Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW Agenda Packet 12/12/2000 -NOTE TIME AND LOCATION- ORDER OF BUSINESS SPECIAL MEETING Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time: Mount Prospect Village Hall, 2nd Floor Tuesday, December 12, 2000 100 South Emerson Street 6:00 P.M. Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 I. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL I1. ROLLCALL Mayor Gerald "Skip" Farley Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Dennis Prikkel Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer Trustee Irvana Wilks II1. CLOSED SESSION LITIGATION 5 ILCS 120/2 (C) (11 ) - Litigation, When an action against, affecting or on behalf of the particular public body has been filed and is pending before a court or administrative tribunal, or when the public body finds that an action is probably or imminent, in which case the basis for finding shall be recorded and entered into the minutes of the closed meeting. IV. ADJOURNMENT COMMI'I-rEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time: Mount Prospect Senior Center Tuesday, December 12, 2000 50 South Emereon Street 7:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL Mayor Gereld L. Farley Trustee Timothy Corcoren Trustee Dennis Prikkel Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer Trustee Irvana Wiiks II. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 28, 2000 II1. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD IV. AMENDMENTS TO REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX At the October 10, 2000 Committee of the Whole meeting, the Village Board undertook a discussion regarding Amendments to the Village's existing Real Estate Transfer Tax Ordinance. The main focus of discussion was shifting the responsibility for payment of the Tax from the buyer to the seller. Additionally, staff took the opportunity to recommend a number of drefting revisions designed to make the Ordinance more readable as well as adding a provision that would require the payment of the Tax on long-term business lease trensactions. As part of the Board's deliberetions, there was considereble discussion regarding the need to provide a "rebate" mechanism by which pereons who paid the Tax as buyer would be given an opportunity for relief should they find themselves now having to pay the Tax again as seller. It was determined that an open-ended rebate could cost the Village several million dollare in lost revenue over an extended period. Some consideretion was given to a short "rebate window" in order to limit potential revenue loss while still providing an opportunity for current sellere to obtain relief from the prospect of double taxation. Ultimately, a majority of the Village Board determined that the responsibility for payment of the Tax remain with the buyer due to the complexity of coming up with a workable rebate mechanism. The other recommended changes to the Code were approved as presented by staff. An Ordinance amending the Real Estate Trensfer Tax (sans a shift from buyer to seller) was presented at its November 8 meeting. At the firet reading, Trustee Wilks asked that the Board reconsider the question of who is responsible the payment of the Tax. A majority of the Board indicated they were willing to revisit the topic. NOTE: ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING BUT BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY NEEDS SOME ACCOMMODATION TO PARTICIPATE, SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT I00 SOUTH EMERSON, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 60056, 847/392-6000, EXTENSION 5327, TDD #847/392-6064. As part of the October 10 discussion, staff surveyed Northwest Municipal Conference communities to determine those that had a Real Estate Transfer Tax and who was responsible for paying same. Of the 15 respondents, only Mount Prospect and Niles listed the buyer as responsible. In the interim, staff secured, through the assistance of a local attorney, a much more comprehensive list of municipalities that impose the Tax and who is responsible for paying same. This list (included) is produced by Chicago Title and Trust and I believe represents the most comprehensive and up-to-date listing on the topic. Of the 70 municipalities listed, 18 (approximately 26%) place the responsibility for payment of the Tax on the buyer. Assuming that the focus of further discussion is limited to who is responsible for payment of the Tax, a decision to switch from buyer to seller raises the concomitant question of whether a "rebate window" should be established whereby homeowners who paid the Tax as buyer and now find they are again responsible for paying the Tax as seller have the opportunity to limit their Tax burden through a credit against the amount of Tax they originally paid as buyer. Included in the information package is a memorandum from Finance Director Douglas EIIsworth highlighting pertinent information critical to any discussion of this topic. V. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT H:\G EN\Cow~genda\121400 COW Agenda.doc MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE NOVEMBER 28, 2000 I. ~7~[,[,~ZE~ The meeting was called to order at 6:15 p.m. by Mayor Gerald Farley. Present at the meeting were: Trustees Paul Hoefert, Richard Lohrstorfer, Dennis Prikkel, Michaele Skowron and Irvana Wilks. Absent from the meeting was Trustee Timothy Corcoran. Staff members present included Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Public Works Director Glen Andler, Deputy Public Works Director Sean Dorsey, Water/Sewer Superintendent Rory O'Donovan, Forestry Superintendent Sandy Clark, Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker, Vehicle Maintenance Superintendent Jim Guenther, Human Services Director Nancy Morgan, Finance Director Doug EIIsworth, Deputy Finance Director Carol Widmer, Fire Chief Michael Figolah, Community Development Director Bill Cooney, Deputy Community Development Director Michael Blue, Building Commissioner Bill George and Police Chief Ronald Pavlock. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of Minutes of November 14, 2000. Motion made by Trustee Lohrstorfer and Seconded by Trustee Skowron. Minutes were approved. III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. IV. ;~001 BUDGET DISCUSSIONS P~lblic Works De_oartment Public Works Director Glen Andler presented a summary of the 2000 objectives including a summary of the effort that was generated as a result of the May 18 windstorm. He stated the Village spent approximately $359,000 of which $94,000 was reimbursed. The windstorm lasted only a short period of time but took several weeks of clean up before the community was restored to normal. The damage included 1300 trees. Route 83 Reconstruction and Water Main Replacement was a significant project during the year 2000. Also, the continuation of the Street Resurfacing and Reconstruction Project along with the FEMA Flood Map revisions were significant undertakings during 2000. He stated the Department received approximately $6.2 million in State and Federal Grants over the past year and the proposed Budget for 2001 is estimated at $18 million which is a 3.7% increase over the year 2000. He highlighted the increased contract for snowplowing cul-de-sacs. He stated this program was experimented with last year and proved highly successful to the point where all cul-de-sacs have been contracted out for this coming season. He stated there is a phase-in under way to replace the School Crossing signs from the standard yellow design to the fluorescent green are starting to show up throughout the area. He said there is an increase in the grounds maintenance account for increased right-of-way mowing on State and County rights-of-way. He also highlighted the fact that electricity costs will likely increase due to the installation of new straetlights along Route 83. He mentioned that the Department is preparing for the booster pump monitoring system upgrade and ,the main panel replacement is scheduled for 2002. He is requesting a replacement of the sewer TV machine and has completed some of the train station improvements due to the grant the Village recently received. He stated that a recent mandate requires complete storm sewer mapping which will start next year and will take several years for completion. The Department is responsible for retention pond maintenance in the Kensington Business Center which may include dredging to increase capacity. He is requesting to replace a bulldozer which is nearly 20 years old and is scheduled for replacement in 2001 two new trucks and a chipper. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: There was a question regarding Street Reconstruction and Resurfacing schedules and there was a question regarding the amount of work that is annually out-sourced. Non-Departmental Expenditure~ Review Finance Director Doug EIIsworth presented the Community/Civic Services' Budget information to the Board. Pam Warchol, President of the Mount Prospect Historical Society spoke. She went over the highlights for the previous year and stated there is a lot of interest which has been generated through the Historical Society as demonstrated by the attendance at the various events the Historical Society sponsors annually. Gavin Kleespies, Mount Prospect Historical Society Museum Director spoke. He stated that he has undertaken an outreach program to local schools and worked on cataloguing the collection items and research files for various historical homes in the community. Ms Warchol is requesting the Village increase its stipend from $35,000 annually to $40,000 beginning in the year 2001. Village Manager Janonis stated the Village could absorb the $5,000 increase by diverting funds from other sources to fund this request without adversely impacting other service items. Trustee Wilks requested a summary of expenditures from the Historical Society for her information to go with the summary of revenues provided for in the Annual Report. Consensus of the Village Board was to increase the Mount Prospect Historical Society stipend to $40,000 for the 2001 Budget year. Debt Service Finance Director Doug EIIsworth provided a summary of the Debt Service accounts and stated that the Debt level is very moderate at $21 million in General Obligation Bonds. He stated only a small portion of the Debt is funded through Property Tax while the majority of other Debt is funded through Sales Tax receipts. He stated the Budget for Debt payment for 2001 is $4.3 million. He stated there is a proposed Bond Issue for a new Village Hall/Senior Center and parking structure in the amount of $15.4 million included in the Budget in anticipation of a Village Board discussion and decision later in 2001. He stated there will be a need to capitalize interest for three years or until 2005 in order for the financing necessary for the Village Hall/Senior Center to be constructed. Trustee Prikkel pointed out that the Village Hall/Senior Center should actually be called a Village Hall/Community Center based on the previous Village Board vote. Finance Director Doug EIIsworth stated that the Pensions for the Police and Fire Departments are increasing due to new mandates and enhancements and recent retirements in the Departments. Insurance and Risk Management increase is slated at 8.4% is primarily due to the cost of insurance coverage increases and some recent loss claims. The health insurance increase is anticipated to be 9.6% and that is pdmadly due to medical inflation. He also pointed out that the Mount Prospect Public Library is part of the Village Budget and their Budget is projected to be $4.5 million with a Property Tax increase of seven-tenths of one percent from last year. Laura Luteri, President of the Mount Prospect Public Library, spoke. She stated there is very little growth in the Budget but there is an inclusion for a new position in the Library for 2001, a Human Resources position. There are modest changes in office space underway, however, overall space needs continue to be a critical issue. 3 Community Development Department Village Manager Michael Janonis stated the Board had previously requested a review for additional staff in the Community Development Department due to Permit levels up 50% from 1995 utilizing the same number of staff and generating approximately 14,000 inspections. He stated as previously discussed at the Committee of the Whole meeting in which Community Development discussed their Budget, it was pointed out that staff levels currently cannot accommodate demand of inspections without extending~the notice period for reserving inspection times. He stated there is a proposal for a new full-time Inspector and the upgrade of a part-time to a full-time Clerk and increase the Permit Fees to cover this additional staff. This Permit Fee increase will be the first increase since 1979. He stated that a comparison with other communities in terms of the amount of Permit Fees show that the proposed increases are in line with Fees charged by other communities. The Village Board has a history of reviewing User Fees to fund specific services in line with actual services provided. He pointed out that if a down turn in the economy does occur in which the demand for Permits and inspections decreases, then staff would be decreased accordingly. He stated this change can be incorporated into the existing 2001 Budget. General comments from the Village Board members included the following items: Several Board members spoke in support of the proposal and wanted to improve the relationship with the residents in terms of this valuable service and to ensure the Village was able to respond to the needs of the residents. There was also discussion regarding the self-reported value of inspections being tied to the Permit Fee itself. Community Development Director Bill Cooney stated that the general feedback that he received regarding Permits is the timeframe necessary to schedule and coordinate various inspections. Consensus of the Village Board was to support the staff increases and the Fee increases for the 200'1 Budget as proposed. Finance Commission Chairman John Korn provided a summary of the recommendations from the Finance Commission. He suggested that all Departments make it a point to inform the public where their funding sources come from and highlight the fact that many Departments have been quite successful in obtaining funds from outside sources including Grants from Federal and State levels. He stated the Commission supports the Public Works Department Budget as presented. 4 He stated the Commission supports the additional staff proposals in the Community Development Department along with the Permit Fee increases. He also stated that the Commission supports the other Budgets as presented by the various Departments. Village Board Wrap-Up Mayor Farley stated that he feels this is a responsible Budget that is reflective of citizen needs and the Village portion of the Property Tax bill remains around 10% and feels that level is quite reasonable. Trustee Hoefert stated the Budget process is becoming a non-event with very few surprises due to the diligence of staff and the Board. He stated that there is a need to acknowledge the aging of the Village infrastructure and maintain the commitment to attract new residents and retain existing residents by encouraging the improvement of the housing stock. Trustee Wilks wanted to thank staff and the Board for a responsible Budget and balance of the needs of the community through the Budget. Trustee Prikkel stated this is the first Budget process that he has been through with the Village and was impressed on how well the Village is run and is thankful for the recent efforts with the Route 83 project. Trustee Lohretorfer commented that the preparation of the Budget is a team effort between staff and the Village Board on behalf of the community and there is a concerted focus on the improvement of the community from one year to the next. Trustee Skowron thanked the Village staff for their involvement in the Budget process and highlighted the fact that the Budget process is primarily a roadmap for the future. Village Manager Janonis stated that the excellent working relationship between the Village Board and staff is shown in the Budget process and the ability of staff to provide services as determined by the Village Board. He feels that the Village Board is able to demand high performance of Village staff because of this relationship and the stable political environment has improved the working relationship over time. Mr. Janonis also wanted to highlight the efforts of Doug EIIsworth and feels he is the best Finance Director in the State and the assistance he receives from his staff and Deputy Director are reflected well in the Budget document itself. He stated that he feels there are strong leaders in the various Departments and they are all capable of meeting the demands of the Village Board as outlined in the Budget document. . ANY OTHER BUSINI~$$ Village Manager Janonis highlighted the fact that the first annual Winter Festival Parade is scheduled for December 9. The Mount Prospect Historical Society House Walk and Teddy Bear Walk are scheduled for this coming weekend. He also wanted to point out that the next Village Board meeting is December 4 as required for a Public Hearing on the Budget, therefore, there will be no meeting on December 5. Mayor Farley pointed out that the second round of flu shots has been received and they will be administered on December 5, VI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:33 p.m. Respectfully submitted, DAVID STRAHL Assistant Village Manager DS/rcc H:\GEN~Cow~Minutes\112800 COW Budget Minutes.doc Hov. 22 2000 S:49 WILLIflM~WRLTERS 84? t ~ T~ ~OB~ ~0~ 0~ T~ ~ O~ P~ ~n 2~,~ V~ ~) 543~1~78 Bu~ A~ 3~ v~ ~ 3~ ~.~1,~ V~ ~ (~ ~70SO 3.~i~ V~ ~ (81~7-~11 ~ I ~1~ 3.7~ ~~(H2)7~ ~1~. ~ (~) 7~0 ~ 1~ 1~1~ V~ H~ (~8) ~3~ ~1~ ~ s~(~ ~) ~ 0~)~o ~ ~t 2~.~ (~ ~). V~ H~ O~)~s~3 O~l NOT~ Vi~ ~(~0)~ ~ 5,~1,~ V~ ~ (70~ ~7~ ~ ~ ~ (~ ~) ~o ~ ~) ~3~0 ~l~ ~ P~ 1~ .~1,~ Vi~ HaH ~08) W~ 25.~ (~ ~) Vil~e H~I ~) ~ 2.~1,~ Vi~e ~ ~ 85~ ~ler 1) 3} P~ S150 ~~d~ ~ ~m ~ ~ ~S750~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. I VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FINANCE DEPARTMENT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE DATE: DECEMBER 7, 2000 SUBJECT: REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX The Village Board is debating whether to switch the liability for the real estate transfer tax from the buyer to the seller. A significant mount of information has already been provided to the Board on this matter. Following is some additional information that might prove useful as they deliberate. SIGNIFICANCE OF TRANSFER TAX The real estate transfer tax is a significant source of revenue for the Village's General Fund. We are estimating receipts of $683,000 for 2001, which represents 2.4% of the General Fund's total estimated revenues. Since its inception and through the year 2000 the Village has received in excess of $6.7 million from this revenue source. Following is a table showing transfer tax receipts by year: Fiscal Year Ended Amt. Received Fiscal Year Ended Amt. Received 12/00 (Estimate) $663,000 4/94 $563 443 12/99 $922,591 4/93 $542 448 12/98 $709,399 4/92 $430 983 12/97 $630,015 4/91 $389 764 12/96 $491,708 4/90 $196 187 12/95 (8 mo.) $374,032 4/89 $246 573 4/95 $494,853 4/88 $ 54,559 As can be seen, the transfer tax has generated steady increases each year, reflective of the increasing property values in Mount Prospect. Some years are significantly higher or less than the previous years. This is due to the unpredictable sales of commercial and industrial properties. SWITCHING LIABILITY TO SELLER The Board already has information on some of the advantages and disadvantages of switching the liability of the tax to the seller. There has also been significant discussion about offering a full rebate or limited rebate to those property owners that have already paid the tax once as buyer and face paying the tax as seller should the Board make this change. I would like to reiterate some of the financial implications of a rebate. Full Rebate: If the Village Board decides to switch the liability of the tax to the seller with a full dollar-for-dollar rebate of any transfer tax paid as buyer of that same property the Village would see a extraordinary reduction in revenue in the years to come. In essence, every dollar of the $6.7 million collected since 1988 would be refunded back. This would create a huge gap in the General Fund revenue stream that would have to be made up with a property tax increase or reduced services. Limited Rebate: There are a multitude of options available to the Board if it chooses to offer, for a limited time period, a rebate to property sellers that already paid the tax as buyer. In deciding which options might be considered viable, the Board and staff will have to look at the issue from three different standpoints; affordability, equity or fairness, and administration of the rebate. It is almost impossible to estimate with any accuracy the financial impact of a limited rebate due to the fact we do not know which homes or commemial properties will sell in any given time period. A significant number of properties have changed hands since the inception of this tax, making a large number of property owners eligible for a rebate. The amount of tax revenue rebated could easily be anywhere from fifty to seventy- five percent of annual receipts. Therefore, any rebate that exceeds a one-year period would have a materially adverse impact on General Fund revenues. Further, If a rebate is established, consideration should be given to extending the rebate only to residential transactions. The Village Board also needs to look at the real and perceived issue of fairness, or equity, in offering a limited-time rebate. Regardless of the timeframe, residents selling after the end of the rebate period are sure to be upset. Finally, any rebate program the Board were to approve should be relatively easy to administer. An open-ended program offering a rebate of a certain percentage would be require a significant amount of staff time since we deal with almost 2,000 mai estate transactions each year. That would be almost 2,000 rebate applications to be processed and 2,000 rebate checks prepared and mailed. RECOMMENDATION It is staff's recommendation that if the Board decides to switch the liability of the tax to the seller, that a rebate be offered for a period not to exceed one year and apply to only residential sa ons. DOUGLAS R. ELLSWORTH, CPA \\VI-BV01\USERS\DELLSWOR\Taxes\Transfer Taxkarnendment memo 12-7-00.doe LAW OFFICES KLEIN, THORPE AND JENKINS, LTD. Suite 1660 Patrick A. Lucansky 20 North Wacker Drive Rinds y. Alliaoa ii. Kenneth Fdk~r Chicago, Illinois 60606-2903 James V. Fa'olo Bruce A. Zolna Facsimile (312) 984-6444 Laac~ C. Marina $~n~ P. Ba~ley (312) 606-7077 Susie E. MEMORANDUM · o: Village Manager FROM: Everette M. Hill, Jr. DATE: October 5, 2000 RE: Amendment of Chapter 8, Article VIII, "Real Estate Transfer Tax" The Village Board recently directed that the Administration investigate whether the Village should shift the primary burden of our Real Estate Transfer Tax to the seller of real estate in the Village. The existing Code places this burden on the buyer. After a full investigation of all the policy and legal ramifications involved in any change, you asked that I draft an ordinance proposing such a change for consideration by the Village Board. At the same time, you suggested that since the tax has now been in effect for 13 years that it might be a good time to review Article VIII in its entirety for the purpose of addressing problems encountered by the Finance Department in administering and collecting the tax. Accordingly, please find attached a draft ordinance crafted with the assistance of Doug EIIsworth. I have made notes in the margins to indicate the changes. I have also attached a copy of the existing Article VIII. As previously stated, the principal change is found in new Section 8.802(E). This change shifts the primary burden of payment from the buyer to the seller. This is consistent with most other Illinois municipalities which have established this tax. We currently place the burden of paying the tax on the buyer, but can hold up the transfer if Mr. Michael Janonis October 5, 2000 Page 2 the seller owes fees to the Village~ Quoting from Lance Malina's memo to Doug on this subject: Regarding the wisdom of maintaining the tax as primarily a burden borne by the pumhaser rather than the seller, there is a certain inconsistency between placing the tax on the pumhaser and yet adding conditions which have to do with the past actions of the seller. Further, given that transfer stamps are often pumhased just before closing and a purchaser would probably not be aware of the skeletons in the sellers= financial closet, disclosure of hundreds or thousands of dollars owed in parking fines at the time of attempted purchase could be enough to wreck a deal based simply on a lack of adequate time. Doug also observes: Many new residents to-be complain that they did not expect to have to pay the transfer tax when they decided to purchase a home in Mount Prospect. In fact, some of them complain that they pay the tax ,.: twice, when they sell their home in another town and again when they '~ purchase their home in Mount Prospect. The current Code reads as follows: 8.803: PRIMARY LIABILITY FOR TAX: The primary liability for payment of said tax shall be borne by the grantee or purchaser involved in any such transaction unless otherwise negotiated by contract; provided, however, it shall be unlawful for the grantee or purchaser to accept a conveyance if the transfer tax has not been paid. If the tax has not been paid and the stamps affixed to the deed, then the grantee=s title shall be subject to the lien provided in Section 8.811 of this Article and the grantee or purchaser shall be liable for payment of the tax. The tax herein levied shall be in addition to any and all other taxes. The proposed new Section reads: E. Liability for Payment The primary liability for payment of said tax shall be borne by the Grantor or Seller. It shall be unlawful for the grantor or seller to convey real property in the Village and for the grantee or purchaser to accept a Mr. Michael Janonis October 5, 2000 Page 3 conveyance if the transfer tax has not been paid. If the tax has not been paid, then the grantee's title shall be subject to the lien provided in Section 8.811 of this Article and the grantor or seller and the grantee or purchaser shall be jointly and severally liable for payment of the tax. While the primary burden for payment has shifted to the seller, we have made the seller and buyer jointly and severally liable in case the transaction slips through ~' without stamps and we are forced to lien the real estate. We had two other objectives in making this redraft. We wanted to eliminate unfair loopholes in the law. Under the existing Code, a homeowner might be fomed to pay $600.00 tax on the purchase of a $200,000 home which might be held for 15 years, while a large corporation might enter into a 75 year lease for $50,000,000 and pay nothing. This ordinance attempts to eliminate that potential loophole. Doug and I understand that it is not always easy to discover long term lease deals (there are no recording requirements), but we think that most larger ones will come to our attention. We've tried to do the same for transfers involved with buyOuts and mergers. Often the transfer of real estate will form the basis of the consideration for stock. transfers or buyouts. Currently, there is no tax on such a transaction. The new language of 8.802 attempts to address that situation. The third objective was to make the Article more readable and easier to administer. One other matter to take note of (but not covered in the draft and Article) is the suggestion by the Finance Commission that some kind of mitigation be included in the new Article for those who are now primarily responsible as sellers but who also paid as buyers under the old Article. This could be accomplished by creating a 100% rebate or exemption of the amount paid as a buyer or seller of property in the Village, upon proof that the applicant has: (1) paid the transfer tax as a buyer under the old Article; and (2) paid a.qain as seller under the new Article. If the rebate/exemption concept is embraced, a major issue will be whether the amount the applicant originally paid as buyer should be rebated, or the amount the applicant paid as seller (probably a significantly larger amount). There should also be a mandate that if the applicant has already received a partial rebate under 8.804, the rebate to avoid the double hit would be limited to $1.00 per $1,000. There could also be requirements placing the burden of proof for the rebate on the applicant and that any applicant would have to submit a sworn affidavit certifying whether or not any 8.804 rebate money had already been Mr. Michael Janonis October 5, 2000 Page 4 received. The double-hit rebate could be either open ended or have a time limit applied to it. If the marginal notes state that these are not substantial changes, this means that I have tried te eliminate the "thereofs" and "heretofores" and other impractical legalese, without changing the meaning and intent of the passage. The marginal notes should explain any other changes. As always, it was a pleasure to work with Doug in creating what I believe to be a good, workable product. If you have any other questions, please contact me. cc: Mr. Doug EIIsworth MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE OCTOBER 10, 2000 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:33 p.m. by Mayor Gerald Farley. Present at the meeting were: Trustees Paul Hoefert, Richard Lohrstorfer, Dennis Prikkel, Michaele Skowron and Irvana Wilks. Absent from the meeting was: Trustee Timothy Corcoran. Staff members present included Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Community Development Director William Cooney, Village Attorney Everette Hill and Finance Director Douglas EIIsworth. I1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of Minutes from August 22, 2000. Motion made by Trustee Wilks and Seconded by Trustee Skowron to approve the Minutes. Minutes were approved. Trustee Hoefert abstained. Approval of Minutes from September 12, 2000. Motion made by Trustee Hoefert and Seconded by Trustee Prikkel to approve the Minutes. Minutes were approved. Trustee Wilks and Trustee Skowron abstained. Approval of Minutes from September 26, 2000. Motion made by Trustee Hoefert and Seconded by Trustee Wilks to approve the Minutes. Minutes were approved. Trustee Lohrstorfer and Trustee Skowron abstained. II1. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. IV. REVIEW OF REVISED CORRIDOR PLAN AND PROPOSED LOGO DESIGN Community Development Director Bill Cooney stated the final Corridor Draft Plan is available and is being provided to the Village Board for their information this evening. There have been several meetings with the consultant, Wolff Clements, to define the guidelines for the improvements and various funds have been requested in future CIP Budgets. He stated that his purpose tonight is to look for general concurrence of the Village so he can return to the Plan Commission for final approval for the general guidelines. Craig Fransworth of Wolff Clements spoke. He stated the document should be considered a planning tool that provides guidelines for the development of 12 different areas which have been previously identified to highlight the fact that someone is within Mount Prospect and nowhere else. Don McLean of Graf/X spoke. He stated the revised Logo is being presented to represent Mount Prospect's image at these various Corridor areas and to incorporate the Logo design on future street signs to designate the Village from other communities. He stated the keystone logo with the "MP" appearing as if it is growing out of the stone to the use of neutral colors was designed to provide a unique identifier for the community. General comments from the Village Board members included the following items: Several Board members expressed approval regarding the Logo design. There was some discussion regarding where the Logo would be utilized and for what purpose. There was also a discussion regarding the standardization of appearance markers at various Corridor locations in the community. Consensus of the Village Board was to accept the revised Corridor Plan document and the proposed Logo. IV. AMENDMENTS TO REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX Village Manager Janonis stated that this item is coming before the Village Board at the request of several Board members who previously expressed an interest in reviewing how this Tax is levied. Staff surveyed several other towns and found that only one other community levied the Transfer Tax on the buyer of the property compared to the seller in other communities that levied the Transfer Tax. He stated that staff also reviewed the administrative burden of managing the collection of this revenue. The Ordinance was revised to acknowledge different sales options that have been undertaken relating to property transfer but have not necessarily been clarified in the Ordinance. He stated the Real Estate Transfer Tax has been in place since 1987 and the Village has collected significant revenue from this Tax with the most recent projection for the fiscal year of approximately $650,000. He also stated staff has suggested an opportunity to balance the equity of the administration so that if there is a change to levy the Tax on the seller instead of the buyer as is currently levied, it would be suggested that the property owner would not have to pay the Tax twice; once buying in the community and once selling in the community. General comments from the Village Board members included the following items: The Real Estate Transfer Tax was originally levied on the buyer because the seller had paid their fair share of services while they were a resident and the Board at the time felt it was critical the new resident pay a fair share for those services upon purchasing a home within the community. There was considerable discussion about the processing of the suggested staff rebates and the discussion also highlighted the fact of the loss of revenue through the suggested rebate system. There were also some comments regarding a specific timeframe in which a rebate could be considered whereby a current resident who paid the Tax when they bought in the community could get some relief at the point of selling their residence when they leave the community. There was also some discussion regarding who would be responsible for providing the documentation regarding the amount originally paid by the buyer. There was a comment suggesting the revenue source be discontinued and the funds necessary be levied through the Property Tax instead of the Real Estate Transfer Tax. John Korn, Chairman of the Finance Commission, spoke. He stated the Commission recommended a shift to the seller and the Village should rebate the amount the buyer originally paid when they purchased in the community. Frank Vlazny, 2'103 Jody Court, spoke. He stated he objected to the Tax when it was imposed and feels it is unrealistic to take credit or rebate a portion of the Tax and it should be added to the Property Tax if it is necessary to obtain this revenue. He feels this is a hidden Tax. George Clowes, 604 South Elm, spoke. He stated this is a Tax on people that have moved into town over the last 13 years. If a rebate window is determined, then it becomes a windfall for the people that have the opportunity to take advantage of the rebate. He is concerned about the overall loss in revenue through considering the rebate option and feels that buyers coming in to the community are making a down payment on the infrastructure, which has been put in place for their use. Consensus of the Village Board was to leave the Real Estate Transfer Tax on the buyer and not shift it to the seller of the property. They also recommended a change in the business lease definitions and the corporate buy-out language, which would allow the Village to collect the Tax on different types of real estate transactions. VI. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT Village Manager Michael Janonis reminded everyone of the upcoming Coffee with Council on October 14 and a portion of the meeting will be a floater to Euclid School at Euclid and Wheeling. He also reminded everyone of the Welcome New Resident meeting scheduled for October 28. He stated that Budget review starts with the Village Board on October 24. VII, ANY OTHER BUSINESS Trustee Prikkel complimented the Mount Prospect Police Department for the Randhurst Safety Show, which occurred during the past weekend. Trustee Wilks commented on the recent Press Release regarding the Mayor's announcement that he is running for a fourth term. CLOSED SESSION A Motion was made by Trustee Wilks and Seconded by Trustee Prikkel to move into Closed Session to discuss Personnel, Litigation, and Property Acquisition. The meeting moved into Closed Session at 9:11 p.m. The meeting reconvened into Open Session at 9:54 p.m. VIII, ADJOURNMENT Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, DAVID STRAHL Assistant Village Manager DS/rcc H:\GEN\Oow~Minutes\101000 COW Minutes.doc 4 IA W OFFICES KLEIN, THORPE AND JENKINS, LTD. Suite 1660 Pa~ck A. Lucansky 20 North Waeker Drive Rinda y. Allison E. Kenneth Ffiker Chicago, Illinois 60606-2903 James V. Ferolo Gerard E. Dempsey ...... Michael T. Jumsik Terrence M. Bamkle Telephone (312) 984-6400 Thomas M. Melody Bmee A. Zolna Fa*simile (312) 984-6444 Lance C. Malina James P. Bartley (312) 606-7077 Ju.ie E. Heu~el's Richard T. Wiramer ........ Arthur C. Thorpe Michael J. Duggan Ofland Park Office Michael P. O=Bfien Thomas P. Bayer 15010 S. Ravinia Avenue David L Fish Dennis G. Walsh Suite 17 Scott F. Uhler Orland Park, Illinois 60462 Everette M. Hill, Jr. Telephone (708) 349-3888 Of Counsel Janet N. petscha (312) 984-OM6 Arthur C. Thorpe Facsimile (708) 349-1506 Philippe R. Weiss TO: Mr. Mike danonis Mr. Doug EIIsworth FROM: Everette M. Hill, Jr. DATE: October 31,2000 RE: Transfer Tax Ordinance Attached please find the new Transfer Tax Ordinance modified to retain the concept of primary liability falling on the buyer. The Board had advised that it was not in favor of shifting the liability to the Seller. I have also changed 8.805 by removing the requirement of a "no zoning violation certificate." It was believed that this would be unduly onerous for the Department of Community Development. Except for these modifications, the ordinance is the same as that presented to the Board for consideration earlier this month. Although it was in the earlier draft, I would point out once again that we ara charging an administrative fee of $15.00 to issue an exempt stamp. If you have any questions, please contact me. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE VIII OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION 1: Chapter 8, Article VIII, entitled ~Real Estate Transfer Tax" of the Mount Prospect Village Code shall be amended by deleting it in its entirety and inserting in lieu thereof a new Article VIII, entitled "Real Estate Transfer Tax" to be and read as follows: 8.801. DEFINITIONS: PERSON: Any natural person, trustee, receiver, administrator, executor, conservator, assignee, trust in perpetuity, trust, estate, firm, co- partnership, joint venture, club, company, joint stock company, business trust, domestic or foreign corporation, association, / syndicate, society, or any group of individuals acting as a unit, / whether mutual, cooperative, fraternal, nonprofit, or otherwise. Whenever the term "person" is used in any clause prescribing and imposing a penalty, the term as applied to associations shall mean the owners or part-owners, and as applied to corporations, the officers. RECORDATION: The recording of documents transferring apPlicable interests with the office of the Recorder of Deeds of Cook County, Illinois. VALUE: The amount of the full actual consideration for any transfer covered by this Article VIII, including the amount of any mortgage, lien or liens assumed by the grantee or purchaser. 8.802. LOCAL REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX IMPOSED: A. Imposition of Tax A tax is imposed on the privilege of transferring certain interests in real estate in the Village. For purposes of this tax, transfer shall include the execution and delivery of any of the following: 1. Deed; 2. Assignment of Title or other beneficial interest; A lease or similar contract for a term of more than thirty (30) years (including assignment or reassignment); 4: Articles of Agreement to Convey Deed or similar document upon the future payment of money. B. Corporate Transfer Transfer shall also include any corporate buyout, merger, or stock transfer, where the real property in the Village is specifically valued or specifically set forth as consideration or a portion of the consideration, for any transfer or assignment of corporate equity. C. Circumstances of Transfer This tax shall apply to the transfer of any of the foregoing interests in property that is located within the Village and shall include, but not be limited to, the following cimumstances? 1. The transfer purports to vest either a beneficial interest in or legal title to the real estate; 2. The interest transferred is only the possession or use of the real estate so long as consideration is paid for the possession or use. 3. Even if the consideration is to be paid in the future or the actual transfer is to be made in the future as under Articles of Agreement. D. Rate of Tax Except as otherwise provided in Section 8.04, the tax shall be at the rate of $3.00 for every $1,000 or fraction of $1,000 of consideration paid for the transfer. If the real estate is transferred subject to a mortgage or similar lien or an existing mortgage is to be assumed by the transferee, the outstanding balance of the mortgage shall be added to any other consideration paid for the real estate interest. 2 If a transaction is determined to be exempt pursuant to this Article, a fifteen dollar ($15.00) fee shall be assessed for the exemption seal .......... . This tax shall be in addition to any and all other taxes. E. Liability for Payment The pdmary liability for payment of the tax shall be borne by the Grantee or Pumhaser. It shall be unlawful for the grantor or seller to convey real property in the Village and for the grantee or purchaser to accept a conveyance if the transfer tax has not been paid. If the tax has not been paid, then the grantee's title shall be sUbject to the lien provided in Section 8.811 of this Article and the grantee or purchaser shall be liable for payment of the tax, _ F. Transfers in Trust No trustee of real estate shall accept an assignment of beneficial interest in real estate located in the Village without first obtaining a statement of consideration from the assignor and assignee and unless revenue stamps in the required amount have been affixed to the assignment. G. Property Ineligible for Transfer. No interest in property may be transferred from one person to another if the property is in violation of any building regulation or if the transferor of the property owes any judgment, fee or fine of any kind or nature to the Village. The sole exception shall be if the transferor or transferee obtains a letter from the Department of Community Development stating that the Department has approved the transfer in order to achieve the correction of any violations, H. Investigation of Documentation; Immunity. The Village shall attempt to expeditiously comply with any request.for transfer stamps or an exemption. In any instance, the Village shall have at least three (3) business days to process the application. Under no circumstances shall the Village, its agents, officials or employees have any liability of any kind or nature for any failure of the real estate transaction to close or a document to be recorded because the Village attempted to verify the nature of the transaction or amount owed. The applicent shall have the dght under all circumstances to pay the amount that the Village asserts to be due. If proof is provided that the amount paid was not the actual amount due, the appropriate amount will be refunded. 3 8.803. TAX ON TRANSFER OF INTERESTS IN LEASEHOLDS GREATER THAN 30 YEARS. Leasehold interests of greater than thirty (30) years shall be taxed as follows: 1. Upon the execution of a lease, the tax shall be paid on the present value of the net lease amount that is payable over the term of the Lease. Net lease amount shall exclude tax and utility payments, Present value shall be figured using the interest rate Paid on one-year U.S. Treasury bills on the date of execution of the lease. 2. If the entire lease amount is paid in a lump sum, then the tax shall be figured on the lump sum. 3. If the transactiorrinvolves the transfer or assignment of an existing leasehold interest, then the tax shall be figured on the value of the consideration paid for the transfer plus the present value of the remaining lease term. This shall be due even if the remaining lease term is less than thirty (30) years provided the original lease was for more than thirty (30) years. 8.804 APPLICATION FOR REBATE. Any person who has paid the real estate transfer tax at the three dollars ($3.00) per one thousand dollar ($4,000.00) rate shall be entitled to a rebate on the purchase of a second or subsequent property in Mount Prospect. This rebate shall be two dollars ($2.00) for each three ($3.00) dollars paid, provided that proper application is m.~de to the Village Finance Department and further provided that the person provide~ proof of the following: 1. Residential Property: a. The person shall have owned and occupied a single-family residence, townhouse or condominium unit within the corpor~ite boundaries of the Village as his or her principal residence. Such single-family residence, townhouse or condominium unit must have been sold within two (2) years of the date of the application for rebate; and the transfer tax of $3.00/$1,000 must have been paid on such transfer; and b. Within two (2) years of the date of selling the previous residence located Within the Village, the person purchased and currently occupies a single-family residence, townhouse or condominium within the Village as his or her principal residence and paid the appropriate tax on that house; or 4 2. Nonresidential Property: a. The person shall have owned and operated a duly licensed business within the corporate boundaries of the Village and the property on which the business was located was sold; and there was a transfer tax of $3,00/$1,000 paid on such transfer; and b. Within two (2) years of the date of sale of the previous business property located within the Village, the person purchased nonresidential property in the Village and currently operates a duly licensed business at the property and paid the appropriate tax on that business property. Within thirty (30) days following the receipt of application for rebate of real estate transfer tax, the Director of Finance shall verify the information provided. If, in the opinion of the Director of Finance, the applicable criteria has been met the Director of Finance shall cause the rebate to be issued to the person applying for the rebate. 8.805. DECLARATION FORMS. A. Declaration of Consideration. At the time the tax is paid, or application is made for an exemption, there shall also be presented to the Director of Finance, on a prescribed form, a declaration of consideration signed by at least one of the sellers or grantors and by at least one of .the purchasers or grantees involved in the transaction. The declaration ma/~ be signed by an attomey or agent, or by a licensed real estate salesperson ,dr broker having knowledge or the terms of the transaction. The declaration Shall state the full consideration for the property and shall be deemed a confidential record. If the property is in a land trust and the trustees are the mere repository of record legal title with a duty of conveying the real estate only when and if directed, in writing, by the beneficiary or beneficiaries, then only the land trust and not the beneficiary or beneficiaries needs to be identified. B. Certificate of Payment of Water and Sewer and Garbage Collection Charges. In order to obtain stamps or an exemption seal, the applicant must satisfy the Village that all water, sewer and garbage collection charges have been*paid in full~ 5 8.806. DOCUMENT OF CONVEYANCE. Every document of conveyance shall show the date of the transaction that it evidences, the names of the grantor and grantee, and a legal description of the property to which it relates. 8.807. EXEMPT TRANSACTIONS. The tax imposed by this Chapter shall not apply to the following transactions: 1. A governmental body is the grantee; 2. The document of transfer only assures that the property secures a debt or other obligation; 3. The document of transfer, without additional consideration, confirms, corrects, modifies or supplements a previously recorded document; 4. The actual consideration is less than five hundred dollars ($500.00); 5. The deed is a tax deed; 6. The deed is a release of p~operty which was secudty for a debt or other obligation; 7. A court ordered the transfer and no consideration was paid for the transfer. (If the;~:lecree is a decree of divorce, consideration shall be presumed according to Section 8.802 or unless satisfactory documentary evidence to the contrary is presented); 8. A transfer between a subsidiary corporation and a parent for no consideration other than the cancellation or surrender of the subsidiary corporations' stock; 9. An actual exchange of real property when both properties ara within the Village limits, except that the money difference or money's worth paid for one or the other shall not be exempt fromthe tax; 10. Transfers subject to the imposition of a documentary stamp imposed by the government of the United States, except that such deeds shall not be exempt from filing the declaration; 11. Conveyances of partition; 6 12. Leasehold interests of a lessee occupying the premises as a residence; 13. Any leasehold interest the term of which is less than thirty (30) years. 8.808. EXEMPTION FOR WILLS, GUARDIANSHIPS AND CONSERVATORSHIPS. No tax shall be imposed by this Article upon delivery or transfer in the following instances, provided however, that a declaration form is filed: 1. Transfers by will or intestacy; 2. A decedent to an executor or administrator; 3. A minor to a guardian or from a guardian to a ward upon attaining majority; 4. An incompetent to a conservator, or similar legal representative, or from a conservator, or similar legal representative to a former incompetent upon removal of disability; 5. A bank, trust company, financial institution, insurance company or other similar entity, 'or nominee, custodian, or trustee, to a public officer or commission, or person designated by such officer or commission or by a court, in the taking over of its assets, in whole or in part, under State or Federal law regulating or supervising such institutions, or upon redelivery or retmns..fe~r by any such transferee or successor; 6. A bankrupt person or a person in receivership to trustee or receiver, or upon redelivery or retransfer by any such trustee or receiver back to the bankrupt or person in receivership; 7. Trustee to a surviving, substitute, succeeding or additional trustee of the same trust; 8. Upon the death of a joint tenant or tenant by the entirety to the survivor or survivors. 8.809. REVENUE STAMPS REQUIRED: This tax shall be collected by the Director of Finance through' the sale of revenue stamps. Such revenue stamps shall be available for sale from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday at the Village offices or at other locations designated by the Director of Finance. Pdor to recording, the revenue stamps shall 7 be affixed to the deed or other instrument of conveyance. Any person affixing a revenue stamp or stamps shalllmark it with his or her initials and the day, month and year when the affixing occurs. Such markings shall be made by wdting or stamping in indelible ink or by perforating with a machine or punch. However, the revenue stamp(s) shall not be so defaced as to prevent ready determination of the domination and genuineness. 8.810. STATE REAL ESTATE TRANSFER DECLARATION; FILING. A signed copy of the real estate transfer declaration filed pursuant to Section 3 of the Real Estate Transfer Act of the State shall be filed with the Director of Einance by the grantor of any deed or assignor of beneficial interest within ten (10) days after delivery of the deed or assignment of beneficial interest or at the time of payment of the tax, whichever first occurs. ~. ~ ~ 8.811. LIEN CREATED; ENFORCEMENT. If a document of conveyance is filed for recordation or there is an assignment of beneficial interest conveying real estate within the corporate limits of the Village without the purchase of revenue stamps in the required amount, a lien is declared against the real estate in the amount of the tax. The fact that the document of conveyance does not contain an exemption seal or a Village revenue stamp in an amount equal to three (3) times the amount of State transfer taxes shall constitute constructive notice of lien. The lien may be enforced by proceedings to foreclose, as in cases of mortgages or mechanics' liens. A suit to foreclose this lien must be commenced with. in three (3) years after the date of recording the deed. Nothing shall be construed as preventing the Village from bdnging a civil action to collect the tax imposed IJ~' this Chapter from any person who has the ultimate liability for payment of the same. Such suit shall include interest and penalties. 8.812. ENFORCEMENT; SUIT FOR COLLECTION. Whenever any person fails to pay any tax pursuant to this Article, or any purchaser or grantee accepts a conveyance where the tax has not been paid, the Village shall bdng or cause to be brought an action to enforce the payment of the tax, including interest and penalties on behalf of the Village in any court of competent jurisdiction. 8.813. INTEREST AND PENALTIES. · In the event of failure by any person to pay to the Director of Finance the required tax when due, or to file a return when due, interest and penalties shall accumUlate and be due consistent with Section 8.2009 and 8.2010 of the Village Code as it may from time to time be amended. 8 8.814. PROCEEDS OF TAX. All proceeds resulting from the imposition of the tax under this Article, including interest and penalties, shall be paid to the Village and shall be credited to and deposited in the general fund of the Village. 8.815. NONCOMPLYING DOCUMENT OF TRANSFER. Any transfer of real property or assignment of beneficial interest recorded or registered in violation of any portion of this Article shall be null and void. The Village may bring an action in a COUrt of competent jurisdiction to direct the Recorder of Deeds to indicate the invalidity of the deed or trust document on the records. 8.816. CONSTRUCTION OF-EXEMPTIONS. All exemptions from the taxes imposed by this Article shall be strictly and narrowly construed, and all other provisions of this Article shall be broadly construed in order to give effect to the intent of this Article, which is to tax all transfers of real property within the Village, unless specifically exempt. 8.817. SEVERABILITY. If any provision, clause, sentence, paragraph, section or part of this Article, or application to any person or circumstance, shall for any reason by adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid, the judgment shall not affect, impair or invalidate the remainder of this Article and the application of such provision.~to other persons or circumstances. The judgment shall be confined in its operation to the provision, clause, sentence, paragraph or section directly involved in the controversy in which such judgment shall have been rendered and to the person or circumstances involved. It is the legislative intent of the Village Board of Trustees that 'this Article would have been adopted had such unconstitutional or invalid provisions, clause, sentence, paragraph, section not be included. ~ Chapter 23, Article XXlV, Section 23 entitled "Transfer of Real Property with Outstanding Violations or Obligations to Village Prohibited". It shall be unlawful to lease, sell, mortgage or otherwise transfer title to any real property in the Village if (1) the property or structure is the subject of a current compliance order or other lawful notice of code violation; or (2) if the owner owes an unsatisfied judgment in favor of the Village; or (3) the owner owes any fee or debt to the Village. 9 SECTION 3: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after January 1, 2001 and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ,2000. Gerald L. Farley, Village President ATTEST: Velma Lowe, Village Clerk lO Glen R. Andler Roderick ~ O'Donovan Sear R O0rsey ~ Paul C. Bures Vi]lage Engi .... ~~ Forestry/Grounds Superintendent Jeffrey A. Wulbecker Sandra M. Clark M. Lisa Angell James E. Guenther Mount Prospect Public Works Department 1700 W. General Road, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056-2228 Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 TDD 847/392-1235 SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA MEETING LOCATION: MEETING DATE AND TIME: Public Works Department Monday 1700 West Central Road December 11, 2000 Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 7:30 p.m. I. Call to Order I1. Roll Call III. Approval of Minutes IV. Citizens to be Heard V. Old Business A. Status Report of the Proposed Traffic Calming Improvements along Council Trail VI. New Business A. Request for No Parking Any Time along E. Milburn Avenue between Main Street and Emerson Street Vtl. Adjournment NOTE: ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING BUT BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY NEEDS SOME ACCOMMODATION TO PARTICIPATE SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 100 SOUTH EMERSON STREET, MOUNT PROSPECT, 8471392-6000; EXTENSION 5327, TDD 847/392-6064. ******** TO ALL COMMISSION MEMBERS ******** ******** IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND THE SAFETY COMMISSION MEETING ******** ******** PLEASE CALL MATT LAWRIE 870-5640 IN ADVANCE ******** Recycled Paper - Printed with Soy Ink