is the point where we are really starting to get a good feel for the size and shape, and sort of look at the building. We’ve been working hard to try and make the most efficient building that can meet the County’s needs long term. We are at a point now where we have identified this concern and we wanted to bring it to your attention quickly so we could discuss it to make sure we are on the right path going forward on the project.
At this juncture Mr. Dwyer presented a PowerPoint presentation that has been provided for the committee minutes. A brief question and answer period was had after the presentation.
Mr. Fricilone stated first I don’t disagree with us building a facility that will handle our future needs; that never should be a consideration that we should ignore. Understanding done to due diligence we build a building that is kind of future proof. Secondly when we look at numbers it is always good to look at numbers that we thought we were spending in comparing; not just total to total. Do we have a spreadsheet that shows us how the numbers layout now and how they laid out before? For example, we have excavation in there; was that number the same as before or was it less. Believe me I understand supply chain I deal with that every day. When we did our initial estimates to come up with that isn’t there any sheet that shows those numbers.
Mr. Dwyer said I don’t think there was a detailed estimate done based on the original budget. We tried to look back based on the information that we had at hand in terms of what we could discern from that in terms of how the initial budget was set. At the time we were asked to do kind of a quick test fit study to figure out a rough building size and see where it could go. I think at that time there was an ask that was presented; and Mr. Tkac you can jump in if I am off based on this. I think there was an ask at that time through the CARES ACT Committee to try and find a way to quickly fund potential for the project. If there was any estimating done at that time it was certainly not to the level of the work that the team has done at this point in terms of determining what the overall cost is. We are not able to do a line item by line item back and forth comparison to where things are at.
Mr. Fricilone stated that would help us when we see that concrete has gone up 40% and that is $400,000 worth of bill; it makes it easier.
Mr. Moustis said there was not detail.
Mr. Fricilone said I thought there was one done to get us to that number; next we said, and I will say this to my death. We said all in, all in, all in; we must have said it 100 times; including all equipment, all FF&E (Furniture, fixtures, and equipment) we always said that. I don’t want you to use that as an excuse; well, we didn’t figure that part because that is always what we said. The third thing is I have no problem with design; are there future things in there that we could; for example, coolers, do we need all these coolers right now; is it something that we could purchase later? That the space is there for it, and they could be slotted in as the money becomes available. Are we providing workstations and offices for everyone that is there now, or future people? Can we just provide what we need right now and add to it as we need to hire additional people? Are there any of those kinds of savings in the initial go around. Not saying we wouldn’t but as you know when we did the Court House, we decided not to do two floors and as we saw the numbers kind of come to where we thought it made sense to move forward and finish it. Are any of those possibilities?
Mr. Dwyer said yes, there are a couple of components in what you identify; let me go through each of them. The cooler is difficult, It is not individual coolers it is one large cooler. That is one of those things where it is very hard to build part of it and expand it; it is part of a cohesive unit. It has redundancy cooling and all of that would be very difficult to expand efficiently. A couple of things the team has looked at even down to the point of furniture; we are looking at whether there are avenues and opportunities to reuse any of the existing furniture in the office areas for a potential cost savings measure. We’ve talked a lot about that to say well we don’t want to save $10 on a desk; I’m just making up a number there. But a small amount of saving on one desk but in having to change the shape of the building which drives the cost significantly more in another avenue. However, we are going to continue to look at that and see if there is potential to save. We’ve already made a little bit of a reduction in a line item that we have for FF&E based on what we know so far, and the inventory of the existing furniture. I think that is work that we have done already, and we can continue to fine tune and see. It is not going to make significant dollars difference. One area we talked about; and this gets a little tricky. You must make sure your infrastructure is in right but if there was an avenue to maybe not outfit one of the autopsy suites and expand into that. Again, I am not sure how much money you are really going to save on a scenario like that. Let’s just say in the present term you could work with two autopsy suites. Maybe the one in the isolation or specialty; or maybe that’s not the one, maybe the one in the general room. You don’t buy all the equipment for that. Just off the cuff I’m going to say that maybe that is a couple hundred thousand savings. Then when you go back to buy it, is it the same equipment and are you spending maybe 50% more a couple of years later. The tough thing about this building which is very different than the Court House it is a small building overall; with a lot of different specialty components where there is not as many ways to phase in that stuff to find real reasonable cost savings on the front end.
We will continue to explore small things but honestly it is not going to make a significant impact in terms of the overall budget.
Mr. Fricilone said my last question would be regarding contingency; in your estimates for whatever it is for the equipment, excavation, and all of that. You’re factoring some of that escalation in those number to begin with, correct?
Mr. Dwyer stated correct.
Mr. Fricilone said so there is kind of some contingency built in because we know we are going to have price increases on probably every one of these things. You are figuring that in on the actual estimates not just saying this is what the price is today; that is why we need that contingency. So, the contingency may not disappear hopefully as fast as we think if we get rolling here and get going on current day pricing.
Mr. Dwyer replied correct, so the pricing that has been done is not today pricing it’s a speculation toward the start of construction. Things like, we know about labor increases that happen every year on trade labor. Leopardo has done a nice job of planning of the overall construction schedule to determine that all of that is factored into the pricing right now. Anybody that’s got a perfect crystal ball that can peg the market on trade market fluctuation at bid time, God love them for it. But we are using our collective team knowledge to make our best assessments on where that’s at. There are escalations, projections built into when the project is being built. Then we also have another contingency of about $500,000 for other issues that come up. Things that we haven’t gotten to yet in design. We are still at schematic and there is still design work left to do. Things that come up in construction and so forth. I think collectively the team feels comfortable with this number based on the schedule that we have. Sure, we all hope that we have favorable bid results we just don’t know. I’ve been through a whole bunch of bids recently; one we had a very big steel contract, and it was a job on a larger scale that attracted a lot of very large steel contractors and we ended up getting decent results; still very high but not as high as we thought. On the flip side of that we had bids open on another project about a week ago; and a whole host of things were higher than expected. It’s tricky but I think again we are comfortable with based on the schedule that we have now as a team that this is a right number for the project.
Mr. Fricilone said I guarantee those prices aren’t coming down. One more question based on that; what is the schedule that you are thinking at this point to get to completion.
Mr. Dwyer said I think right now we are looking at a start of early summer of next year for construction. We’ve got to finish the design. There are certainly lead time issues that are being factored in there; and wanting to get in with construction starting then going into the first quarter of the following year to completion.
Ms. Traynere said being that we are going to have a flat roof I suppose if we are going to be using it for solar or for a green roof in the future; so that is kind of important. I noted that the office is being moved to this location. So, are we saving any money; it seems to me that the Coroner’s Office is in a building that we already owned? Is that space going to be used for something else? Finally, and I will just make this point on comments Mr. Fricilone made and my own experience. We at the Township have been taking a bid for a new AC unit. It is imperative that we get that unit bid and we get it purchased before the end of the year; because the industry already knew there was going to be like a 25% price increase come the end of the month. I am just a little concerned; it seems like ages ago that we voted to move forward on this morgue. I am just wondering why it took so long to get to this point because that is a big reason for these price increases. I am glad to hear that there are some additional increases built into the cost. But why didn’t we start on this six months ago; why weren’t we breaking ground in September? This is not a surprise that we needed the morgue and it certainly as far as I know we had the money allocated. I’ll go back on mute to hear those answers.
Mr. Dwyer said I can’t speak to the start date; we started as soon as we were selected to move forward with the design; so, I can’t speak to that issue. The reference to the potential for solar; right now, the project does not have PV Panels on the roof. But certainly, with it being a flat roof I think that is something that could be added to the project. I am not sure of the other question.
Ms. Traynere said it was about the rent; currently I think the Coroner’s Office is in the old Social Security Office; but correct me if I am wrong. I want to know if there are going to be any cost savings there.
Mr. Dwyer said yes, the Coroner’s Office space is in the Scott St. Building right now. I don’t have the answer in terms of how that space is going to be utilized. I do know from an operational standpoint it’s a little bit problematic having the office space separated from the morgue area itself. I think even going back last year when we did a quick check of this project that question was asked about just replacing the morgue out of the other Caton Farm Facility where they are located right now; or consolidating with the office. I think from an operational standpoint there is significant benefit to consolidate the office operations with the morgue operations. I don’t have a statistic for you in terms of any operational cost savings. I do know in talking to the group extensively that is going to be a benefit to the Coroner’s Office to have all the operations consolidated under one roof.
Ms. Traynere said Mr. Dwyer that’s great and I am glad to hear that, but I would love to hear from someone in the Executives Office if there is somebody present as to what the plans are for the space that the coroner would be (inaudible) by the way I am a yes vote on this. I just hate that I must be a yes vote and we didn’t get this nailed down sooner.
Mr. Brooks said Ms. Traynere what I am going to do; the coroner is in the room, and I am going to give her an opportunity to talk. But I need to go to committee members next. I am going to go to Ms. Berkowicz from my committee.
Ms. Berkowicz said Ms. Traynere brings up excellent questions and excellent points and echoes all the concerns and the questions that I have. You know Chairman I would like the staff to respond to those questions so we can try to understand. We’re in a situation that hasn’t been to our advantage the length of time that it’s taken again to get to another month and another committee meeting with more questions. Also, we need to come to some understanding with the concerns that Mr. Fricilone has again brought up this month. Why is this coming before committee and not going before the Finance Committee. Perhaps the State’s Attorney can give us some clarification; we’ve had this conversation ongoing so if we can kind of focus here and try to get these questions answered. I would really appreciate it.
Mr. Brooks said I have asked the Chief of Staff from the County’s Executive Office, Mr. Schaben to move up to a microphone and he is going to go next then followed by the Coroner Summers if she wants to add anything. I would also add those of you with longevity Minority Leader Fricilone you know this. We had a lot of Capital Improvements project that came through the forum of Public Building Commission. Those projects still landed on the Capital Improvements Committee. Mr. Schaben if you could comment on some of those issues that have been brought up at this time.
Mr. Schaben stated so first a timeline of things I think it is important to rewind the clock when this conversation first started. Money was put aside for this project in the CARES Committee. There are a lot of questions being asked today that were being asked eight months ago. I think throughout this process our desire is to have a transparent discussion about where this project is headed and where it is ultimately going to land. I think what is important that we are all on the same page in where this project is going to end in totality. That includes the cost so, we want to take our time in this process to ensure the product is exactly what the coroner is asking and requesting for. So, as far as the timeline for things I think there is a lot that goes into this process and I think it behooves us to take our time and do this right, so we don’t end up with a project that is over budget or out of line of what the intention is of this County Board, the County Executive’s Office, and ultimately the Coroner. To the second question; the role of this body. This is the Capital Improvements Committee; this is a change of what the designation, of what the direction was to our office for the project cost. I think we wanted to have this conversation at this committee so that the Board Members were aware of what’s being requested. Our thought was that a recommendation would be made to the Finance Committee on the direction for the cost of this project. This is a change in what was initially set for the all-in cost. I think that it is important that the Board Members understand what that request is and ultimately our office doesn’t have the ability to spend that money without that authority. So, we don’t want to begin a project with sort of a discrepancy between what was requested initially and established and what is being requested now.
Ms. Summer said there was some questioning on some space for some future employees; one of the areas that was cut out was and I may let my Senior Deputy to speak to this. At the present time where we are at; our investigators which is what they are. Our Deputy Coroners do not have the space to have the privacy to speak to families, doctors, or anyone else. It is very congested. In this setting we did the minimal number of spaces it would take for day-to-day operations for these investigators to do their job. Also combined within that is our Cold Case Deputies. Yes, is there a little bit more room if we must hire more deputies in the future, which we have already hired. We have 16 deputies now. There will be four on each shift. Spaces are just allotted for the time that they are there. We have cut back on the size of our offices within the administrative office. Mine in particular; we need the storage space. We have no storage space. As we’re talking about the coolers. I am going to let JP talk as well as talking about the Sally Port. He can explain to you a little bit more on what they must do on a day-to-day basis; and it is imperative that we are together in that office because it will just benefit the workflow and make things a lot simpler for everybody.
JP Rasmussen on the cooler we could touch on that; right now, our cooler holds 13 bodies. We can put 15 or 16 in there if we put one rack of three in there. We lose a spot in the big picture by taking that rack and putting that in there. So many times, we are at capacity or one away from capacity. For years we have only had one deputy on shift for 24 hours at a time; and you come in at two in the morning and must deal with that alone; I don’t want to get into too much detail. But we are busting at the seams there almost all the time in the cooler. So, our cooler space is nowhere near what it should be for the case load that we have. Some of the importance of the Sally Port; we use the county garage now; so, we use their indoor area, and we have room for about four vehicles in there now. Things that the public don’t know about that we have to use that Sally Port for sometimes indoor. Right now, we are releasing bodies from inside the morgue to the funeral home. They sign the book and then wheel through our back door into the garage area and pick up the remains and go. During that time, we could have an autopsy going on. There is no room for the police, the State’s Attorney’s people who show up for some of these autopsies; we are trying to open a cooler door right into where the doctor is standing and do autopsies and get by when some people are bringing them in, and we are trying to release. That happens all the time. Another reason for the sally port; sometimes we have cases where a vehicle is incinerated on the highway and there are people inside; we can’t do that type of work up against a concrete wall on Interstate 55. We will have the whole vehicle towed back to the morgue where it is put in there and extricated with the Fire Department. We’ve had homicides where there’s four people in a vehicle. We tow the whole vehicle back on a flatbed. We will put that vehicle inside of the sally port and start the investigation right there with the removal of the remains, documentation in a controlled atmosphere. Without that sally port we would be trying to do some of this stuff outside in cold weather; or 24/7 with funeral homes coming picking up, dropping off. Bodies in barrels with concrete that need to be chipped out; that all gets done in the sally port; so those are just a few things that I’ve seen in my time here where we needed those ports; not all the time but it’s once or twice a year that we see a vehicle towed back in where we must have that room for those types of events.
Mr. Brooks asked Coroner Summers if you can address the issue or maybe Mr. Tkac. The question about your current office; that was also asked.
Ms. Summers said the current office I am not sure what they would do with that; but as I said in my previous comment it is imperative that we are combined in one building. I spend a good portion of my day driving up to the morgue and back. That is 30 minutes if the bridge isn’t up. The same thing with the Deputies that are coming down to get the stock that they need because we store it at the facility because they don’t have the storage room out there. They are being pulled away from the morgue on a regular basis to come and do these things. We must do something called toxicology daily. That must be sent out for testing, it must come from the morgue down to our facility and it pulls them away again from the morgue. It just makes total sense to keep them combined. As Mr. Dwyer spoke about before; we have looked at everything on cutting cost on furniture and that type of thing; and it is the administrative office that has made the conscious decision. Bea is my Office Staff Manager on how we can do that and what we can reutilize to save the County money and put it back into that morgue. The morgue is a specialty building I’ve said that repeatedly; and we knew that going into this that those costs were going to be more; we talked about that when we were doing the decision-making on who the designer was going to be as well as the builder. I think every single person that interviewed for that said the same thing. Mr. Fricilone of course brought it up right away; that these costs were going to be going up. We have one chance to get this right and make it work for the future; and I want everyone to know that it must be done correctly, or we are going to be spinning our wheels in a few months trying to come back and correct things.
Mr. Brooks asked Mr. Tkac if it was too premature right now to talk about what is going to happen to the current office; there’s been no discussion and no decisions made.
Mr. Tkac stated that is correct; I can say this much; there will be a lot of competing interest for that 5,000 sq ft. it will not go unused.
Ms. Freeman said I have several questions and they are regarding such things as the sleeping quarters; I can’t see of the picture where the sleeping quarters will be; but I want to be sure that they are included. Because I do know that there are people who must spend the night and they need a place to sleep. Are those on this plan?
Mr. Dwyer stated there is a space called night room; it is a modest space but one that I think will serve the needs. The Deputy Coroners are on long shifts many times; so, there are moments where they need to take a break throughout their shift, so we do have a space allocated for that.
Ms. Freeman asked if security has been taken into consideration with the costs.
Mr. Dwyer said yes, we are going to have security technology at the facility. We’re not talking about significant or elaborate measures of bullet resistance glass and that sort of thing. I think one of the big benefits of the location is it is directly adjacent to the Sheriff’s Public Safety Complex which is a significant added benefit to provide that level of security. But we do have other security technology access control and that sort of thing as well.
Ms. Freeman asked the morgue equipment; does that total on the screen cover the new scales, eye wash station, x-ray machines, and all those expensive specialty items.
Mr. Dwyer said correct, the slide that is up right now is an analsisof how to reduce cost. But the $1.3 million figure that I spoke of earlier; It is every part and piece necessary to outfit the operations of the morgue area.
Ms. Freeman said as I am looking at the numbers for the morgue equipment on the screen; it seems a little bit low. The other one is landscaping.
Mr. Dwyer stated this is the budget for the facility that is proposed; the other slide is where the $1.3 million for the morgue equipment is coming from.
Ms. Freeman said I would have to say that it would probably be closer; I hate to say that I’m still concerned it might be a little bit low. I just know that specialty equipment is rather pricey, and it too is going up. Has landscaping been included?
Mr. Dwyer replied yes, it is a very small sight area, so we don’t have extensive landscaping, but we do have landscaping included in the budget that is consistent with the other landscaping at the sight. For the very modest sight area that we have that is not being used by the building and the parking lot.
Ms. Freeman said I have two more questions; what type of floor is going to be but into this.
Mr. Dwyer said I don’t have the specific manufacture and product for the floor; but it is interesting that it has been the topic of significant conversation and I mentioned earlier that is a benefit of touring other facilities comes into play. One of our other facilities tours we saw a floor that was used that was not holding up well. That’s why we have like I said Ms. Clair Wilson Lowery on the team who does these facilities all over the county. I know we are going to get the flooring product right based on what they’ve see long term, in terms of durability and useability for this specific type of operation.
Ms. Freeman said to have to redo a floor 5 years in; that’s a big undertaking at that point. The question is I saw on the floor plan there were several different restroom areas; I am hoping that there was a shower area for those that are on their 24 hours plus shifts. Is it possible to put a unisex one in; and then have the shower rooms for the staff.
Mr. Dwyer said yes, a couple of questions in there; we do have a series of different restroom areas that are tied to the different functional operations. We do have showers in there. Now the code requires in this case because of the overall staff count we must provide separate male and female shower areas and we have that in the plan right now. It was sharing a locker space to find some efficiency because it’s more about storing thing; we have changing rooms that are separated for male/female but some of that other core locker areas rather than completely duplicating them all we’ve got some efficiency there by sharing some of that space.
Ms. Freeman said those were my questions I do feel that the cost saving options is just not going to give us what we need; it doesn’t make sense to me that we would go through this project and not have the things that are needed like the coolers and the sally port and the Cold Case Storage. That’s just my thoughts and I thank you for answering all my questions.
Mr. Moustis stated my audio went off for some time, so I don’t know if this question may have been asked. I don’t see a specific item on here that designates the cost of sight work. Can you perhaps talk a little bit about how you feel about the sight and the cost of the sight work? Assuming you are not anticipating any problems; but maybe you can tell us about the due diligence you did. Very often that is where we run into surprises and cost overruns.
Mr. Dwyer said if you can see the slide that is up right now; because of the presentation format we didn’t give you the full detailed estimate of every detail. At the top there is a yellow bar that says total trade costs. So, all the site work is included in that along with building construction, steel, masonry, and all that kind of stuff. We have all the site work included. I think we purposely selected our Design Team for this; to talk advantage of the back knowledge of this site. We have H. R. Green on the team who did all the site engineering work for the Public Safety Complex. So, we have a good knowledge of what to expect out there. We know where all the utilities are; they did all the design work for extending sewer and water to the site. We know right where we need to make our tie ins for that. Down to the point where I think we have a fiber optic line that kind of cuts across where the building is at. We know a lot of the details of the site; it takes out a lot of the unknowns and we can quantify costs appropriately based on our knowledge of the site.
Mr. Books said we will move on to Mr. Palmer and then we will follow up with Ms. Berkowicz.
Mr. Palmer stated said for a process alignment; back to Ms. Traynere’s question. I think that Mr. Tkac addressed this. Space allocations are made by the County Executive’s Office so any unused space; the County Executive would make that determination. The County Board just funds projects, the County Executive allocates the space. In the past, this committee has been designated the owner’s agent. This is probably a conversation to have after today on whether that is still an option going forward. Because my understanding, but I didn’t hear this directly from the State’s Attorney. That their interpretation is this committee is not owner’s agent anymore. That’s an offline discussion. Mr. Schaben is correct; ultimately any decision to fund additional dollars is going to have to come through the Board. This item is on this committee because it is a standing item on the Capital Improvements Committee. We were told offline with a question of funding from the Executive’s Office, so we were going to have the discussion here first. But obviously if we’re going to allocate money, we are going to have to go to Finance Committee first. Just trying to align the process here; at the end of this discussion if the recommendation from the Executive’s Office is that we need to fund additional dollars; we will move this discussion to the Finance Committee and have a discussion where it is in the appropriate place to allocate. Hopefully that clears up a few things.
Mr. Brooks said it helps me; but I like that point of an offline discussion; because Mr. Schaben I think we need to have some continued offline discussions.
Ms. Berkowicz said there is no dispute we realize that you need this facility and everything that has been proposed. I certainly wouldn’t want us to build a new facility that can’t meet our current and future needs. Because we all know that it will be more expensive later, if we try to fix a problem with the initial project. When do we anticipate the final project for design so that this project can be started; and development can start? From what I am hearing are we still trying to tweak this design or is this completed. I know we talk about communications but other than our committee meeting I really don’t ever hear anything about this project. The timeline is so important and the fact that it has taken so long to get to this point. Where are we at now? I don’t know if this is an answer that he can partially complete, but I think if I am correct the County Executive’s Office is driving this project. If both could give me impute, I would appreciate it. Thank you.
Mr. Dwyer said thanks for the question; I think I can answer it. We are just wrapping up the schematic design phase. We still have more design work left to do. At this point largely the building footprint and key drivers are being set. The next phase design and development really starts getting into the detail of specifics of the mechanical system and just more and more detail on the design. Then we prepare the construction documents to go out to bid. We are working closely with Leopardo and the County Executive’s Office to look for every opportunity we can to try and accelerate the project. As you can imagine with some of the supply issues and so forth; getting things out to bid as soon as possible is important. We are looking at a package of staged bidding packages based on when we need certain components. Certainly, things like site work, and foundations and that are bid early. Long lead items like steel, certain mechanical equipment those are bid quickly. We are prioritizing those in terms of completion for construction documents so we can get the bid out early; and get all the shop drawings prepared so that we can start construction as early as possible in the summer. So that is kind of the lead up to the start of construction. The reason we wanted to come here, and I know there has been a lot of discussion today about committee and so forth. And recognizing there needs to be an approval by the Board to adjust the budget. We are at sort of a critical timeline here. We are wrapping up schematic design but if the county chose to stick with the current budget we’d have to go back and change the design. That becomes a bit of a challenge in terms of the overall timeline. That is why we wanted to get it to you with the information just as soon as we had it.
Mr. Fricilone said I wanted to speak to that. We know that the County Board is going to have to vote on the monies, which normally go through Finance Committee. But that is today; and it is not on the agenda for today’s Finance Committee; which means it would be held up another month which it means it won’t be until January so I might suggest to the Speaker that it goes to Executive Committee so maybe we could move on it at this month’s County Board Meeting so we could speed the process up.
Mr. Brooks said let me answer this question before we wrap, Mr. Dwyer you mentioned something about the start date. But can Leopardo perhaps answer the longevity of this project?
Mr. Dwyer asked in terms of the completion of construction.
Ms. Mc Elroy said I would need to look at the exact date; but Mr. Dwyer did answer where he thinks it’s going to be delivered by the first quarter of that following year. That is what we are targeting right now.
Mr. Brooks asked does anyone have an idea of the longevity that a project like this takes.
Ms. Mc Elroy stated for just construction; 9 to 10 months.
Mr. Dwyer said some of the discussion is knowing where we are going to go with; our team and Leopardo’s team have been talking extensively on how to optimize this schedule. We know that there was a little bit of time lost in the front end. As soon as we all got on board, we have been trying to move this just as quickly as we can on the project. We will continue to do that.
Mr. Books asked if there are any other questions; okay we will go to Mr. Schaben and then back to Mr. Moustis.
Mr. Schaben stated I would ask that this body would make a motion and recommendation to move this to Executive; in either an approval or a not approval for the project that was presented just so that there is clarity on what the direction is.
Mr. Moustis stated Mr. Brooks you mentioned the Public Building Commission and that we used the Public Building Commission for many years for projects. I just wanted to give some clarity of how that process worked and how this process is perhaps a little different. The Public Building Commission when it was given a project it never came back to the County Board for the project, or the construction of the project. The Public Building Commission did everything; they didn’t come back to the Capital Committee or the County Board for any change orders, or anything to do with the project. But they did give monthly updates to the County Board; and County Board controlled the funding. If there was a $5 million project; we didn’t give them the $5 million they had to come to us and ask for requests for the payouts. Everything that they did was done in a Public Meeting; any change orders no matter how small or large was done publicly. This process is a little different in a sense, that it is not as much of a public process, unless there is additional funding needed. So, I do want to make that distinction that the Public Building Commission did not come back to the Capital Committee or the County Board only in the case of funding did they come back. I think that is a clarification that I would like everybody to understand; because most people on the Board weren’t here for the Public Building Commission so it is slightly a different process.
Mr. Palmer said Speaker Cowan chimed in at one point to say yes, we are too late to post for the agenda, but we could discuss it as I think as old business, new business. If there is a vote needed, we can save a space on the full Board to officially decide. I’ve talked to Mr. Dwyer, and they are going to move forward to the official funding plan. Or they are going to go with the $7 million, which means scaling the project down. My understanding to keep things moving they need that decision, so we don’t lose a month plus.
2. RNG Facility Construction Update/Financial Summary
(Christina Snitko)
Ms. Snitko stated I have Mr. Kozak here to give a construction update. Due to the holidays, I submitted the memo right before Thanksgiving, a lot has changed; so that really doesn’t reflect the construction progress that was made. I am going to go right to the pipeline update and the other things before Mr. Kozak presents. We have really made a positive progress and had positive conversations with other owners and easement personnel. However, we have a possible reroute on the ComEd parcel. We are still entertaining if we can stay with our current route or adjust it a little bit within the area that we have surveyed. But until then I can’t really give an update until we decide that going forward. As for the RNG interconnect which is the end point at where the station will be at; we are also figuring out a relocation access due to IDNR expressing some concerns with tree mitigation and some other things. We are also working on that currently as we speak. Until we work things out, we can’t do the amendment with our MGT Contractor so that is going to take some time. Lastly for the O&M Agreement we are currently in negotiations with Waste Management, so far things have been going well; and we are going to have an update meeting with them this week. I will now turn it over to Mr. Kozak.
At this juncture Mr. Kozak reviewed the PowerPoint presentation that he provided for the agenda. A brief question and answer period followed.
Mr. Fricilone stated it was mentioned that that the O&M negotiations are moving forward. What was our start date on that?
Ms. Snitko stated November 5th.
Mr. Fricilone asked we didn’t start until November 5th. I thought that we started in October, and they had 30 days to respond.
Ms. Snitko stated that was our initial letter to see if they were interested but their 30 days to respond was on November 5th the start date.
Mr. Fricilone asked if they have responded now.
Ms. Snitko said yes, they have responded.
Ms. Snitko said I think that we just sent an email to them yesterday to see if they have any more questions from us. As of now I have not received any additional feedback from them.
Will County, Illinois Posted: 2/3/2022 Page 15
Minutes Will County Capital Improvements Committee December 7, 2021
Mr. Fricilone asked so they responded that they want to respond.
Ms. Snitko replied no, they have also submitted their questions pertaining to the plant, the equipment, how things are organized. We sent them the actual O&M Agreement draft.
Mr. Fricilone asked if we sent that on November 5th.
Mr. Moustis said do you mean the operator?
Mr. Fricilone said what I am trying to get to was.
Ms. Snitko interrupted and stated they have reviewed it; they have submitted their questions; and now we are waiting if there are any additional feedback that they need to proceed forward. That is what we are waiting on right now.
Mr. Fricilone said so they haven’t given us any numbers yet?
Ms. Snitko said no they haven’t given us any numbers.
Ms. Berkowicz said just to follow up on Mr. Fricilone question; Ms. Snitko said that they’ve made this contact and have sent out this information and now we are waiting. How long are we waiting; how long do we wait? How long is this process in limbo to wait for their response?
Mr. Hartke said when they initially began or were presented with the O&M Agreement and then they stated that they did intend on negotiating with us. They were given an approximate 30-day timeframe to hopefully show some in good faith negotiations which was required under our 5th Amendment of the Host Agreement. I believe it was that or one of the other agreements that we had to negotiate in good faith with them. They’ve asked some very good questions; there have been some meetings between Waste Management and our Legal Team. There is progress, there are some technical questions that they are asking of the County that some of those we are still working through. The feedback from our Attorney Jane Montgomery is that they are very serious and really want to enter into this agreement. At that time Don Moran has stated that they had hoped in about the second or third week of December to provide an offer back to us. We do have a meeting scheduled with Leadership to determine how we want to move forward at this point. Continuing with Waste Management or there are other options to be explored at this point; or at what point we would do that.
Mr. Moustis said I don’t want to be repetitive here; the scheduled completion date of the plant is when?
Mr. Kozak said with the completion part of it there are several parts of it. There is the actual mechanical completion and the operational thing. I’d have to check with SCS Energy on the operational side.
Mr. Moustis stated I guess the point I want to make is when the plant is ready to go operational; I think that is an important date when it comes to who is going to operate it. Currently we didn’t go out and solicit different operators; we were talking to Waste Management only at this point. I hate to see our plant sitting there ready to go and we don’t have an operator. What is the date where we decide whether we are going to choose Waste Management or go out and solicit other operators? We can’t let Waste Management drag this on; you must have a date; we must have an agreement by that date; or we are going to move on to other options. I guess this was more of a statement than a question.
Mr. Brooks said Mr. Moustis we are going to let Mr. Hartke address those issues.
Mr. Hartke said very good point there Mr. Moustis. We do have within our current design build agreement with SCS Energy and Engineers. There is an intent there and an option within that that we can pursue with SCS to have them operate the initial part of that, the initial year or even beyond. Which there also could be some benefit to that since they designed the plant and if there are any problems; they could also have the resources to resolve those very quickly as well.
Mr. Moustis replied that’s reassuring, that is nice to know. We do have with our off loader; we have timelines with them that we could go into a penalty phase. Hopefully we are totally operational and don’t get into a penalty phase with our off loader.
Mr. Hartke said yes, and if there are potential delays or if we see that we are not going to be able to meet those delays we may be able to speak to US Gain, our off taker to possibly amend that or change some of those dates. At this point we don’t want to have to do that, but we do need to entertain speaking with them to try to avoid penalties if we determine other parts of this project are slowing things down. Not just the plant; it could be the pipeline due to the reroute or the interconnect. Those are some of the things that could potentially cause a delay. Those are things on our radar and that we are considering.
Mr. Moustis asked do you think they are open to more negotiation.
Mr. Hartke said we have earlier intended that they were open to that; but they wanted to monitor the progress further until about the first of this year and see where we are at and address that again to see where we think all the different items within this project are going to line up at the right time before those penalties would kick in. Obviously at the end of that they said they are not in business to hurt us; they really want the gas and want to be able to work with us. From all our impressions that we got from them was that they wanted to work with us to keep that from happening, but the County may have to give perhaps on the backend. Maybe some additional time on their agreement. We are not quite sure what that looks like currently.
VI. OTHER OLD BUSINESS
VII. NEW BUSINESS
VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT
IX. ANNOUNCEMENTS/REPORTS BY CHAIR
X. EXECUTIVE SESSION
XI. ADJOURNMENT
1. Motion to Adjourn @ 11:29 AM
https://willcountyil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=4235&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up