Will County Capital Improvements Committee met Sept. 6.
Here are the minutes provided by the committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Mr. Gould led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. ROLL CALL
Chair Herbert Brooks Jr. called the meeting to order at 10:01 AM
Herbert Brooks Jr., Chair Present
Joe VanDuyne, Vice Chair Present
Julie Berkowicz, Member Present
Natalie Coleman, Member Absent
Gretchen Fritz, Member Absent
Donald Gould, Member Present
Meta Mueller, Member Present
Annette Parker, Member Present
Jacqueline Traynere, Member Absent
Also present at the Meeting: M. Fricilone, N. Palmer, B. Adams
Present from the State's Attorney's Office: M. Tatroe
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Capital Improvements Committee - Regular Meeting - Jun 7, 2022 10:00 AM
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Meta Mueller, Member
SECONDER: Joe VanDuyne, Vice Chair
AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Gould, Mueller, Parker
ABSENT: Coleman, Fritz, Traynere
2. WC Capital Improvements Committee - Regular Meeting - Jul 5, 2022 10:00 AM
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Donald Gould, Member
SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Member
AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Gould, Mueller, Parker
ABSENT: Coleman, Fritz, Traynere
3. WC Capital Improvements Committee - Regular Meeting - Aug 2, 2022 10:00 AM
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Vice Chair
SECONDER: Annette Parker, Member
AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Gould, Mueller, Parker
ABSENT: Coleman, Fritz, Traynere
V. OLD BUSINESS
1. RNG Facility Construction Update/Financial Summary
(Christina Snitko)
Mr. Kozak gave an update on RNG Plant (see presentation attached to agenda). A lot has happened over the last month as we’re finishing this project up. The landfill gas connection has been completed. Installation communication conduit are all set and ready for AT&T to come and do the fiber tie in. The data line installation connection has been made. The electrical room has been installed and getting ready to get fired up. All the paint touch-ups are being coded and painted. Upcoming stuff; compressor alignment start-up that’s happening. The manufacturer testing off all the electrical components. Our part of this was the construction portion of it; our electrical contractors had certified testers out there and tested all the installations and now there is a second round per SCS. Each manufacturer comes out with an owner rep and technician and retest every piece of equipment to make sure it’s setup right. We don’t want to put the asphalt down until the last piece of equipment is installed. That’s the recap.
Mrs. Berkowicz asked I know in the past we’ve had conversation about security and the possibility of damage to the facility. Do you see anything going on at other plants where we might have issues or things we need to consider or address regarding protecting the RNG plant from theft?
Mr. Hartke replied during our time out there we haven’t really seen anything out there and it’s pretty secure. The gates are locked right off the main road.
Mrs. Berkowicz asked are there recordings at some of the surrounding areas? Someone had mentioned that there was some video recording at a nearby plant and is that available?
Mr. Hartke replied I don’t believe they have anything in the plans for that. I believe that the plant is pretty secure.
Mr. Moustis asked at what point do you think we would be able to go on a tour in the next couple of weeks?
Mr. Hartke replied there hasn’t been discussion of that so, some of you probably want to get out there before the ribbon cutting. The ribbon cutting is planned for the 3rd week of Oct, that’s what we’re looking at right now. A specific date has not been confirmed. There has been discussion about a leadership tour out there before then; perhaps towards the end of September or the first week in October before the ribbon cutting.
Mr. Moustis stated from the operational perspective these guys are construction and not security people. Mr. Hartke, I do believe that you need to put a security plan together for when the plant goes into operation. One of the things I think you need to look at and consider is what could happen. So, I do think it makes sense for the Chair to come up with a security plan but of course we don’t make it public because it’s security. It should be brought up in the Executive session, what are the vulnerabilities. Where do we think the risks are. I’m not talking about operational risks. As we get closer to operations are we set for insurance?
Mr. Hartke replied we are working with our insurance broker that the County has. We do have to require separate insurance policies for this facility. CHUB Insurance has a group that’s insured facilities like this before from what I understand and we’re working on applications with them to acquire the insurance that we need. The builders risk insurance stays into place until we reach final completion which is December 20th. So, we have to have our county insurance in place to takeover at that time. That is in the works.
Mr. Fricilone asked it’s going to be staffed 24/7 in the building?
Mr. Hartke replied the building will not be staffed 24/7. It will be staffed during the day. There will be 3 staff people there per our O&M agreement. It has a very technical for the processing to monitor that and alert staff when something comes up or when they need to deal with something that needs to be turned back on or some other issue but a lot of that can be done remotely.
Mr. Fricilone asked but it’s running 24/7?
Mr. Hartke answered correct.
Mr. Fricilone stated I think we need to have some cameras there. Mrs. Berkowicz asked if an emergency were to occur whether it be a breakdown of equipment or some other type of issue if it’s that remote that it takes 20 minutes to get out there, I think in order to be proactive we need to have eyes and ears there 24 hours a day in some fashion. I think we need to see what our options are and go forward and make sure that we have that.
Mr. Hartke replied we can have security cameras on but at this point with our O&M agreement it will increase our cost significantly if we renegotiate to have more staff there 24/7.
Mrs. Mueller asked can you refresh my memory. Didn’t we talk early on in this process about having some sort of surveillance there?
Mr. Hartke replied very early on in 2021 there was a conversation on having a camera to oversee or watch construction. We were told then not to do that. You have to go past the landfill scalehouse to get to this facility and there are security cameras on the inbound and outgoing lanes at the scalehouse so that’s one thing to keep in mind. Being that it’s a landfill it is required to be a gated facility. The entire facility is surrounded by gate or fence and there are 2 sliding gates to enter the facility. They have to be unlocked.
Mr. Brooks commented earlier in this process when we were still building the courthouse, we had talked about the video that was going on there whether we wanted it out there and what I remember from a previous committee they voted it down and everybody determined that they didn’t want it at that time.
Mrs. Berkowicz asked how are you notified if there is a mechanical failure within the plant?
Mr. Hartke replied there is a very high-tech system that monitors everything going on inside the plant. That communications with the valuing station offsite, it communicates with flares, so there’s a lot of networking and communication with that system does and other plants use this type of system.
Ms. Snitko gave an update that we have a few open issues for the RNG Plant itself. We did send an invitation to bid for the non-sole source parts. We didn’t receive any bids. We are working with Mr. Kozak to vet some quotes from different vendors in order to accommodate those parts as well. We also need natural gas supplies for the TOCs and OPs spec flare of the plant. We also sent out and have been working with Nicor and they’re not going to be able to fill the gas line in time so we need to temporarily haul in natural gas. We did send an RFP for that and we didn’t receive any bids because of timeline issues. SCS was able to move up some of their testing and vendors and now we have a final date when we need natural gas which is September 15th. We already have executed an emergency procurement process with a temporary supplier so they are all set to bring gas to the plant. Same kind of issue with hauling, we also sent out an RFP for the gas condensate hauling and we didn’t receive any bids, but we are working with our consultant to secure an agreement with the vendor, and we are very close with that. We’re also working on some intercommunication work that’s in the RNG Plant and the landfill flares so part of this system is to make sure that the flares can talk to each other, and we can have that data and know where we’re at with certain specifications. For the RNG pipelines the pipeline is mechanically complete. It’s connected from the RNG Plant to interconnect from beginning to end. They did a hydro-test a couple of weeks ago that was performed successfully. So, everything is done in regard to the pipeline. Some open and outstanding issues. ComEd still needs to connect power to the system. We do have a change order coming the Executive Committee, but Mr. Schaben briefly talked about that during our last County Board meeting. This is about the crop damages and cover crop costs. The Farm Bureau has been involved so we are putting that forth. For the RNG interconnect we are finalizing the electrical and intercommunication work for the most part. They are finalizing their construction things there. They are working with the City of Wilmington in order to have a building inspection to make sure the electrical work is okay and finalized and they also have to have ComEd give their final approval of electrical work. I believe they did pay their fee for to the City of Wilmington. I believe they officially need to schedule the date. As for any open issues NGT is consolidating a change order, this is for additional construction costs, engineering, and design work, additional survey, and environmental consultation permitting. It’s not very large I think its slated to be about $200,000.00. It was also for initial matting because we got a lot of rain this past season and so they ran out of the matting that they needed. That will be coming forth in October. We just want to finalize that if there are any other fees with ComEd that we can put that in 1 change order. For the O&M agreement the County is still working with SCS, we’re basically almost done. We’re trying to finalize the operating plan of the procedures and it’s in SCS lawyer’s hands to review it and once they are done, we can execute that. I also attached the RNG budget and we’re at $39,300,000.00.
Mr. Van Duyne asked do you have a commitment date from Nicor? Ms. Snitko replied no.
Mr. Fricilone asked we paid Wilmington permit, but they still haven’t given us a date to come out and inspect?
Ms. Snitko replied not the last that I heard of.
Mr. Fricilone asked what is that hold up?
Ms. Snitko replied the final electrical inspection.
Mr. Hartke replied the interconnect.
2. Morgue Project Update/Financial Summary
(Dave Tkac)
Mr. Tkac stated approximately a year ago this month we started the design process on this project with an approved budget of $7 million. As the design process proceeded, we came to the realization that $7 million dollars was not going to give us the opportunity to deliver the type of facility that the County would expect. We sought additional funding to the tune of $2.4 million dollars at end of last calendar year. The bidding process was structured into 3 packages and that bid structure allowed us to anticipate trades and materials that had long lead times so that we could start the project and have a continuous construction schedule. Bid packages 1 and 2 were let in spring of this year and while they did come over budget by a certain amount, we didn’t think that overage was insurmountable because the bulk of the trades were bid in bid package 3. I felt we could proceed at that time knowing we were over on bid packages 1 and 2. Bid package 1 and 2 consisted of 10 trades. While the bids came in and there were yellow flags we proceeded with the project, and this was my decision on to bid package 3 in the hopes that we would have favorable bid results in bid package 3 and offset the overage we experienced in bid packages 1 and 2. However, bid package 3 the bid opening occurred on July 21st and at that point we experienced a major bust and ended up being $1.8 million dollars over and that’s were we stand today. Since then, the project team has worked very diligently to come up with a number of cost reduction options that are presented in your agenda packet and they total about $900,000.00. Does this get us where we need to be in terms of proceeding with the project? The answer is no. These reduction and recommended scope reductions a lot of them are doable and some of them if we were to enact them; there will be those at the end of the project that would say, “why did we do that to save a couple of bucks?” Some of them are no brainers and others are significant. Working together with the Coroner and her staff I thought that it was a mandatory requirement that there would be no short selling the autopsy room. In other words, the Coronor and her staff were very adamant about having the equipment that the need for a state of the art autopsy operation but one that is built for today with an eye on the future. So, having said that I think we made a very significant effort to reduce the scope of the project around $900,000.00 but we are not where we need to be yet. I present this as kind of a status report.
Mr. Van Duyne stated this is a financial decision at this point, correct? Mr. Tkac replied yes.
Mr. Van Duyne stated you give Capital Improvement an update on where we’re at financially.
Mrs. Berkowicz asked have we reduced the number of stations to 2 or was it always 2? I thought it was a higher number.
Mr. Tkac replied no. The design calls for 3 total stations. What we’re saying here is if we were to only build 2 but rough in the 3rd and not fit it out.
Mrs. Berkowicz asked so it is technically reducing it to 2 stations. How many autopsy stations does the coroner have in Kane County, DuPage County?
Mrs. Summers replied they have 3. The one that we’re doing the rough in on is the isolation autopsy room. Because of COVID we’re trying to plan because it’s not a matter of, but a matter of when, we have another pandemic, and the isolation room is where you can do those autopsies because currently, we cannot do those.
Mrs. Berkowicz stated I don’t feel that is something we need to cut out. We need to keep that in there.
Mr. Fricilone commented we went over all this, and it made sense to us. One question I have is on the contingency we’re reducing but what is the contingency now?
Mr. Tkac replied it is 5% of $8.5 million.
Mrs. Tatroe stated with those reduction it goes to 3%.
Mr. Fricilone stated so we’re at $250,000.00 and so far, we haven’t spent any contingency?
Mr. Tkac replied no we have not.
Mr. Fricilone asked the $22,000.00 for the 3rd station is basically the equipment. It’s more less the equipment that you’re not buying.
Mr. Tkac replied yes.
Mr. Fricilone asked you guys were going to negotiate that after the bid? You guys are still working on negotiating the equipment?
Mr. Tkac replied we are waiting for an opinion from the State’s Attorney’s Office as to whether or not where we can go for a noncompetitive procurement and negotiate with more tact.
Mr. Fricilone commented my thought from both the Capital and Finance standpoint is this. You’re in that process now so, it may be $22,000.00, but it may be $30,000.00, if you buy that station later so, you have to make that decision does it make sense just to include it now, if you do go to negotiation and you can work a better deal with them it might be only $18,000.00, if you work a better deal. I think this committee should consider keeping that in the loop right now. If we use less than 10% of that to finish this off which would give us the 3rd station now. And the rest of the things we went through intensely and it made sense.
Mrs. Mueller commented my concern is I want this building to be able to serve our residents for years to come. What items in here are going to most greatly effect how we serve the people in Will County?
Mrs. Summers stated I looked through this repeatedly since I received this and 1 of the things that I have a concern about whether others think this makes no sense is removing the window blinds. Any autopsy room are the operatory this is not a lab we were going to have the windows put up higher. One of the issues that I heard from one of our pathologist’s that fills in from Kane County was that they did not put the blinds in there and there’s a glare and a issue getting decent pictures and being able to see things while you’re doing the autopsy. I really don’t feel we can take those out. If you want to take out the blinds in my office, I’m good with that. One of the things that I asked for and Mr. Tkac as well the team we are repurposing things and furniture from the office. Removing the equipment is for us to put up screens like this for us to be able to see the x-rays that are done prior to the autopsy. The doctors would not have to be running back and forth because it would be placed between each autopsy station, and they can look at these x-rays while they are doing the autopsy. I have three screens that have never been used that work fine. Go ahead, lock it in and we’ll connect them in. One of the things we can’t cut cost is in the autopsy room. If we’re planning for the future Will County, it’s going to be a 30/40-year thing before it’s looked at again. We’re going to outgrow it before 5 years, and I can give you statics. I want this to be for the future and I don’t want to come back and now it’s going to cost us this much because we didn’t do it now. I can’t stress it enough this is operatory. These people may not still be alive, but it really doesn’t work any different than a surgical suite and it’s not cheap. The other thing I don’t want taken out is the patio. We talked about this from the beginning. The staff needs they have to have a place to just get away. They have a very challenging job that most of us would not want to take on and they need a place to go to just sit and unwind. If you want to take the fence away, that’s fine, but leave the patio.
Mr. Van Duyne asked you want the equipment for the 3rd autopsy room, you want the patio, and you want the blinds. Capital Improvement wise Mr. Fricilone do you have comment/question.
Mr. Fricilone commented so the glare factor shouldn’t be there. Here’s my thoughts back to the contingency we have $250,000.00. Is this something we can add at the end based on what the contingency is? Even the patio can wait til the end. I think if we proceeded the way this is here separately for that 3rd autopsy station, we can wait a little bit until you’re about halfway done and then say, we’ve been really good with the contingency we have the money in the budget and maybe those things can come back, but I wouldn’t give it a stamp right now until we see where we’re at with contingency.
Mrs. Summer stated we cut back on the number of cameras that are in there which was a safety thing. We’re cutting back on the ballistics that I hear they were going to put in the walls; however, I still do want bullet proof windows where my staff sits in the front because many times, we have had to have police escort back my deputies to where they are because of the scene they came out of. Again, it’s about safety.
Mrs. Berkowicz commented our construction manager; they are the ones we’re counting on as far as the quality of materials that will provide a negative impact in the future. Have you run this by them the changes in materials?
Mr. Tkac replied we developed this itemized list in conjunction with the architect and construction manager and they are also here today.
Mrs. Berkowicz commented it would be nice if they commented here today, but I want to make sure they are the experts and they are hired to represent our interest and I like to get feedback from them regarding those items. Mrs. Summers is there anything in this project that you are not aware of that is not on this list that could be reduced or eliminated that could bring some savings?
Mrs. Summers replied one of the small areas that we have set aside for is for tissue blind samples. The tissue is put in the slides. We do have some extra equipment that we kind of sat aside that they can utilize in there. I don’t know how much money was set aside but we have things that we can put in there now that we can store those things and give us way more room than what we needed currently. That could be a savings too, but I don’t know how much that would be. The ballistic rating walls, I’m okay with. As long as we get, the bullet proof glass. I can’t go back on that.
Mr. Van Duyne commented it sounds like between the Coronor’s office and the Executive’s Office they have a little bit more work to do and bring the final product back to Finance. Is that correct?
Mr. Tkac replied that’s a fair statement.
Mr. Moustis commented I agree with Mr. Fricilone, it’s a process that we used with the courthouse. We took a lot of things out of the courthouse and some things were major and they realigned the project and redeveloped as we were spending and we added things back in, I agree with that process. Take it out and then if we move on and we have money we add it back in. I think we should leave the list as is and move forward. We can see what we can add in as we go through the process. Staying within the budget is extremely important. I’m not down playing your security issue is there but we can add it in as we go down the line.
Mr. Van Duyne asked what is the total amount of money for those 3 items; the patio, the 3rd autopsy equipment, your ballistic, and windows? Maybe $100,000.00.
Mr Tkac replied that’s a good amount or close to it.
Mr. Fricilone commented even with those things we’re still $900,000.00 over budget. This isn’t getting us back on budget.
3. Status of Former Courthouse, 14 W. Jefferson St.
(Dave Tkac)
Mr. Tkac stated basically we’re looking at 2 activities that are front and center. Recently we had a bid opening for the abatement of the old courthouse and the low bid was $645,000.00. The low bidder was Valour Technologies out of Bolingbrook IL. We would like to proceed with the recommendation for award in September, however, we’re not certain that the dollars are there to fund the abatement work. Looking for some direction and I’m just reporting on this now in this regard.
Mr. Fricilone commented that’s Finance’s problem and let’s get moving. Mr. Moustis commented that’s a Capital budget.
Mr. Palmer commented we’ve talked about it and some of these items are going to appear on Finance. I don’t think it’s specifically mentioned on the Capital budget but as we talked about a previous budget workshop that’s a draft document so the Board can put it in if it’s not in there. I don’t think specifically line item within the Capital. In the past some of those projects were line items like other Capital projects not related to these, but I didn’t see it listed as a specific funded item in the budget. There’s only $1.2 million in the Capital budget.
Mr. Moustis commented the Executive’s Office presented a Capital plan and I went through the document, and I think it’s pretty good but Mr. Tkac they should bring that back to this committee to approve.
Mrs. Howard replied there isn’t a specific line item for the asbestos, however, it was assumed a portion of this would go for this fiscal but if it would carry over for 2023 there’s enough budgeted in the Capital fund to cover this.
Mr. Van Duyne stated Mr. Tkac as far as the committee is concerned the committee would like for you to move forward to put up this asbestos removal bid.
Mrs. Mueller made the motion to move forward the bid for asbestos removal and Mr. Gould seconded.
Motion carries.
RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Capital Improvements Committee
MOVER: Meta Mueller, Member
SECONDER: Donald Gould, Member
AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Gould, Mueller, Parker
ABSENT: Coleman, Fritz, Traynere
VI. OTHER OLD BUSINESS
VII. NEW BUSINESS
1. Capital Projects Summary
(Dave Tkac)
Mr. Tkac stated there are 2 projects that are included in your agenda packet. Trench Drain replacement at Will County DOT garages at Caton Farm Rd. & Laraway Rd., this is completely funded by the DOT. We would like to bring that forward with a recommendation to award on the 15th, to Austin Tyler of Elwood, IL. Also, there is a summary of a project at the Community Health Center; the bid opening occurred on Aug 25th, this is for a conversion of a record storage area. This is an interior project at the Community Health Center converting the records storage area on the main level into a behavioral health unit consisting of 8 behavioral health exam rooms. This bid was opened on August 25, the low bidder was Paul Borg Construction, out of Chicago. The low bid amount was $367,000.00. We plan to bring this to the Will County Board for approval on September 15. This project is completely funded with Health Dept. grant proceeds.
Mr. Moustis asked regarding the drainage and since the morgue is on the same property is that going to take care of where the morgue is too? Is there going to be other issues with the morgue?
Mr. Palmer asked Mr. Tkac on the previous item on the old courthouse there is information about the building demo bid. For the Board members sake is that going forward? There’s a schedule here that has the dates and things like that and that’s just to bid it out that’s not awarding the bid so, board members we’re not approving it, the Executive Office is just putting it out for bid.
Mr. Tkac replied this is an RFP for services, Professional Engineering Services to develop us a cost estimate for building demolition to develop a bid document necessary for putting this out on the street for bid by demolition contractors. Demolition phase services and post demolition phase services. This is essentially for professional services only. The RFP has been drafted and it is ready to be released by our purchasing department a week from yesterday. We hope to put that on the street then and this is basically an information item.
2. Facilities Update
(William Fern Sr.)
Mr. Fern Sr. gave update on the facilities monthly report overview. The 14 points can be found in the agenda. Work orders is how I track inventory maintenance.
Ms. Ventura asked the asbestos removal is not in the 2023 budget and it’s also not on the Capital project plan that was submitted so, Mrs. Howard is saying it’s on this year’s budget that we have the dollars?
Mrs. Howard replied I said there is no align item in the 2023 budget, however, there’s enough funds in the Capital Improvement funds in the fy23 budget to cover this. For fy22 it was not originally budgeted, however, those salaries would have to come out of contingency if the project was done this fiscal year.
Ms. Ventura asked why wasn’t it budgeted this and more importantly why is it not budgeted for 2023?
Mrs. Howard replied I thought it was part of the CIP.
Mr. Schaben stated the CIP process started during the budgeting process which probably started in April/May and at that point we didn’t have accurate information on the cost abatement would be nor did we know what the actual cost for the demolition either. That’s why it wasn’t included.
Ms. Ventura asked we had estimated $500,000.00 dollars for asbestos removal. Why at that point include in last years budget especially in this upcoming budget?
I know I can ask in Finance but.
Mr. Schaben replied those were the decisions that the Board made last year to put money in the budget for asbestos. That’s not for us to put that in the budget.
Ms. Ventura stated maybe this is a procedural question.
Mr. Schaben commented that goal of the CIP is, we’re not throwing darts at a wall and be guessing. I think the better process is to go out for a bid, find out what the cost is, identify the funds, and plan for those funds to be spent for that purpose.
Ms. Ventura commented and when they are approved at that point it will be a part of the permanent budget.
Mr. Schaben replied correct.
Mrs. Howard commented just to add most of the items when the request comes in during the initial phase of the budget process if that information is presented early on it would be included in the proposed budget. If we get that information in estimates afterwards when it’s in the process of being finalized at the County Board level, then it is also included in the upcoming year’s budget but if we don’t have that information, it doesn’t always get in the budget in time.
Ms. Ventura stated that the Copperfield update is not on here and I think its super important considering in the budget we got $1.3 million in grants. This committee is supposed to be keeping updates with what we’re doing with that building. This is an asset we need to stay on top of.
VIII. OTHER NEW BUSINESS
IX. PUBLIC COMMENT
X. ANNOUNCEMENTS/REPORTS BY CHAIR
XI. EXECUTIVE SESSION
XII. ADJOURNMENT
1. Motion to adjourn meeting @ 11:25 a.m.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Meta Mueller, Member
SECONDER: Julie Berkowicz, Member
AYES: VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Gould, Mueller, Parker
ABSENT: Coleman, Fritz, Traynere
LEFT MEETING: Brooks Jr.
https://willcountyil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=4385&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up