Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/26/1994 COW minutes MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE APRIL 26, 1994 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was celled to order by Mayor Gerald Farley at approximately 7.30 p m. Present at the meeting were Trustees George Clowes, T~mothy Corcoran, R~chard Hendncks, Paul Hoefert and M~chaele Skowron Absent from the meebng was Trustee Irvana Wilks Also present at the meeting were V~llage Manager M~chael Janonls, Assistant to the Village Manager Dawd Strahl, Village Attorney Everette H;ll, Pubhc Works D~rector Herb Weeks, Deputy D~rector of Pubhc Works Glen Andler, Sohd Waste Coordinator L~sa Angell and Fire Department Public Educetor Skip Hart, Environmental Health Coordinator Bob Roels II. MINUTES The M~nutes of March 22, 1994 were discussed Trustee Hoefert made the Motion to accept the M~nutes, Seconded by Trustee Skowron Minutes were accepted M~nutes of March 29, 1994 were d~scussed ~On a Mobon made by Trustee Skowron and Seconded by Trustee Hoefert, the Minutes were accepted General d~scuss~on followed concerning the Committee of the Whole M~nutes Trustees Clowes and Hendncks felt that the M~nutes ~n their current form seemed to be adequate The general consensus of the members of the Board was that the Minutes should be generalized and contain ma~n points ~'~th summary. Itwas not necessary for extensive detail III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD Norm Major, 200 North Owen, spoke He was concerned that the Telecommunlcetlons Tax actually comes out to be more than the 2% that the Village had approved He also stated that the c~t~zens should have an opportunity to voice their opinions concerning Tax increases through a Referendum and is concerned about additional new Taxes the Board may approve The difference ~n the uflhty tax is due to a handhng fee charged by the utility Ralph HIIlenbrand of '1318 Mallard Lane, spoke He stated that there was a s~gn~ficent problem w~th graffit~ at 701 Hunbngton Commons Road at Bralen He ~ (~ stated that the graffiti has been up for at least 30 days Ulllan Perham stated that the graffib that has been up for over 30 days needs to be removed and possibly the 30-day period should be reconsidered She stated that it ~s important for the V~llage to force the removal of graffit~ by bu~ldmg owners Manager Janon~s stated that there has been a large increase in graffib recently and the Village has had difficulty gettmg property owners to remove the graffiti, but would consider recommendmg a shorter removal time frame IV. SOMD WASTE CONTRACT - EXTENSION The first question ~s whether to extend the contract by two years Mr Janon~s summarized the staff recommendation in which the V~llage Board would extend the contract ~n years four and five and the mcreases m cost for years four and five would be based on the Producer Price Index w~th a m~nlmum of 4 and 1/2% and a maximum of 7-112% Arc will not extend the contract back to May 1 but w~ll extend the contract by nine months at the back end of the contract in year five so ~t does end on January 1 ~n accordance w~th SWANCC rules D~scuss~on of the Board - General consensus was to concur with staff recommendation on 5-1 consensus to extend the refuse contract for years 4 and 5 (1998 & 1999) The second quesbon is the internal control of fee collection to ensure comphance based on the requirements of the contract One of the major changes would be that the V~llage would act as the agent for the hauler whereby the hauler distributes sbckers to the appropriate selling Iocabons instead of the V~llage doing the d~stnbut~on Dmcuss~on of the Board - General consensus of the Board was to follow the staff ~ recommendation whereby the Village will continue to sell sbckers as provided by the refuse hauler A summary of the staff recommendation for the four internal control ~tems ~nclude the following I A stogie sticker for yard waste or excess refuse 2 Contractor sells the st~ckers and keeps the proceeds from their sale, therefore, it would ehm~nate the need to count st~ckers removed from yard waste refuse containers as is done now The contractor would also d~stnbute the stickers to the selling locations 3 The brush program will be paid through a monthly fee so the question of verifying the number of un,ts b~lled by the contractor would be eliminated 4 Contractor w~ll supply statlsbcal reformation to the Village regarding sbcker sales, yard waste, brush and excess refuse contamers V. BOCA PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE ~ Bob Roels reviewed the proposed changes to the Code as recommended by the V~s~ons Housing Subcommittee He also summarized that there were a few additional items that were st~ll under discussion that were expected to come back to a future Committee of the Whole meebng The ~tems st~ll under considerabon include re~nspect~on fees, shopping cart ordinances, lease language that would include definition of occupancy ordinance, shorten the graffit~ removal time D~scuss~on of the V~llage Board General consensus was to accept recommendabon as outhned by Bob Roels in his memo and d~scuss~on for approval of the BOCA property maintenance code as drafted They also requested an Ordinance be drafted ~n order to be put into consideration for first meeting ~n May Ulllan Pe~am spoke She stated she ~s personally wnbng out violation notices to residents who wolate the covenants of the property. She stated she would be more than w~lhng to orgamze a Court watch ~f they are not~fled of wolaflons She also suggested that the Police come out to write t~ckets for lack of vehicle st~ckers Lee Earlman, 318 North Eastwood, spoke He stated that graffib should be considered the same as garbage on the street and should be treated the same ~n terms of removal and c~tatlon John Mallory; 560 Ida Court, spoke He stated that the problems that are occurnng are due to a long period of inact~on and would hke the V~llage to focus on uniform and consistent enforcement of the Code and to ensure that the Courts are punishing the violators even though their cooperabon m the past has been somewhat I~m~ted He would recommend using the press to get the word out about reporting graffiti Mr Janoms stated he would rewew the poss~bthty of qu~ck response time to remove graffib and to respond to these concerns VI. SINGLE-FAMILY CONVERSION ORDINANCE D~scuss~on of the Board - General consensus of the draft presented by staff and recommended moving forward to the Zoning Board for a Pubhc Heanng prior to full V~llage Board consideration of s~ngle-fam~ly conversion ordinance as drafted Bill Ready, 105 South Elm, spoke He stated he lives m an area where three homes are an wolatlon of th~s proposed Ordinance right now He stated that the Village should enforce Codes to protect single-family homes as well as multi-family homes to keep them segregated However, he would recommend a five-year amorbzation period 3 II. FUTURE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETINGS General d~scuss~on of the ~tems hsted on the memo presented by the VIllage ,Manager and some pnont~zabon of these ~tems occurred General consensus of the Board was to bnng these ,tems as research ~s completed for d~scuss~on at that t~me There was also general consensus that deferred ,tems be placed on the COW Agenda in order to momtor progress in order to show the Board when this item may be com,ng up for dIscussion VIII. MANAGER'S REPORT No report ~ IX. ANY OTHER BUSINESS No other bus~ness VI. ADJOURNMENT The Committee of the Whole meeting was adjourned a't 9 55 p m Respectfully submitted, DAVID STRAHL DS/rcc Assistant to the V~llage Manager