Will County Executive Committee met Sept. 8.
Here are the minutes provided by the committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Mrs. Mueller led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. ROLL CALL
Chair Mimi Cowan called the meeting to order at 10:21 AM
| Attendee Name | Title | Status | Arrived |
| Mimi Cowan | Chair | Present | |
| Meta Mueller | Vice Chair | Present | |
| Herbert Brooks Jr. | Member | Present | |
| Mike Fricilone | Member | Present | |
| Tyler Marcum | Member | Present | |
| Jim Moustis | Member | Present | |
| Judy Ogalla | Member | Present | |
| Annette Parker | Member | Present | |
| Jacqueline Traynere | Member | Absent | |
| Margaret Tyson | Member | Present | |
| Joe VanDuyne | Member | Present | |
| Rachel Ventura | Member | Present | |
| Denise E. Winfrey | Member | Present |
Also Present at the Meeting: N. Palmer, B. Adams
Present from the State's Attorney's Office: M. Tatroe
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. EXEC SESSION Executive Committee Minutes June 9, 2022
(Executive Session)
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
2. WC Executive Committee - Assignment Meeting - Jul 7, 2022 10:00 AM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
3. WC Executive Committee - Board Agenda Setting Meeting - Jul 14, 2022 10:00 AM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
V. OLD BUSINESS
1. American Rescue Plan - Attachment Added
(Mimi Cowan)
Speaker Cowan stated we would like to invite President Dr. Johnson from St. Francis University to the podium. Just to refresh everyone’s memory for anyone that wasn’t here. We have been talking to Dr. Johnson and some of the other universities and college heads about what we can help with ARPA funds, and they brought us a proposal that we would like to have you all consider, so Dr. Johnson is here to talk about it a little bit more and maybe answer questions.
Dr. Johnson thank you for this opportunity to address you all this morning on behalf of Joliet Junior College, Lewis University, Governor State University, and the University of St. Francis. What we’re here to talk about is a process. This is a process that started many months ago with visits by Speaker Cowan and Chief of Staff Palmer to each of the individual colleges, your 4 universities based here in the Joliet Region and the Will County region asking us about what ideas we might have to utilize the ARPA funding to make differences, not just in our campuses but across Will County. Those individual meetings each one of us thought about ourselves. Maybe a little selfishly because we all can use the money ourselves but one of those things that those meetings expired was a zoom call with the 4 presidents’, with Speaker Cowan and Chief of Staff Palmer, Mr. Walsh, and the staffs at the various universities to discuss ideas. What quickly came to the top were 2 transformational initiatives that did not involve 1 university or college but all 4 and that we can work on together. One has to do with nursing education, and one has to do with teacher education. Both are similar proposals, but both could have a huge impact. In terms of nursing education, we think it’s important that we address the shortage of RN, BSN qualified nurses in Will County currently. In fact, our proposal has been endorsed by both Silver Cross and Ascension St. Joseph’s Hospital to build a pipeline of potential RN, BSN educated nurses over a 4 year period during which we would actually graduate 58 RN, and 80 BSN, but at the end of that program through a grant that we provided to Will County residents who chose to study nursing and agree to work in Will County for 2 years upon graduation at the end of the 4 years we will have a pipeline of 360 additional nursing students that will be able to graduate 15 RNs, 85 BSN a year going forward. We think that program could be sustained. Doesn’t mean necessarily have to come from Will County were going to try to provide other funds but the idea here is to create a sustainable pipeline of nursing educators. In a similar way we have what we call a teacher education initiative which looks to address the critical shortage of qualified certificated teachers in Will County and across the state. In a similar fashion we propose a grant program for students that are Will County residents that agree to work in Will County for 2 years upon graduation that will over that 4 years period graduate 100 qualified teacher educators and have another 400 in the pipeline to create a pipeline of 100 teacher educators a year. While that seems like a big number if you know anything about education and the shortage of teachers and the number of teachers that will be retiring each year these are 2 areas that address the health and education of Will County. The universities have come together with a proposal that we think may make a difference. This was kind of an update not just on the proposal but a little bit about the process. I know as a Board you can say the funds came in and what have you been thinking about there’s been a lot of brainstorming going on with some good ideas and I will tell you each university has its own individual good idea and there’s nothing from keeping us from proposing those too, but these are transformational trans universities initiatives and we’re very proud of them. On behalf of Mr. Livingston at Lewis University, Ms. Green at Governor State, and President Namuo at Joliet Junior College. I’m proud to be here to address you on their behalf today and answer any questions you may have.
Mr. Fricilone stated I am definitely in favor of this program, and we talked about it a lot in leadership. It’s loosely based on a program the State of Illinois did 15 years ago with special education teachers. My daughter-in-law was a beneficiary of that. She did have a little longer term that she had to teach but it was a title 9, 10 or whatever the number was schools and I think it was a 4- or 5-year program. I’m wondering if we push it to 3 years instead of 2 to try to keep them in the County a little longer. I do think we have to figure out if the kids are scheduled to go to school for 4 years and they have commitment of 2 years that’s a 6-year plan which we have to spend this money by 6 years, so we have to figure out the logistics of that. I’m well in favor of all these programs and the sooner we do these the better. If we do need to back Will County and spend some time working in Will County there’s a good chance you’re going to stick around.
Dr. Johnson replied that’s a good point. We did a discussion about the term. We do have other programs within the various universities in Will County that provide up to full funding. This is only partial funding this is up to $5,000.00 a year. Providing up to full funding and those programs there’s typically 3-to-4-year service requirement. Since, this was a partial funding the Presidents felt the 2 years were right but we can certainly discuss that.
Mr. Fricilone asked how do you see it working here? Are you giving them the money as they are in school? What if they don’t do the 2 years?
Dr. Johnson replied that’s what we talked about having a payback agreement. Just as we do with other programs. We’re hoping that that won’t be the case because that would be a failure.
Mr. Fricilone commented if they do have to pay us back, we don’t meet the federal guideline because the 4 years has passed, so that’s what we’re going to have to figure out.
Speaker Cowan stated there are some details that need to be worked out, but I think if the committee wants to move forward with the idea, then we can get to the nuts and bolts. I think those are good questions.
Mrs. Ogalla asked I know people who have left the nursing and teaching fields because of various issues that are still present today. I understand the baby boomer generation is retiring. How do you feel that there are enough students out there that would be wanting to get into either of these skills?
Dr. Johnson replied I’m going to give you a slightly different answer for each of these. Nursing is still a very dynamic field with a lot of folks wanting to get into it but sometimes they don’t have the academic preparation to succeed because it’s a very technical field. Not that teaching isn’t technical, but nursing is very technical and very scientific status. That said, the number of students because of the types of jobs they can get in nursing, there is a demand. The question is can we make this affordable as possible. In teaching, quite honestly, I think we must do a better job of marketing what a great job being a teacher is. It’s not just important but it is a great job. We think this will help make it more attractive. It is our belief that they’ll be able to graduate fundamentally debt free because of this and that’s a nice thing to be able to do.
Mrs. Ogalla commented because you hear all the negative stuff about being a teacher but yes, it is a good job to have. The hours are good, and you don’t have to work all year round.
Dr. Johnson replied the hours are long and you do work all year long but you’re doing the most important thing in the world.
Ms. Ventura commented to Mr. Fricilone’s issue on timing. I think the easiest way to get around that is to do a grant program so we’re giving the universities a grant and it has a stipulation of the timing, the payback all that. We cut the check submitting would be on the universities to enforce it. The universities to track the students. Obviously if the student doesn’t finish and have to pay back then that opens a spot for another student. That would allow for us to be within the timeframes of the federal requirements. The next thing is how is the enforcement after they graduate how are we making sure that they are working here?
Dr. Johnson replied the way this works for the colleges we do monitor that and we don’t have them compliance but if we did we would ask them to repay.
Ms. Ventura commented mental health and social work is this something you could expand because I feel these are areas that need to expand, especially because of COVID.
Dr. Johnson replied we can modify that. Our approach was to address the critical need for those entry level nurses because those who want that honestly the hospitals are having the hardest time to hire. Will County is blessed because this county has psychiatric mental health practitioners nursing programs available in 2 schools that have substance abuse counseling programs available. Because those aren’t available at all 4 colleges those might be 1 of the proposals the colleges might choose to present.
Mr. Brooks asked Dr. Mitchell came to the Board last month and made a presentation about this. Another thing that she mentioned was a program Pathway to Healthcare. Are you looking at starting this before getting the ARPA funds and/or is this going to be put on the hold until such monies appear?
Dr. Johnson replied the intent of these proposals are waiting for ARPA funding but we do have an eye for how we can try to make it sustainable. We recognize that the hardest sell is going to be education, but we think this will help.
Mrs. Ogalla asked how will we get the students made aware of this?
Dr. Johnson replied it will depend on the particular college but we have already started talking to the guidance counselors. That’s why we’re saying this would start in the fall of 2023. Again, each of our schools takes a slightly different approach but most of us are offering dual credit course work in local high schools for people who might be interested in education. We can go out there and say, Will County Board has approved this and if you enroll at the University of St. Francis or anywhere else, you get an extra $5,000.00 on top of it and you just must teach in the county for 2 years or whatever we determine.
Mr. Fricilone commented I just want to make sure when we appropriate this money that all the money is going to the students and not the administration of the program and then whoever wants to talk to Speak Cowan say what the program cost is because I would like for us to approve and start moving things along today on this program if we can.
Dr. Johnson replied it’s a draft because there’s no RFP out there right now. There are no administrative costs for any of the colleges and we talked about that. We feel that we can handle this as part of our normal financial aid processes. We are used to reporting on state funds, federal funds through the uniformed audits, so we felt we could handle it that way. There are 0 administrative costs. In terms of funding, we have scoped each program in about $5 million dollars. The nursing because they have the RN sole option is at $4.7 million and the other one is at $5 million. It’s a $5,000.00 grant for up to 4 years to study.
Speaker Cowan stated to Mr. Fricilone’s point our option for the Board today is that we can decide as an Executive Committee to move this to the full board for next week and we can provide documentation about the cost to get this going right away or we can wait until October at Executive Committee and put the documentation ahead of time on Executive Committee and deal with it then.
Mr. Fricilone stated I think the people who are here right now are ready to move on it.
Mrs. Mueller stated I love this idea. This will apply anywhere where they hire nurses and not just our hospitals and teachers as well?
Dr. Johnson absolutely in Will County.
Mr. Moustis asked in this program if you start out at in a 2-year program at the junior college and then they decided they want to get their bachelor’s in nursing and they want to go to St. Francis will that carry over? Will there be coordination on that grant?
Dr. Johnson replied yes and yes.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Executive Committee MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
2. Cannabis Tax Revenue
(Mimi Cowan)
Speaker Cowan stated we discussed some broad strokes about cannabis last week and I think there was a large amount of support for moving forward with an allocation for CAC. I would like to propose that we move forward with that today to send it to full County Board. I’m going to throw out $500,000.00 from the cannabis revenue to go to the CAC.
Mr. Fricilone stated the reason this is important as you know we’re working on the budget right now and the Executive has put cannabis money in the budget and put expenses against it which I don’t think either side agrees on where those expenses are at. We need to determine what we’re doing; it may not come to an agreement on all of it at this point which means we can set it aside and say, we’ll continue to talk, especially in the case of the CAC there is a $150,000.00 in the budget already and we thought we were going to put more in based on last year. So, if we’re in agreement we have the $500,000.00 at least we can put that piece of cannabis in the budget now so that the CAC winds up getting $500,000.00 from there, $150,000.00 from the revenue corporate money for a total of $650,000.00.
Ms. Ventura asked last year we did $450,000.00 total for CAC. Correct? So, I don’t know that they need $600,000.00. I thought they were going to come before us with a proposal to build a building and that might change some of the funding for the programming. We haven’t seen that or discussed that so, I guess I’m okay putting $350,000.00 from the cannabis and $150,000.00 from the budget to up them the $500,000.00 that’s in addition from their $450,000.00 from last year. I don’t know if they are stocking this money away for future planning and it’s all going towards operation. I know that they have their own foundation or funding source as well and so, I guess ultimately if this is really about building a long-term building or location, I would like to see that on Capital and be part of a budget for that and keep the expenditures at $500,000.00 plus.
Speaker Cowan stated we’re investigating whether the construction of the new CAC facility can be funded via the ARPA infrastructure. This money is for operations.
Mr. Fricilone commented to your point about operations if you look at the budget there and people over their case loads are going up as we speak. They are growing. Their money comes from grants or from Men Who Cook and that’s it. We’re becoming a vital part.
Ms. Ventura stated I’m not saying that we don’t fund them I’m saying, we limit this funding from cannabis so that we have other options for that.
Mr. Van Duyne stated I was going to take your recommendation and add an additional $500,000.00 and I will make that motion.
Mr. Moustis commented if we’re going to start putting this kind of money in the CAC, I think we should at least get a review of their budget and how the money is going to be spent. Why is it necessary for us to increase the allocation. Quite honestly, I don’t feel comfortable giving them more money without looking at how they are spending the money. I will support it and I think it’s our responsibility to view their budget.
Speaker Cowan noted I wanted to let everyone know that the suggestion about having a public hearing about cannabis. Essentially, we are starting to move forward with, and I’ve asked staff to put together something either at the very end of September or the beginning of October. We will start with 1 and talk about our plan to do others after that but that is in the works. As soon as we get a date down, we will let you know.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Executive Committee MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Member SECONDER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
VI. OTHER OLD BUSINESS
VII. NEW BUSINESS
1. Authorizing Expenditure of ARPA Funds for Health Pillar and Transferring Appropriations
(County Executive's Office)
Mr. Schaben stated I wanted to recap where we are as we continue to travel down the track approving the framework associated with the pillars that were originally identified back in April. Leading up to this meeting we did approve sub-pillars for the health department, as well as met on August 11 regarding the initial conversation for what is the economic development pillar. We received feedback from you all on where the priorities are and what issues you wanted to follow-up with. Today we want to bring the structure for the economic development pillar for you all to vote on and provide feedback, so we can then make targeted engagements. We will be sending out a memo that identifies the details associated with the unmet needs pillar and who has been contacted and where we are from an eligibility standpoint. As of today, we are happy to report that over $8 million dollars of the township dollars park districts and libraries have been applied for under the allocation have been deemed eligible. The next step is we are working with the State’s Attorney’s Office to get that MOU (memorandum of understanding) drafted. For those that are looking for reimbursement we can start going through that process now with the MOU (memorandum of understanding).
Mr. Fricilone asked since the State’s Attorney is here do we know where that’s at because I keep hearing we’re working on the MOU (memorandum of understanding)?
Mr. Schaben replied we brought in a subconsultant under Anser to help support because it was too heavy of a lift given the time alignment, so they have the first draft coming to us tomorrow. That firm is under Anser and we talked about other subconsultants at previous meetings. We had a great meeting with the townships two weeks ago. Provided some additional clarification. There are some townships that have decided to hold off on their applications so they are going through the budgetary process but did give great feedback on the status on where their applications are and what they intend to do with the money. We will be providing the Executive Committee a full debrief regarding each township, fire district, park, etc. on where they are with ARPA and eligibility.
Mrs. Ogalla asked have they been contacted to let them know they have been approved.
Mr. Schaben replied we are going through the eligibility notification right now. It’s a rolling process. We will be reaching out this week. To continue to evaluate and have shared the initial results of the RFI (request for information) for the letter of intent associated with being in the construction pillar. The infrastructure pillar is the next opportunity we will be discussing with you all on October 13th. We will bring debrief of what kind of projects we received, where and what initiatives it aligns within the American Rescue Plan. What the eligibility dollar amount and location of the products are. We also will be looking for feedback on October 13, about where our priorities are, so location, size, initiative such as clean drinking water, sewer mitigation, and so forth. On October 6, we have the initial outreach for the health pillar. We have identified the initial list of 1,010 contacts. We already have 1 application that has been completed and submitted. We have 3 that have been started and about a 1% bounce back rate on those applications and 400 of those have already opened the engagement letter. We will be continuing with Zoom meetings as well to further educate and clarify what the application looks like leading up to the deadline and that will be done in both English and Spanish.
Ms. Ventura stated we did ask last meeting for some very solid communication, so we thought we could get the link.
Speaker Cowan stated I found it in my junk email, so you may want to check your junk email. There is a social media packet with the link.
Ms. Ventura asked well I appreciate that because I didn’t see the link and there are people that are interested in applying for the application, so I want to make sure that we get them that. The other thing we talked about that was not clear is very early on when you came on and presented to us you talked about having an open for 45 days and for marketing for 45 days and then have the application for 60/60, so are we marketing right now or just extending to 90 days?
Mr. Schaben replied for the first 30 days of the 60-day window our target engagement for the health pillar so it’s going to be Twitter, Facebook, Zoom, community meetings, all over the townships both in English and Spanish. Then we’re going to record several our meetings with people and post that on the County’s website so those that can’t be in attendance can download. After that 30-day window it’s going to be more of techno assistance as I would call it. What’s different about this what we talked about at the last meeting is the allocation of the township park districts the money has already been set aside for that. Our anticipation is that the health pillar is going to be somewhat oversubscribed so we are going to be there to offer help. We’re going to identify how they can get their send.gov so we do have a little more of a deadline of the health pillar.
Ms. Ventura asked so they can’t apply through the application until they have the step-up.gov?
Mr. Schaben replied they can apply then we go through the process and say, here’s what you are missing. Then it’s on the applicant just like any other process.
Ms. Ventura asked 60 days from Tuesday is the deadline for the health applications.
Mr. Schaben replied correct. What we really want to focus on today is obviously we identify very early on that we want to support a strong and equitable recovery from COVID and as a result from this pillar as we focus specifically on the economic downturn. What has been discussed with leadership and brought forth for your consideration is 2 vehicles in which we would do that under the economic development pillars. The first is an open grant application. The second is allocation for targeted engagement. We will identify the prioritization criteria and then look at the total investment amount. The feedback provided in the last meeting was the focus on specifically 3 initiatives from a competitive standpoint. The first was supporting households and under that was identifying opportunities to help Will County residents with affordable housing initiatives. The second was financial services. Existing programs where those that can get help with funding in underbanked populations. These are initiatives we are looking to identify within Will County to support our existing population. The second issue that was identified and provided feedback confirmation at the last meeting was healthy children. Looking to aid kids associated with high poverty school districts specifically resulting in the learning loss mitigation that occurred within the COVID and at home schooling. Also, looking to support any program that deal with childcare and early learning. The last is the aid impacted interest category. This is where we look to support nonprofit organizations and tourism hospitality sectors that’s struggling identified financial losses associated with the pandemic and continuation their business submission. The current framework is to identify or allocate $10 million dollars to those 3 initiatives. The second sub-pillar under economic development is what we’re referring to as a target engagement. This is an opportunity for the County Board to give directly with folks like St. Francis University to support initiatives about having to go through competitive grant process. Going back to April supporting teachers and nurses was something that we identified. This would be a target engagement.
Ms. Ventura asked you picked the $10 and $13 million arbitrarily based on the ones you already haven’t targeted. How did those numbers come about?
Mr. Schaben replied its part ARP and part science. What we did based off the application that Anser and Utter have reviewed in other areas as well as what NACo has reported online versus this somewhat developed organizations are within Will County. That was how we looked at the $10 million dollar number. We have identified attended $500,000.00 cap associated with the open application so that way we make sure we are diversified where opportunities to fit in different areas. The target engagement was based off what the program that we spoke about previously needed. Also, identified partners could be involved and how much funds we could allocate to them as well. For reference under the $13.5 million is where we identified 3 tentative opportunities for direct engagement. The first is working with the Center of Economic Development to support initiatives disparities in impacted communities. The second is the Workforce Services supporting employment training as well within the Workforce Services Division of Will County. The third being the collegiate opportunity that you all just heard about. This is the current identifying list we know there could be opportunities for others to bring ideas forward under the target engagement which is still applied to the same criteria for impact and evaluation.
Mrs. Ogalla asked you must be associated with a non-profit if you’re a for profit?
Mr. Schaben replied if you’re a for profit and you’re in an impacted industry you’re eligible. This aligns with Department of Treasury guidelines as an impacted non-profit or small business.
Mrs. Ogalla asked are you going to be the administrator of this or Anser or both?
Mr. Schaben replied the roll that we play is probably two fold from it. Providing structure process in terms of how the program can work within Will County. Not about what the program is achieving and on the back end it’s about the compliance side.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
2. Amending the Parameters for the Expenditure of American Rescue Plan Funds (Executive Committee)
Mr. Palmer stated Anser proposed this on the spreadsheet, it’s not in your packet but the question is how much we’re going to allocate for administrative costs because when we setup the pillars originally it’s not that we didn’t know it was a cost but we didn’t calculate that specifically into the pillar, so we had $50 million for infrastructure, $30 million for health and $25 million for economic development. Last month we talked about setting up payment for the Anser program for that’s the Board approved and not receive $1.5 million contract knowing that there may be addendums to that contract. There are other costs that are being spent as we speak for Anser related prototype and ARPA work, so we need to setup a pillar or whatever in litigation of that money.
Mr. Fricilone stated as we talked about this last month, this is getting confusing keeping administrative cost within each pillar. When we did CARES Act, we set aside $6 million at the time and then we had no idea what it was going to cost for administration. However, if we approve this number, we need oversite ahead of the expense because we can’t just approve this as administrative pillar and we don’t put any caveats on it then the Executive can spend whatever they want. My recommendation is that we create the pillar put say $8 million dollars in it, but Mrs. Tatroe must tell us how we can make that into a resolution.
Mrs. Tatroe replied I think you just include in the resolution that any contracts must come back to County Board for approval.
Mr. Fricilone stated right now their saying that’s professional service, so they don’t have to get approvals.
Mrs. Tatroe replied I’ll have to look at that and see what happened. As I said, you would have to include a provision in there that says that any contracts going forward would have to be brought back to the County Board.
Mr. Fricilone stated whatever you need to do on that resolution. I would say $8 million dollars even and administrative bucket with whatever we need oversite to contracts.
Ms. Ventura stated I don’t think it should be retroactive to whatever has been spent already. If money has been spent by the Executive on professional services, then that should come out of the Executive’s professional service budget item and not ARPA. If money was paid out of ARPA, it needs to be paid back or transferred from her professional service budget line item should be moved back to the ARPA funds.
Mrs. Tatroe replied we will review that.
Ms. Ventura stated I’m happy to second Mr. Fricilone motion.
Mr. Palmer stated the other possibility is we know we have a $1.5 million not to exceed commitment to Anser. We know there’s going to be more, and we don’t know how much. We could ask for a proposed budget for what other cost of doing business. We’re paying a consulting firm to do this work. If we have a budget that says here is what we project to spend on communication and other subconsultants then we can at least have numbers to work from. To your point Ms. Ventura in the past, we had some discussion the prime consultants would hire subcontractors under their contract, and it would just roll up under Anser. That didn’t happen; in this case it was separate contracts that didn’t come to the Board, so what could happen in best practices bring a proposal with expected cost communicated.
Ms. Ventura stated when we hired Anser that they were going to do the communication and that was a part of our contract because we discussed it. Now, I didn’t read through the contract to make sure all communications services were presented but I thought that was their responsibility as a part of the $1.5 million.
Mr. Moustis commented I have some similar concerns going back to Ms. Ventura’s point. We never approved that vendor or had a budget. Mrs. Tatroe moving forward this County has never been approved or participate in ARPA and believe the Executive’s Office feels all administrative costs is whatever they decide and whatever vendors they use that they come back to the County Board. Going forward I have no idea what The Fource is going to cost. Is there a budget, a proposal? We haven’t seen anything. I do think there was inappropriate appropriation coming out of the ARPA money we paid them for their past work. Even moving forward, we have not approved them for ARPA. Mrs. Tatroe are you going to give us some direction on this?
Mrs. Tatroe replied I’m going to look at the contract and I’m going to look at the appropriation that was made and see what’s going on with it. I think there were appropriation made in the budget and I must look at the contract to see because I am not clear. I’ve heard different conversations. I have not had the opportunity to sit down with our finance people and look at the budget I have not seen The Fource contract. I need to look at it and see what exactly is going on.
Mr. Moustis commented we hired them for CARES and that was a separate program and necessary going forward.
Mrs. Tatroe replied yes. I think there was a specific contract for that.
Mr. Van Duyne stated $8.1 million is a big number and kind of threw me for a loop. I’m wondering who decided on these percentages of these different pillars?
Speaker Cowan replied these were suggested by the consultants at Anser. To review its not saying necessarily that we’re going to spend $8 million dollars on Anser or other consultants with the administrative. We want to make sure we’re budgeting for it to make sure were not overspending in the infrastructure, health or economic development and not have any money to pay administrative needs we have.
Mr. Schaben stated the American Rescue Plan allows for the recipients like Will County to account for up to 10% of the allocation amount for administrative. We’re at 6% right now and the real supporting material to why it’s 6% is because there’s going to be flexibility in the program and infrastructure project that puts us over $500,000.00 to complete. It’s not contingency but it doesn’t allow for flexibility under the administrative pillar and a placeholder for those dollars between now and 2026 to draw on funds to support ARPA initiatives without clear deliberation of where it’s been allocated right now.
Mr. Fricilone stated we can reimburse ourselves. Remember when we took our $10 million dollars as revenue replacement. If it’s becoming a burden in the finance department, we’re already talking about hiring someone we can look at them and say, let’s take some of this money and put it towards it. It’s a number that’s comparable and hopefully we don’t spend it all and maybe we can put some of the money back into the programs.
Speaker Cowan noted this is what we need to motion for is to reduce the pillar that we previously passed by the amount shown to create this $8 million.
Mr. Palmer stated the question is we can have leadership work on this, but we need a number.
Mr. Fricilone stated let’s choose this number it equals the administrative cost in each pillar.
Ms. Ventura stated minus the balance there is a little bit difference the $129,659.00, take that off the balance of total, so it’s a $8 million even.
Mr. Palmer stated we will take those numbers out of the pillars. Let it show it’s no longer $50 million, it’s $50 million minus the admin cost. So, there’s not a question 6 months from now what’s the number and why didn’t we have enough because we took it out for admin. Our previous resolution said, any changes we would bring that back to the Board, I’m just following what you already wanted to do.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Jim Moustis, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
3. Review of Purchasing Ordinance - Current Version Attached (County Board)
Speaker Cowan stated it’s time to update purchasing ordinance. The last update was in 2008 so the staff is reviewing and researching other improvements. If Board members have any ideas we can update it now, we can discuss it in October, we can continue to update it in the future. The Diversity Committee has suggested some changes for the future. The main point today in addition to any discussion that you may have right now, is to let you know that if you have ideas or changes that we might like to see, get them to Mr. Palmer and he’ll put them in formats that we can have a substantive conversation about, and it might be a conversation for the caucus meetings too. Any comments or questions on that right now?
4. Review of County Board Rules - Current Version Attached
(County Board)
Speaker Cowan noted every two years in December when a new Board is elected we revise if needed and repass the County Board rules. We like to get the conversation going about potential edits that we might see fit to make sure we’re ready with those rather than scrambling to put things together in December so that the continuing Board members with any new Board members have a blueprint. They can of course change it before passing in December but we’re doing some of the leg work now. Is there anything that anyone wants to discuss now? Again, it might be a good topic of conversation for caucus as well.
5. Supporting Operation Green Light for Veterans
(Nick Palmer)
Speaker Cowan noted this is a NACo initiative that NACo seeks to recognize veterans in our community.
Ms. Winfrey commented Operation Green Light is supported by NACO, but the Veteran’s Assistance Commissions (VAC) are all onboard as well. The whole point of that is to recognize veteran’s service and sacrifice for them and their families. During the week of Veteran’s Day, the entire week they are asking for all county facilities to light up in green and encourage people to light up their homes as well in green for recognition of the work that’s been done.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
6. Radio System Project
(Tom Murray)
Mr. Murray provided an overview on the Tinley Park expansion project. He also provided a history of the county’s radio system.
A brief discussion followed regarding the request by Tinley Park to expand our coverage.
No action was taken.
7. Authorizing the Will County Executive to Execute Lease Renewal with City of Joliet for Problem Solving Courts Program at 10 S. Chicago Street, Joliet, IL (Dave Tkac)
Mr. Tkac stated we thought we would have all the details of this lease renewal worked out, but I don’t think we’re going to make it unless we get something back from them today. I’m asking to remove this from the agenda.
| RESULT: WITHDRAWN [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
8. Authorizing the County Executive to Execute the Contract with Total Parking Solutions, Inc., (TPS) for Multi-Space Parking Terminals
(County Executive's Office)
Mr. Palmer stated this is something Mr. Tkac and I worked on previously in our lives, but this may not be needed this was the parking licenses for TPS (Total Parking Solution) parking we had for the old courthouse parking lot. Machines and support for those machines for the parking meters. In the past it came to the Board for approval, but after this was on the agenda for some discussion Mrs. Tatroe is researching whether things like this need to come to the Board. The dollar amount is low and this kind of overlaps with our previous purchasing ordinance. We might want to be clearer about things that are below a certain financial threshold that don’t need to come to the Board, but the question has not officially been answered yet. If there’s a contract with Will County not our respected office County Executive’s Office does that require Board approval and if it doesn’t, we won’t bring it to the Board or if it doesn’t surpass a certain financial threshold then we wouldn’t bring it back but there’s some murkiness in this and that’s why it was on the agenda.
Mr. Tkac stated we concur with everything Mr. Palmer just said, and we would like to bring it forward and I would like to have it today. We just have to do a little bit of back and forth on it and we are pursuing this.
Mr. Palmer asked should that be possible for next week?
Mr. Tkac replied yes.
Mr. Palmer asked so we should leave it on the agenda?
Mr. Tkac replied I would say so, yes.
Mrs. Ogalla asked what is the cost because we don’t have anything on our agenda?
Mr. Tkac replied approximately $8,000.00 annually.
Speaker Cowan asked we would be able to get this and distributed to Board members later today or potentially by tomorrow?
Mr. Tkac replied yes, potentially by tomorrow.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
9. Authorizing County Executive to Renew Service and Maintenance Contract with Total Parking Solutions, Inc., (TPS) for Multi-Space Parking Terminals (County Executive's Office)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
10. Authorizing the County Executive to Execute an Elevator Maintenance Contract with Schindler Elevator for the Courthouse
(Dave Tkac)
Mr. Tkac stated this is for the elevator maintenance at the new courthouse. It involves 17 pieces of vertical transportation equipment consisting of 4 escalators and 13 elevators; we have gone back and forth several times and I thought we were going to have it ready, but we do not. I am asking to remove this from the agenda.
| RESULT: WITHDRAWN [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
11. Awarding Bid for Ballistic Shields for Sheriff's Department
(Kevin Lynn)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
12. Awarding Bid for Community Health Center Behavioral Health Renovations (Dave Tkac)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
13. Awarding Bid for Trench Drains at various D.O.T. garages
(Dave Tkac)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Member SECONDER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
14. Setting a Cap on the County Fee for the Will County C-PACE Program (Briana Moore)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
15. Authorizing Change Order from Midwestern Contractors for Crop Damages and Cover Crops on RNG Pipeline Easements
(Dave Hartke/Christina Snitko)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Member SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
16. Replacement Hire for EMA Planning Officer
(Denise Maiolo)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mike Fricilone, Member SECONDER: Joe VanDuyne, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
17. Replacement Hires for Land Use Development Analyst I
(Denise Maiolo)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Vice Chair AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
18. Replacement Hire for Sunny Hill Nursing Home - Administrative Assistant (Denise Maiolo)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Margaret Tyson, Member SECONDER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
19. Proclamation(s)
Speaker Cowan stated we have a number of proclamations requests that I think staff needs to confirm with Mr. Fricilone and Mrs. Mueller.
20. Appointment(s) by the County Executive
1. Executive Appointments
(Mitch Schaben)
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Margaret Tyson, Member SECONDER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
VIII. OTHER NEW BUSINESS
Speaker Cowan stated we need to save a spot for the Interim Supervisor of Assessments position.
Ms. Ventura stated I don’t agree with having an interim. If this is who they are going to hire why not just have a special meeting before the end of the date and just approve that person.
Mr. Fricilone replied it’s by law. We must have an interim. Even if they were hiring somebody and they offered them the job this week they might not be able to start until the end of October. By law we must put somebody in place as soon as Rhonda leaves that’s why they have to have an interim.
Mr. Palmer stated there’s going to be an appointment of a permanent person at some point. Since this is an interim filled from the time the current until the assessor leaves and/or consents to a permanent replacement. Is this an actual appointment like an appointment process or is it a resolution?
Mrs. Tatroe replied I will review the actual verbiage in the actual statute, but I would be inclined to say that it’s a temporary appointment.
Mr. Gould asked perhaps you could also save a space on the agenda for a resolution at the next meeting regarding participation in IMRF. This is regarding the decision out of the Illinois Supreme Court regarding Williamson County whereby the County Board members, those elected prior to 2016 were restored into IMRF with their full participation rights. This obviously affects anyone elected prior to that time so this morning if you can do that and save space.
Mr. Palmer stated we also have the Morgue Bid Package 3 that Purchasing would like to bring forward this month.
Mrs. Tatroe stated as you all aware we have our expected revenues from the opioid litigation, and I spoke with Mrs. Howard this morning about whether a special fund had been established for that. She indicated she did not believe that we did have a special fund. Those revenues could be coming in this fall, and I was wondering if we could save a space on the agenda to establish a special fund for the opioid litigation revenues. Those will have to be spent on opioid mitigation measures, so they will have to be tracked.
Motion was made by Mr. VanDuyne, second by Mr. Brooks, to save space on the County Board agenda for the items discussed above.
1. Motion to save space for Interim Supervisor of Assessments, Participation in IMRF, awarding Bid Package #3 for the New Morgue, and Establishing a Special Fund for the Opioid LItigation Revenues
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
IX. REQUEST FOR STATE'S ATTORNEY'S OPINION
X. COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. Land Use & Development
Mr. Marcum stated I need to save space for 4 zoning cases and 5 resolutions for what will be coming out of Land Use next Tuesday.
2. Finance
3. Public Works & Transportation
4. Diversity & Inclusion
5. Public Health & Safety
6. Legislative & Judicial
7. Capital Improvements
8. Executive
XI. PUBLIC COMMENT
XII. ANNOUNCEMENTS/REPORTS BY CHAIR
XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION
XIV. APPROVAL OF THE COUNTY BOARD AGENDA
1. Approval of County Board Agenda
(Approval)
XV. ADJOURNMENT
1. Motion to adjourn meeting @ 12:46 p.m.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Judy Ogalla, Member AYES: Cowan, Mueller, Brooks Jr., Fricilone, Marcum, Moustis, Ogalla, Parker, Tyson, VanDuyne, Ventura, Winfrey ABSENT: Traynere |
Alerts Sign-up