HomeMy WebLinkAbout3077_001y
' DEPUTY VILLAGE CLERK
ALL
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
AGENDA
Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time:
Mount Prospect Senior Center Tuesday, July 23, 1996
50 South Emerson Street ! 7:30 P.M. i
MINUTES
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
JULY 9, 1996
I. GALL TO, ORDER
Mayor Farley called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. Present at the ,meeting
were: Trustees George Clowes, Timothy Corcoran, Paul Hoefert and Michaele
Skowron. Absent from the meeting were: Trustees Richard Hendricks and Irvana
Wilks. Also present were: 'Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village
Manager David Strahl,;Community Development Director William Cooney, Finance
Director Brian Caputo, Village Attorney Everette Hill,Deputy Community
Development Director David'Hulseberg and Environmental Health Coordinator
Robert Roels.
11. MINUTES
Minutes of June 25, 1996. Motion made by Trustee Corcoran and Seconded by
Trustee; Hoefert to accept the Minutes. Trustee Clowes requested a revision on
page six regarding the intent of comments discussing the Gas Tax per gallon
revenue source. Minutes were approved with the revision as requested by Trustee
Clowes:
Ill. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
None.
IV. REVIEW OF INTERIOR APLkRTMENT INSPECTION PR IG M
Community Development: Director William Cooney provided a general overview
and history leading up to the draft presented to the Village Board this evening. He
stated the general intent of the draft Ordinance is to achieve the four goals which
are listed as follows: 1) To address the severity and number of violations
occurring in the Interior of apartments, 2 to ensure that inspections would not
necessarily impose on an individuarsI rights; ) to create an inspection process that
is manageable by all parties involved such as owners, management and Village
staff and 4) to direct Village resources to the most serious problems.
1
a
Mayor Farley asked whether there has been legal challenges to an Ordinance
which requires interior inspections and whether there are ;specific notice
procedures which have been mandated for interior inspections.
Village Attorney Everette Hill noted that there has been no challenge to date which
has been sustained but there may be some cases currently under litigation which
may address this issue. He stated that generally it is not appropriate to target a
specific group; and an Ordinance must deal with all people equally in terms of
interior inspections.
Environmental Health Coordinator Bob Rook provided a ;general overview of the
components of the Ordinance relative to notice of inspection. He stated that
during the first year staff will be focusing on education. He stated the Village will
provide a 30 day advance notice to owners; thereby, the owner then provides the
notice to the tenants. If both the landlord and tenant refuse, then the Village has
the opportunity to obtain an Administrative Warrant. Tenants will get a minimum
of 72 hours' notice by the owner in addition to a rider placed on the lease outlining
the interior inspection program. The goal is to review or inspect all units
throughout the Village in five, -year cycles.
General comments by the Village Board included the following items:
A discussion as to how the Ad Hoc Committee would be structured and what their
purpose would be took place. The Board also ,inquired as to the education
components which will be utilized to inform residents of the program. There was
also some discussion as to ensuring that uniform inspections occur and it was
requested that landlords also be provided the opportunity to participate in the
Inspection procedure of each unit.
Board members were provided a general overview, of the licensing procedures for
rental units. There was a request to remove the verbiage which refers to other
structures in Section 23.1813 A) 4). There was also a request to change the
Ordinance so it would apply to two units or more instead of three units or more.
It was also suggested that a notice be posted in the units or in common areas for
all tenants and perspective tenants to see that the interiors have been inspected
by the Village. There was also a discussion concerning how the incentive program
was structured. A suggestion was made to strike' the Section of the Ordinance
that relates to the financial means to keep up units or to clarify the 'language
because financial means might not be the only reason that units deteriorate.
Some Board members requested a review of the warning conditions as outlined
in the Ordinance as minor violations.
3
A concern was also raised as to why the inspection program did not include single-
family homes. Another concern was also raised as to why 20% of the units were
picked as the percentage which should be inspected. A concern was also raised
as to possible Fourth Amendment violations and the use of probable cause for
inspections.
Community Development Director Bill Cooney responded to a number of the
comments of the Village Board members., He stated that the Ad Hoc Committee
would consist of five owners with staff representation and meet semi-annually to
offer suggestions for improvement of the Ordinance and would expect this
Committee to meet six months after the adoption of the Ordinance.
Environmental Health Coordinator Bob Roels responded to a number of the
comments of the Village Board members. He stated that the warning conditions
listed would be considered somewhat subjective but he would hope that the staff
could look at input from the owners to help define these items more clearly if
necessary. He stated that there is a standardized inspection procedure which is
performed regularly to ensure that Inspectors are consistent in their inspections.
He stated the Village has the option of going to Court to obtain an Administrative
Warrant in order to get inside a unit When the tenant or owner or both are
uncooperative. He stated that an enforcement fee would be billed to the owner for
outstanding violations and the Village would have the option of revoking the
license if necessary. If the violations remain for a period of time the license may
not be renewed at license renewal time. However, staff sometimes waives the
enforcement fees in order to encourage owners to put possible enforcement fees
which may be levied by the Village into the building to bring it up to Code. These
kinds of agreements are made in order to ,encourage cooperation and to improve
the quality of the building. He also stated that the 20% figure was arrived at in
order to achieve review within five years and to make the incentive program
worthwhile.
Bob Roels stated that he would review the documents to ensure that there was no
confusion as to possible violations transferring to new owners. At time of sale,
whether such transfers would be limited t ' o a unit -by -unit basis or to the owner of
the building Itself would be reviewed by staff.
Jack ftrdnger, 15111 North River WeA- spoke.owpptad to 1114nk the Board for
their expenditures to correct thoflobding, in the, area, However, he did want to
speak regarding the, Ordinance under consideration. H4, stated he did not feel the
Ordinance was necessary and feels that the current inspection program is strong
enough to address concerns which have been highlighted by staff to the Board.
I
He stated that inspection of occupied units without probable cause is a violation'
of Constitutional rights and feels t ' hat such an inspection procedure would drive
residents out of town. He felt that such an inspection of interiors of dwelling units
should not be limited to multi -family only. This program should also include single-
family residences. He also stated that he would undertake'a legal challenge if the
Ordinance is adopted.
Ralph Ketree, 940 East Northwest Highway, spoke. He stated that the Village
currently inspects common areas and performs fire inspections of various dwelling
units. He stated that he recently received a notice of 15 items on a citation and
feels that it is a burden to comply with these Items which had been cited. He said
the taxes kept him from selling the building and feels the inspection program is
stringent enough as it is.
Bob Warren, 921 South Owen, spoke. He is speaking for a. landlord who is unable
to speak. He felt there should be rules implemented by Mount Prospect to focus
less on landlords and make tenants responsible for much of the damage which is
caused to residential units. He also stated the Village should make up any loss
that tenants would be held responsible for regarding damage to the rented units.
Lillian Perham, 501 West Dempster, spoke. She stated that the owners that are
not concerned do not take the time to show up to these meetings. She stated that
focusing efforts on bad areas which are near good areas should also protect
property values of owners who put forth the effort to keep the buildings up. She
stated that conversations she has had with tenants have highlighted their concerns
about inspecting bedrooms and bathrooms. She also felt that there is a need to
ensure that Inspectors are consistent in terms of their identification of Violations.
She also stated that tenants fear eviction if they complain to their landlords. They
need education as to proper procedures to rectify problem areas. She concluded
her comments by stating that the Courts have been very uncooperative with the
Village when violations are brought forth for resolution.
John Cabanski, 1000 Pendleton, spoke. He has a problem with the items listed
as minor Violations within the Ordinance, He stated that he would challenge the
Village to go to a single-family home which does not have many of the minor items
listed. He is concerned that multi -family homes may be held to a different
standard. He stated the Village knows where the problems are and should focus
their efforts there. He also stated that the Village should include units of two -flats
and above; not three units and above.
5
a
V. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT
Village Manager Janonis stated that Coffee with Council is scheduled for the
Village Hall from 9:00 a.m. until 10:00 a.m. on Saturday, July 13 and from
10:30 a.m. until 12:00 noon at the RecPlex.This is the first floating Coffee with
Council. It is hoped that subsequent' meetings will be held in various areas of the
community on a quarterly basis.
VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
Trustee Hoefertwanted to thank the Special Events Commission and Public Works
for the outstanding 4th of July Parade and the two sets of fireworks.
Mayor Farley requested the Closed Session be deferred due to the absence of two
Trustees.
Trustee Hoefert made a Motion to move into Closed Session for Property
Acquisition. The Motion was Seconded by Trustee Skowrom 'Roll call vote to
move into Closed Session was held. Trustees Clowes, Corcoran, Hoefert and
Skowron voted' yes.
Village Board members moved into Closed Session to discuss Property Acquisition
at 9:35 p.m.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
The Committee of the Whole meeting reconvened at 10:04 p.m. There being no
further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 10:05 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
DAVID STRAHL
DS/rcc Assistant Village Manager
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECTalm
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS
FROM: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
DATE: JULY 18, 1996
SUBJECT: 1996 MID -YEAR FINANCIAL REVIEW AND 1997 FINANCIAL FORECAST
Before the Village staff begins work on the 1997 budget, it would be useful to examine how we
are doing financially at the mid -point of 1996 and how trends and contemplated changes in our
programs may impact upon the originally forecasted 1997 budget. It would also be helpful to
review our debt position as we consider new flood control projects and the expansion of our
street reconstruction program.
Most important is the financial condition of the General Fund. I would like to review our
estimated 1996 condition of the General Fund and update the fund's 1997 forecast. Then, I will
briefly describe the 1996 condition of all the governmental funds with emphasis on their
estimated year-end fund balances. I will also discuss our capacity to incur debt in the future in
order to fund capital projects. Finally, I will highlight some initiatives which the Village staff
has been discussing in anticipation of the 1997 budget process.
General Find - 1996
Schedule 1, which is attached, is a summarized statement of estimated 1996 revenues and
expenditures in the General Fund. The schedule reveals that we are on track to have a very good
year.
Overall, revenues are expected to be at or above the budgeted amount in all cases. Based upon
the actual experience of the first five months of the year, I anticipate that Sales Tax revenues will
be very close to original projections. Revenues from Licenses, Permits, & Fees will likely be
about $225,000 (or 10%) over budget due mostly to permits and fees related to the expansion of
the U.S. Robotics facility. As reflected under Intergovernmental Revenue, we are also being
greatly helped by higher than expected state income tax receipts.
General Fund expenditures are expected to be within budget. The only exception to this relates
to legal costs which are recorded in a program of the Village Manager's Office. It is now
estimated that the Village will incur $70,000,in legal costs which were unanticipated in the 1996
budget.
Because of our favorable revenue experience to date, I believe that it will not be necessary to
deposit the 25% of the second J/4% of Home Rule Sales Tax into the General Fund as originally
planned. The Home Rule Sales Tax revenue of $300,000 budgeted in the General Fund was
provided to allow a cushion in case other revenues did not perform as well as anticipated.
Because that cushion will not be necessary, I recommend that, the monies be deposited in the
Capital Improvement Fund. That fund has been used to make various capital improvements in
the Village and to purchase certain large equipment items.
General Fund - 1997 Forecast
Attached as Schedule 2 is an updated, summarized 1997 General Fund forecast budget. Most of
the changes from the original forecast relate to revenues.
Although the forecast for property taxes has not changed, the 5.6% increase over the 1996 budget
amount merits explanation. As you know, our property tax levy consists of the following
components:
Debt Service
Police and Firefighters' Pension Contributions
Garbage Collection
Corporate Purposes
The components of the levy for pension contributions and corporate purposes are recorded as
revenue in the General Fund. After receiving the property tax revenue, the General Fund makes
the Village contribution to the pension funds. As -you recall, a few years ago the Police Pension
Fund and Firefighters' Pension Fund were both funded at significantly more than 100%. That
situation arose, in large part, because of unusually high investment earnings. The Village then
decided to reduce its contributions to the pension funds and allow the funds to move back to the
100% level. This was accomplished in the fiscal year which ended April 30, 1993. Since that
time, the Village has been phasing in increased contributions so as to maintain the funds at the
100% funding level. The increased contributions will result in a 14.4% increase in our levy for
the pension funds in 1997. This obviously impacts upon the overall General Fund tax levy.
Without the pension component, the General Fund tax levy would increase in 1997 by only about
4%. Our objective remains that the overall Village levy, including the components for debt
service and garbage collection, increase no more than 4%.
Fines and Forfeits in the General Fund were forecasted based upon a trend analysis which
considered 1996 estimated actual revenues. As discussed above, actual 1996 Fines and Forfeits
are expected to surpass the amount budgeted by a large margin. Based upon the trend, we can
expect revenues from Fines and Forfeits to be $535,000 in 1997, or $87,000 higher than the
amount budgeted in 1996.
The notes which follow Schedule 2 provide information about other classifications of revenue
which may be of interest to you.
With regard to expenditures, only two changes have been made to the,original 1997 forecast.
First, the Police Department intends to request funding for an additional Community Service
Officer. Second, the Human Services Department will be requesting support for an expansion
of its Social Work Intern Program.
The only other notable issue impacting upon expenditures relates to the Community Development
Department. The original forecast budget provided for an Environmental Health Inspector to be
added in 1997. That new position was actually added in 1996 and is reflected in Schedule 2.
Even with these program changes, it appears at the outset that we will be able to balance the
1997 General Fund budget and limit the overall property tax increase to 4%.
The Governmental Funds and Their Fund Balances
Schedule 3 reflects estimated 1996 revenues and expenditures in all the governmental funds
together with the resultant fund balances. Mr. Jepson provided you with a schedule similar to
Schedule 3 about two months ago.
The General Fund's fund balance will probably be 19% of expenditures at the end of 1996.
Although our current goal is to maintain a fund balance in the General. Fund of at least 15%, I
believe we should consider recommending to the Village Board that the fund balance be
permitted to grow further to 25% of expenditures. Doing so would strengthen our case with the
bond rating agencies for an upgrade in our bond rating. A higher bond rating would decrease
our borrowing costs. While not a formal requirement for a higher bond rating, a 25% fund
balance is a widely recognized measure of the capacity to withstand serious, adverse dips in the
economy.
There is nothing significant to report concerning the Special Revenue Funds. The same is true
with respect to the Debt Service Funds in 1996. Debt capacity and the role of fund balances in
the Debt Service Funds will be discussed in some detail below.
In two instances, actual expenditures in the Capital Projects Funds will be appreciably different
from the 1996 budgeted amounts. In both cases, actual expenditures will be under budget
because projects were deferred. In the Capital Improvement Fund, the $1,000,000 budgeted for
Village Hall improvement will not be spent. Also, in the Flood Control Construction Fund, the
See Gwun/Milburn project was postponed until 1998 because bids came in substantially over
budget estimates. The 1996 budget provided $1,109,000 for this flood control project. These
two deferrals account for the large fund balances in the Capital Improvement Fund and the Flood
Control Construction Fund.
Debt Capacity
In recent years the Village has issued a significant amount of debt to finance various capital
projects. The Village's current debt service requirements are reflected Schedules 4 through 8
which are attached.
Schedule 6 (Flood Control Projects) reflects debt service covered by the first 1/4¢ of our home
rule sales tax ("first 1/4¢"). In this schedule, I have assumed than we will issue an additional $1.5
million of debt in both 1998 and 2001 for flood control project's. Those issues would consume
the remainder of the debt service capacity of the first 1/4¢ until 2006. We will pay off the
1993B issue in 2005. Thus, in 2006 some of the first 1/4¢ will be available to service additional
debt for flood control projects.
Schedule 7 (Street and Capital Improvement Projects) presents debt service funded by 75% of
the second 1/4¢ of our home rule sales tax ("second 1/4¢"). Here I have included the effects of
two new $2.5 million bond issues, one in 1997 and one in 2001. These issues would permit us
to continue our street reconstruction program. The 1997 and 2001 issues for street reconstruction
would consume the remaining debt service capacity of the second 1/4¢. In 2004, we will
complete the debt service on the 1994A issue. After allowing the uncommitted portion of the
second 1/4¢ to replenish the expectedly low fund balances of debt service funds during 2005
(consistent with our past practice of maintaining minimum fund balances in the debt service funds
as described below), we could then issue new debt in 2006 for street projects.
Projected actual and target fund balances for the debt service funds are reflected at the bottom
of Schedules 4 through 8. For the debt service funds supported by property taxes, the Village
has followed the practice of sustaining fund balances of an amount equal to the next interest
payment. For debt service funds supported by revenue sources other than property taxes, we
have maintained fund balances at the equivalent of 50% of the next year's principal and interest
requirements. These practices are well advised. Recent experience with Cook County has shown
that we cannot count on receiving our property tax revenues on time. With regard to non -
property tax revenues which vacillate with the economy, it is prudent to provide a reserve which
may be drawn upon if the economy declines.
As we consider issuing new debt, it is important to know how Mount Prospect compares with
other municipalities in terms of debt burden. According to Moody's Investors Service, median
general obligation per capita debt for U.S. cities within the 50,000 to 99,999 population range
was $677 as of December 1995. As of December 31, 1995, Mount Prospect's general obligation
debt per capita was $378. Since that time, we issued $3,150,000 of general obligation bonds.
This brings our per capita debt to approximately $440. Obviously, we compare very favorably
with cities of similar size across the country.
A broader measure of the debt burden upon a community, however, is overlapping debt. The
concept of overlapping debt is a tool used to gauge debt burden as imposed by all taxing bodies
overlapping a community. As of December 31, 1995, median overlapping debt for U.S. cities
between 50,000 and 99,999 in population was $1,270. Mount Prospect's overlapping debt was
$1,807 as of the end of 1995. Thus, Mount Prospect residents are feeling a comparatively large
debt burden imposed by other taxing districts.
Initiatives Under Consideration for 1997
Briefly, I would like to outline some of the initiatives the staff has been discussing in preparation
for the 1997 budget process.
1. Acceleration of the Street Reconstruction Program. As alluded to above, a bond issue of
$2.5 million is planned for 1997 in order to accelerate the street reconstruction program.
2. Creation of a Computer Replacement Fund. This fund would be used to fund the
replacement of our computer hardware and software systems in a manner similar to our Vehicle
Replacement Fund.
3. Separate Line Items in the Budget for Carryovers. Carryovers are projects which, for any
number of reasons, could not be completed in a prior year. The concept suggests that budgets
be presented with a subtotal "net of carryovers." Such a presentation would enable a more
balanced evaluation of budget requests. At present, new projects and carryovers are sometimes
budgeted in the same line items. Separating the two will make it less likely that new initiatives
will be crowded out by carryovers.
4. Merit Pay Pool. In general, the present Village compensation program provides only for
cost -of -living increases. When raises are given, no distinction can be made to reward one
employee who performs better than another. A merit pay pool would give the Village Manager
and/or department heads the ability to recognize superior performance.
5. Management Training. This would be an extension of the training scheduled for this year.
Next year's training would focus on team building.
6. Expansion of the Social Work Intern Program. This initiative was mentioned above under
the discussion of the 1997 forecast budget. In the attached memorandum, Nancy Morgan
provides more information on the proposed expansion of this program.
I look forward to working with you on the Village's 1997 budget. Should you have any
questions about the information presented above, please let me know.
BRIAN W. CAPUTO
attachments
c: Carol Widmer, Assistant Director of Finance
x:\users\caputob\budget96\midtrans
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT Schedule 1
GENERAL FUND
Revenues and Expenditures
1996
Variance **
1994/1995 1996 1996 Positive/
Actual * Budget Estimate (Negative) Notes
REVENUES:
Property Tax
$ 5,005,975
$ 5,378,700
$ 5,403,000
$ 24,300
457,545
Sales Tax
5,722,642
6,350,000
6,350,000
-
A
Home Rule Sales Tax
158,120
300,000
-
(300,000)
B
Food & Beverage Tax
535,636
440,000
445,000
5,000
7,636,695 -
Real Estate Transfer Tax
494,853
485,000
500,000
15,000
3,971,743
Other Taxes
1,465,898
1,596,000
1,668,500
72,500
C
Licenses, Permits & Fees
2,222,320
2,257,200
2,484,000
226,800
D
Intergovernmental Revenue
3,290,620
3,815,700
3,930,000
114,300
E
Charges for Services
458,450
485,000
493,000
8,000
Fines and Forfeits
432,941
448,000
535,000
87,000
F
Investment Income
224,848
238,500
285,000
46,500
Reimbursements
149,416
297,300
352,800
55,500
Other Revenue
33,591
49,850
56,850
7,000
TOTAL REVENUES
20,195,310
22,141,250
22,503,150
361,900
EXPENDITURES:
Public Representation
71,443
78,575
78,575 -
Village Manager's Office
457,545
489,875
559,875 (70,000) G
Communications Division
244,232
231,430
231,430 -
Village Clerk's Office
191,954
209,575
209,575 -
Finance Department
984,044
1,073,800
1,073,800 -
Police Department
6,901,554
7,636,695
7,636,695 -
Fire Department
5,711,502
6,013,095
6,013,095 -
Streets & Public Property
3,971,743
4,173,020
4,173,020 -
Community Development Department
967,382
1,128,210
1,128,210 -
Human Services Department
428,166
477,540
477,540
Community and Civic Services
132,639
181,120
181,120 -
Miscellaneous
18,496
49,050
49,050
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
20,080,700
21,741,985
21,811,985 (70,000)
Excess of
Revenues over Expenditures $114,610 $399,265 $691,165 $291,900
* In order to compare 1996 amounts with a 12 -month fiscal period, actual amounts for the fiscal year ended April 30,
1995 are presented.
** For revenues, an excess of actual over budget is a positive variance and a deficit of actual under budget is a negative
variance. The opposite is true for expenditures.
6
General Fund
1996 Revenues and Fxpenditures
Nates
A - Sales Tax. After five months, sales tax receipts are very close to original projections.
B - Home Rule Sales Tax. Because receipts from Licenses, Permits, & Fees as well as
Intergovernmental Revenue will likely exceed projections, it will not be necessary to deposit
the Home Rule Sales Tax revenue (25% of second 1/4¢) into the General Fund. Recommend
that these monies be deposited into the Capital Improvement Fund.
C - Other Taxes. Most of the positive variance can be attributed to better than expected
utility tax collections.
D - Licenses, Permits, & Fees. Almost all of the positive variance is due to permits and fees
paid by U.S. Robotics associated with the expansion of their facility.
E - Intergovernmental Revenue. State income tax revenues are on track to exceed our
original projection by $100,000.
F - Fines and Forfeits. Greater than expected revenues from both parking fines and circuit
court fines are contributing to the positive variance.
G - Village Manager's Office Expenditures. Unanticipated expenditures for Special Counsel
and the Prosecutor are the reason for the negative budget variance.
'PILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT Schedule 2
GENERAL FUND
Revenues and Expenditures
1997 Forecast
1996 1997 Percentage
Budget Forecast Change Change Notes
REVENUES:
Property Tax
$ 5,378,700
$ 5,680,000
$301,300
5.6%
A
Sales Tax
6,350,000
6,415,000
65,000
1.0
B
Home Rule Sales Tax
300,000
305,000
5,000
1.7
215,875
Food & Beverage Tax
440,000
450,000
10,000
2.3
49,725
Real Estate Transfer Tax
485,000
500,000
15,000
3.1
6.0 F
Other Taxes
1,596,000
1,744,500
148,500
9.3
C
Licenses, Permits & Fees
2,257,200
2,364,700
107,500
4.8
1,128,210
Intergovernmental Revenue
3,815,700
4,032,000
216,300
5.7
506,905
Charges for Services
485,000
497,000
12,000
2.5
4,595
Fines and Forfeits
448,000
524,000
76,000
17.0
D
Investment Income
238,500
250,000
11,500
4.8
Reimbursements
297,300
302,000
4,700
1.6
Other Revenue
49,850
49,700
(150)
(0.3)
E
TOTAL REVENUES
22,141,250
23,113,900
972,650
4.4%
EXPENDITURES:
Public Representation
78,575
79,585
1,010
1.3%
Village Manager's Office
489,875
499,600
9,725
2.0
Communications Division
231,430
226,230
(5,200)
(2.2)
Village Clerk's Office
209,575
215,875
6,300
3.0
Finance Department
1,073,800
1,123,525
49,725
4.6
Police Department
7,636,695
8,091,210
454,515
6.0 F
Fire Department
6,013,095
6,312,770
299,675
5.0
Streets & Public Property
4,173,020
4,332,140
159,120
3.8
Community Development Department
1,128,210
1,222,960
94,750
8.4 G
Human Services Department
477,540
506,905
29,365
6.1 H
Community and Civic Services
181,120
185,715
4,595
2.5
Miscellaneous
49,050
59,470
10,420
21.2
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
21,741,985
22,855,985
1,114,000
5.1%
Excess of
Revenues over Expenditures $399,265 $257,915 $(141,350) (35.4)%
8
General Fund
1997 Forecast Revenues and Expenditures
Notes
A - Property Tax. Forecasted revenues include amounts levied for the corporate purposes, as
well as for the Police Pension Fund and Firefighters' Pension Fund. The amounts for
pensions are ultimately paid to the pension funds as Village contributions. The 1997 forecast
calls for an increase in the Village's contributions of 14.4% over 1996 amounts. This reflects
the phase-in of increased payments so as to fully fund the actuarially recommended
contributions. (In prior years, the Village reduced its contributions because the funds were
more than 100% funded.) The result is a 6.2% increase in the aggregate General Fund tax
levy. However, the overall Village tax levy (including the levy for garbage collection and
debt service) will be held to 41/a
B - Sales Tax. Sales tax revenue is projected to increase by 1% in 1997.
C - Other Taxes. This classification includes utility taxes which are projected to increase 4 to
5% over 1996 estimated actual revenues.
D - Fines and Forfeits. The 1997 forecast is based upon a trend analysis which considered
1996 estimated actual revenues. Actual revenues for 1996, which include parking fines and
circuit court fines, are estimated to be significantly greater than the budgeted amount.
E - Other Revenue. The decrease in Other Revenue forecasted for 1997 compared to the
1996 budgeted amount is due primarily to the reduced receipts from flood loan repayments.
By 1997, these loans will have been almost totally repaid.
F - Police Department Expenditures. Reflects the addition of one Community Service Officer.
G - Community Development Department Expenditures. Includes the addition of an
Environmental Health Inspector. This position was originally endorsed by the Village Board
in the 1997 forecast but the position was actually authorized and filled in 1996. -
H - Human Services Department Expenditures. Includes a provision for the enhancement of
the Social Work Intern Program.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT Schedule 3
AVAILABLE FUND BALANCES
12/31/95 - 12/31/96
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
General Fund $3,465,550 $22,502,900 $21,811,985 $4,156,465
Special Revenue Funds:
Refuse Disposal Fund $ 386,025 $ 2,851,400 $ 2,741,250 $ 496,175
Motor Fuel Tax Fund 575,845 1,172,900 1,222,620 526,125
Community Development Block Grant - 405,900 405,900 -
Totals $ 961,870 $ 4,430,200 $ 4,369,770 $ 1,022,300
Debt Service Funds:
Targoti!.;
Actual 1996 1996 Estimated
Fund ±
Balances Estimated Estimated Balances
13al, ocs
12-31-95 Revenues Expenditures 12-31-96
12-3 2=
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
General Fund $3,465,550 $22,502,900 $21,811,985 $4,156,465
Special Revenue Funds:
Refuse Disposal Fund $ 386,025 $ 2,851,400 $ 2,741,250 $ 496,175
Motor Fuel Tax Fund 575,845 1,172,900 1,222,620 526,125
Community Development Block Grant - 405,900 405,900 -
Totals $ 961,870 $ 4,430,200 $ 4,369,770 $ 1,022,300
Debt Service Funds:
G.O. Bonds - Property Taxes
$ 167,070
$ 845,300
$ 819,515
$ 192,855
$- 250100
G.O. Bonds - Tax Increment
341,600
511,600
520,895
332,305
260;1100 ''
G.O. Bonds - Home Rule Sales Tax 1
1,046,270
1,400,500
1,377,775
1,068,995
690,000
G.O. Bonds - Home Rule Sales Tax 2
114,220
981,500
659,305
436,415
330;000'
Special Service Area Bonds
29,070
52,400
57,020
24,450
15.1300
Totals
$1,698,230
$ 3,791,300
$ 3,434,510
$2,055,020
$1,555;000
Capital Projects Funds:
Capital Improvement Fund
$2,600,365
$ 420,000
$ 610,150
$2,410,215
$ 750,1100
Police & Fire Bldg Const Funds
106,390
6,000
53,925
58,465
58,500
Capital Improvement Const Fund
-
715,000
499,500
215,500
207;x00
Downtown Redevelop Const Fund
32,220
931,600
440,100
523,720
523;5{14
Street Improvement Const Fund
532,015
5,000
348,000
189,015
189„000
Flood Control Const Funds
468,290
1,925,000
1,040,825
1,352,465
,0 00
Totals
$3,739,280
$4,002,600
$2,992,500
$4,749,380
$1„51 8j1 ,, 0,
10
Cash Balance - Start of Year
Revenues
Debt Service Requirements
1987A Public Works Bldg
1987B Public Wodcs Bldg
1993B Public Works Bldg
1991A Police &Fire Bldg
1993B Police & Fire Bldg
Totals
Cash Balance - End of Year
a'ar.Balances>
Schedule 4
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PROJECTS FINANCED BY PROPERTY TAXES
Annual Debt Service Requirements
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
$192,800 $208,220 $223,660 $257,685 $259,300 $257,755 $252,925 $245,260 $247,705 $203,380
$697,000 $701,000 $734,200 $703,900 $707,500 $707,400 $719,000 $740,000 $725,000 $201,620
$ -
$ -
$125,000
$ 47,000
$122,000
$112,000
$ 66,000
$ 67,000
$151,000
$405,000
160,200
-
_
_
-
_
-
-
287,730
42,340
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
166,120
404,805
452,470
450,905
452,105
449,820
451,300
452,305
452,065
-
67,530
238,415
122,705
204,380
135,940
150,410
209,365
218,250
166,260
-
$681,580
$685,560
$700,175
$702;285
$709,045
$712,230
$726,665
$737,555
$769,325
$405,000
$208,220
$223,660
$257,685
$259,300
$257,755
$252,925
$245,260
$247,705
$203,380
$ -0-
$1-50,00D
V-5%0 0
5250,000
$25U0
X250,000
$25¢.$00
$250,000
32 ,OW
5 4
11 711916
Schedule 5
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Annual Debt Service Requirements
and Estimated Cash Flows
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 111
Cash Balance - Start of Year
$332,300
$379,805
$305,790
$230,210
$296,030
$303,750
$ 52,220
$ 30,595
$ 28,470 $
Revenues
Tax Increment
$727,000
$865,000
$1,028,800
$1,088,800
$1,219,500
$1,219,500
$1,219,500
$1,365,800
$1,365,800 $
Tax Increment to Const Fund (1)
(100,000)
(350,000)
(525,000)
(485,000)
(635,000)
(875,000)
(1,135,000)
(1,315,000)
(1,338,500)
Other Income
20,000
20,000
18,500
13,800
15,000
18,200
3,100
1,800
1,705
Debt Service Requirements
1987 C & D
$203,830
s -
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ - $ -
1991 B
36,995
-
1992 B
7,795
52,550
-
-
-
m
1993 A
146,335
358,820
377,130
409,165
429,290
457,930
109,225
54,725
57,475
1994 B
73,600
70,805
73,010
-
_
-
-
-
-
1996 B
130,940
126 840
147.740
142,61
162.490
156,300
-
Totals
$599,495
$609,015
$597,880
$551,780
$591,780
$614,230
$109,225
$54,725
$57,475
Cash Balance - End of Year
$379,805
$305,790
$230,210
$296,030
$303,750
$52,220
$30,595
$28,470
$ -0- $
Target Balances
$304500
V"lom
346,
V-%,006
$307, x0
$55,0 1
$ 1,500
as 9;
$ -0- $
(1) Tax Increment revenues that are not needed for existing Debt Service Requirements will be allocated to the Downtown Redevelopment Construction Fund. If additional
debt is issued, the required debt service amounts will be provided from this allocation.
12 7118/96
Schedule 6
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS
Annual Debt Service Requirements
and Estimated Cash Flows
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Cash Balance - Start of Year (1)
$1,058,600
$ 871,090
$ 722,375
$ 620,065
$ 323,185
$ 365,450
$ 432,665
$ 284,115
$ 135,400
$ 246,555
Revenues (2)
$1,344,900
$1,343,300
$1,345,200
$1,350,500
$1,341,200
$1,357,400
$1,375,400
$1,378,300
$1,380,100
$1,402,500
Debt Service Requirements
'.. Flood Control Projects - 1991A
$ 195,545
$ _
$ _
$ _
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
$
Flood Control Projects - 1992A
435,095
397,210
359,615
342,550
Flood Control Projects - 1993B
112,285
306,765
306,820
307,275
309,395
303,895
307,815
306,270
249,445
Flood Control Projects - EPA (Est) (3)
390,000
390,000
390,000
390,000
390,000
390,000
390,000
390,000
390,000
390,000
Flood Control Projects - 1994A
188,505
187,700
181,680
185,660
179,210
177,760
196,095
198,265
-
Flood Control Projects- 1996
211,080
210,340
209,395
213,245
211,680
209,880
212,740
215,180
212,200
213,375
Flood Control Projects - 1998 (Est) (4)
_
-
-
208,650
208,650
208,650
208,650
208,650
208,650
208,650
Flood Control Projects - 2001 (Est) (4)
-
-
-
208 650
208.650
208.650
20800
Totals
$1,532,410
$1,492,015
$1,447,510
$1,647,380
$1,298,935
$1,290,185
$1,523,950
$1,527,015
$1,268,945
$1,021,015
Ca- Balance - End of Year
$8-71 U90
$72 ,575
$520,065
S3 1,iS5
$365.`153
�a",fi5�
�_.-'�
M 35,40A$216,555
$627,94
Target Balances
$744j00-3 .
$714.00
$824,000
"i5o
$445,
$762,M
s7oiSW
$634,500
$S
5403,650
(1) The Cash Balance 1/1197 is estimated.
(2) Revenues include the first 1/4C Home Rule Sales Tax and Investment Income. The Home Rule Sales Tax is assumed to increase I % per year. Investment Income
is based on 7.5 % of the Cash Balance at the start of the year.
(3) The final loan requirement for the Hatlen Heights Project has been estimated.
(4) Estimated bond issues of $1.5 million in 1998 and 2001 are included to complete phases VII and VIII. The interest rate is assumed to be 6.5% with a ten year term
for each issue. Interest is capitalized for the year of issue and the first year after issue.
13
7118196
Schedule 7
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
STREET AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Annual Debt Service Requirements
and Estimated Cash Flows
IF1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Cash Balance - Start of Year
(1)
Revenues
12}
Debt Service Requirements
$ 618,680
1994 A
$ 610,450
1996 A
1997 A (Het)
(3)
2001 A (Est)
(3)
Totals
-
Cash Balance - End of Year
Target Balances
$436,400 $ 618,225 $ 692,580 $ 601,030 $ 527,490 $ 458,895 $ 394,365 $ 336,470 $ 84,970 $ 438,120
$968,770 $1,024,400 $1,042,900 $1,049,100 $1,056,600 $1,064,400 $1,072,600 $1,082,200 $1,076,400 $1,116,800
$628,305
S 629,035
$ 628,825
$ 617,955
$ 621,255
$ 618,680
$ 620,245
$ 610,450
-
158,740
158,410
157,875
157,135
156,190
-
-
_
-
-
162,500
347,750
347,750
347,750
347,750
347,750
347,750
347,750
347,750
162,500
262,500
375.500
375,500
375,500
$787,045
$ 949,945
$1,134,450
$1,122,640
$1,125,195
$1,128,930
$1,130,495
$1,333,700
$723,250
$ 773,250
$618,125
$692,580
$601,030
$527,490
$458,895
$394,365
$336,470
$84,970
$438,120
$831,670
$475,000
$567.001,
556;;500
tn&-506
$534,500
sw6 oG4)
$66T,Q00
536 ,
$361,560
$36P,5
(1) The Cash Balance to start 1997 is estimated.
(2) Revenues include approximately 75 % of the second Home Rule Sales Tax and Investment Income. The Home Rule Sales Tax is assumed to increase I % per year.
Investment Income is based on 7.5 % of the Cash Balance at the start of the year.
(3) Estimated bond issues of $2.5 million in 1997 and 2001 are included. The interest rate is assumed to be 6.5 % with a ten-year term for each issue. Interest is capitalized
for the year of issue and interest only will be paid in the first year after issue.
14 7r18/%
Cash Balance - Start of Year (1)
Revenues
Debt Service Requirements
SSA #1
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
SPECIAL SERVICE AREA PROJECTS
Annual Debt Service Requirements
and Estimated Cash Flows I
Schedule 8
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
$24,450
$22,240
$16,000
$14,500
$12,500
$10,000
$ 8,000
$ 6,000
$ 5,000
$
$59,500
$53,650
$39,480
$37,155
$39,805
$38,055
$35,775
$39,495
$32,800
$ -
Prospect Meadows Water
$22,870
$22,470
',.. SSA #6
$
George/MbeR Street Impry
38.840
37.420
Totals
$61,710
$59,890
Cash Balance - End of Year
$22,240
$16,000
Target Balances
$20,000
$16.000
(1) The Cash Balance to start 1997 is estimated.
$
$
$
$
$
$
49- 480
39.155
40.055
37,
37_,800
$40,980
$39,155
$40,055
$37,775
$37,800
$
$14,500
$12,500
$ 8,000
$ 6,000
$ 40-
$ -
$14,500
$12,5011
410,000
1 8.000
$ 6,000
5 5.00(€
$
s-
42_,305
$42,305
$lo,000
40.495
$40,445
$ s,000
15 711"
Village Manager -
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT Community Development Director
cirri
ce Director
MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS FFiinare Chief
Police Chief
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM Public Works Director
Village Clerk stra
Coffirnunications Adrninia tor
TO: MICHAEL JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: NANCY MORGAN, HUMAN SERVICES DIRECTOR
DATE: JULY 17, 1996
SUBJECT: 1996 SIX MONTH REVIEW - ENHANCED SOCIAL WORK INTERNSHIP
PROGRAM
During 1996, the number of Social Work interde artmental
referrals, time corrmitment with referrals, community
involvements have increased. 'This increase is directly related to
the development of the Visions Interdepartmental Working Group's
efforts and the recently passed housing ordinances. Referred cases
are particularly time consuming for the Social Worker because they
involve mental illness, inability for self care,. distraught family
members, isolation from the community, diverse cultural
tat
ions* buildings
maintenance,
anc
e
,
i
ntense
-advocacy with
eighb0rin ,.�cipalitesocial
-ery1csand medical agencies,
tcSocIlork cam= ItV invlvemen sincludes the development
of �lean �D Days, Program, Social Sewing Croup, Creative
Club, FamlyFlan
Mites,
etc
In an effort to manage the increased Social Work referrals in the
most cost effective manner, the Human Services Department is
proposing to enhance its Social Work Internship program. BY
providing ixaterrls with a solid agency to complete their field work,
tae Village. receives an inecpensive, enthusiastic part time work
force. Shortly after a placement begins, quality students become
an invaluable asset to the department by taking on appropriate
cases thus allowing the highly skilled staff Social Workers the
time to spend with the more time intensive, difficult cases.
The enhanced program provides the student with a set hourly rate of
�a attracting the qualified
ho
0 hours
t ct g most udent'
s. The proposed rate
ar costing the Village
y �us tt 8 y
pa Is 0 hour
for
'3, 840The student
works 15 hours e week. The proposal is for
two
0 0 1 0
w Social
W rk terns at $7 ' 68 nnually. The enhanced program
replaces t t r 0 m t t provided
ro'vT ,
he en year d ded a $600 per student
st_ t us not
attracting
t 1 . fi
ct g t most
1
pend h n a a in he ied students.
/nm Nan(�y_Morgan
file: NLOUinters$
MAYOR w'we
, GERALD L FARLEY
TRUSTEES
GEORGE A, CLOWES
TIMOTHY J, CORCORAN
RICHARD N. HENDRICKS
PAUL LH RT
MICHAEE W. SKOWRON Village of o.n t Prospect
IRVANA K. WILKS NEAV
VII:LASEMAIINAGELLAREA cant
MICHAEL E. JANONIS 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois:. 60056 847
VILLAGE CLERIC..
CAROL, A, FIELDS Phonei 706 / 382-6000;
Fax: 706 / 392-6022
AGENDA TDD: 706 / 392-6064
BUSINESS DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT AND
REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Wednesday, July 24, 1996
Village Halt
100 South Emerson: Street
7:30 P.M.
I. GALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
M. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (JUNE 26, 1996)
IV: OLD BUSINESS
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. Downtown Redevelopment Issues
1. Location of Village Hall: Existing or Other?
2. Business Retention and/or Relocation
3 a Other Issues
VI. ADJOURNMENT
Any individual who would like to attend this meeting, but because of a disability needs some
accommodation; to participate,: should' contact the Community Development Department at
100 S. Emerson, Mount Prospect, IL 60056, 847-392-6000, Ext. 5328, TDI} #847-392-6064.
MINUTE`'
BUSINESS DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT AND
REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
Wednesday, June 26, 1996
CALL 10 -*
The regular meeting of the Mount Prospect Business District Development and Redevelopment
Commission (BDDRC) was called to order by Acting Chairman Joseph Janisch at 7:30 P.M. on
Wednesday June 26, 1996 in the Second Floor, Conference Room of Village Hall, 100 S.
Emerson St.,Mount Prospect, Illinois.
go-LL
Members oUlie Commission present. Keith Youngquist, Ralph Stadler, Calvin Huber, Joseph
Janisch. Members absent: Hal Predovich, Bart Keljik and John Eilering. Also present was
Daniel Ungerle der, Planning Coordinator.
Mr. Huber asked that he be given the opportunity to clarify his statement found in the May 22,
1996 minutes: "Mr. Hubert stated he believes that the downtown is "okay" as it exists today."
Mr. Huber explained that as it relates to the preliminary downtown redevelopment plans presented
by staff, he does not feel that we should be tough on the existing businesses, such as, Continental
Bakery and Fannie May until the plans for that area had been finalized and other parcels have
been acquired. Mr. Huber further explained that he believes that the Village would be in a better
position to oppose Northwest Electric expansion plans if the Village had already acquired the
parcels north of their property. In conclusion., he stated that the present downtown has much
potential and by making it more attractive and convenient for the shoppers and the general public,
economic benefits should occur to the community.
Mr. Ralph Stadler asked that the sentence: "Mr. Stadler questioned the Village's urgency to
develop the downtown and stated that he dict not see the potential of the developing of the
Village's downtown" be omitted from the minutes. He stated that he did not recall making such
a statement and he is in full support of any type of redevelopment program for the downtown and
that he believes that the downtown has a' potential of being a vital economic draw for the Village.
With those statements and corrections a'motion was moved and seconded for the approval of the
minutes of May 22, 1996. The minutes were approved unanimously.
OLD BUSINESS:
22 West Busse + Avenue:
Mr. Ungerleider explained that given the amount of time that it has taken Mr. Neitzke,to complete
Page 3
Village may wish to use the same method they are using -now in its commuter parking lots, i.e.
stickers,, hangtags or either means,
Mr. Huber expressed that he thought combining the Senior Center with Village Hall would be
beneficial for the downtown.
Ralph Stadler asked if Prospect Avenue businesses and Central Plaza were included in the
downtown redevelopment plans. Mr. Ungerleider stated that neither areas are located within the
TIF District and therefore are not being addressed as part of this initial plan.
Keith "Youngquist expressed that he did not feel that the Police and Fire Building was an important
facility to be located within the downtown. However, he stated that Village Hall does provide a
cultural benefit and regional draw and should, therefore, remain. downtown.
Mr. Stadler stated that condominium development is essential for this plan to be successful.
Without providing additional residential development in the downtown, there will not be sufficient
customer base to support any commercial development.
Keith Youngquist stated that he felt it was important that B.D.D.R.C. meet before the upcoming
ad hoc meetings of the Boards and Commissions. Mr. Ungerleider agreed to contact all the
B.D.D R.C. members' f a special meeting was to be required.
The meeting was adjourned at 8.40 p.m.
Re° l y submitted,
Daniel Unerleidez
Planning Coordinator
s,
MAYOR
GERALD L, FARLEY
TRUSTEES
GEORGE X CLOWES
TIMOTHY J, CORCORAN
RICHARD R, HENDRICKS
PAUL WM, HOEFERT 'Village of Mount Prospect
MICHAELE W, SKOWRON
FAVANA K , WILKS NEW
VILLAGE MANAGER 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 AREA CODE
MICHAEL E, JANONIS 847
VILLAGE CLERK
CAROL A, FIELDS A!GEN D A Phone: 708 / 392-6000
(Prepared July 11, 1996) Fax: 708 / 392-6022
TDD: 708 / 392-6064
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Mount Prospect Senior Center
50 South Emerson Street
730 P.M.
July 25, 1996 Approval of. Afinuto Qf June 13,1996
ZBA- I I -CU-96 208 S. Main St.,/Robert Crouse
ZBA-12-CU-96 10 S. Elm St.,/Michael Schwarzbeck
Cases to be Heard
ZBA-15-CU-96 1630 W. Algonquin Rd., Plaza United Shpg. Ctr./A Mother's Touch -
Conditional Use Amendment to expand a Day Care Center.
VILLAGE BOARD FINAL
ZBA-13-Z-96 218 S. Emerson St.,/Edward Verschoor - Rezoning from R -A to B-5.
VILLAGE BOARD FINAL
ZBA-10-Z-96 Mount Prospect Park District, 1326 W. Central Road (former Pop
Shop)- Rezoning from 1-1 to C-R, Conditional Use fora visual arts
center and setback and lot coverage variations. VILLAGE BOARD
FINAL
ZBA-14-CU-96 832 River Rd./Sedano Landscaping - Text Amendment and
Conditional Use to permit an illegal existing landscaping business to
remain in the R-1 Single Family Residence District. VILLAGE
BOARD FINAL
August 8. 1996 Case No.,' ZBA-15-A-95 - Text Amendment/Commercial Vehicles
Any individual who would like to attend this meeting, but because of a disability needs some
accommodation to participate, should contact the Community Development Department, at
100 S. Emerson, Mount Prospect, IL 60056, 847-392-6000, Ext. 5328, TDD #847-392-6064.
Director Water/Sewer Superintendent
Glen R, Andler CAA#tdt'Afrtf Roderick O'Donovan
Deputy Director Streets/Buildings Superintendent
Sean P Dorsey „ , Paul Bures
Village. Engineer Forestry/Grounds Superintendent
Jeffrey A. Wulbecker Sandra M. Dark ;
Administrative Aide �' " Vehicle/Equipment Superintendent
Dawn L. Wuckj James E. Guenther
Solid Waste Coordinator
Mo Lisa Angell
Mount Prospect ;Public Works Department
1700 W. Central Road, Mount Prospect, Illinois BOO56-2289
Phone 647/870-5640 Fax 847/256-9377 TDD 847/992-1`295
MINUTES OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT
SAFETY COMMISSION
I. CALL TO ORDER
The Regular Meeting of the Mount ProspectSafety Commission Was called to order at 7:30 P.M.
on Monday, July 8, 1996.
II. ROLL CALL
Upon roll call, each Safety Commission Member introduced themselves to the audience.
Present upon roll call. Arlene Juracek Commissioner
Jean BJork, Commissioner
Chuck Bencic Commissioner
Sean Dorsey Public Works
Buz Livingston Fire' Department
Sean Won' Public Warks, Engineering Division
Absent: Lee Beeping Chairman
Andy Mitchell Commissioner
Art Coy Commissioner
Tom Daley Police department
Others in Attendance: See Attached List.
Commissioner Arlene Juracek presided over the Safety Commission Meeting in the absence of
Chairman Lee Beening.
Ill. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Joan Bjork seconded by Sean Dorsey, moved to approve the Minutes of the
Regular` Meeting of the Safety Commission held on June 10, 1996. The Minutes were approved
by a vote of 5-0.
Recycled Paper - Printed with Soy Ink
2. No Stopping, Standing, Parking between 8:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. on
SchoolDays
on the South Side of Isabella St from Fairview Ave to Oak St & on the West
Side of Forest Ave from Isabella St to 208'N. Forest Ave
a) Background Information
The Engineering Staff sent out surveys to 14 residents concerning the,
above parking restriction. Of the 9 surveys returned, only 1was against
this restriction, 8 were In favor (3 out of the 8 approved resident parking
only. Currently, the Village does not have a resident only parking
restriction on public streets) Because the majority of the residents
approved the above parking restriction, the Engineering Staffdid
recommend the above restrictions.
b) Discussion
Fairview School also requested the parking restriction on the south side
of Isabella St from Fairview Ave to Oak St & on the west side of Forest
Ave from Isabella St to 208 N. Forest Ave during school hours because
1) it is difficult to maneuver around parked cars if cars care parked on
both sides of Isabella St and Forest Ave, 2) Fairview School does not
want parents to drop off their children and then have them cross the
street, 3) sometimes drivers double park their cars on Isabella St and
Forest Ave, and 4) not enough room is left for emergency vehicles due
to double parking and parking on both sides of streets.
Several residents on Isabella St and Forest Ave stated the following:
• Parents drop off their children on the north side of Isabella St
between the drop off entrance and exit driveways. These children
have to walk between cars in the drop off area. Additional parking
restrictions may be needed on the north side of Isabella St between
the drop off driveways.
• Some drivers park their cars in front of fire hydrants and driveways.
Many drivers are using resident's driveways as turn arounds.
• Some residents have only,a one car garage but the families have
several cars. Therefore, if parking is restricted, they can not park in
front of their houses.
• Former School Superintendent Dr. Many promised that there would
be no congestion on Isabella St and Forest Ave, Residents wanted
to know why they are experiencing these problems.
• Due to congestion, some resident wanted the parking restriction
expanded to both sides of Forest Ave from Isabella St to Thayer St,
not just the west side of Forest Ave'
• One resident suggested resident only parking on Forest Ave (Sean
Dorsey said that the Village does not have a resident only parking
area because it is difficult to enforce).
3
the south side of Isabella St from Fairview Ave to Oak St, and 3) the north
side of Isabella St between drop off driveways.
0 Instead of 3 -way stop signs, a yield sign on Forest Ave will be considered
because this Intersection does not meet stop sign warrants.
• Sean Won will contact the Fairview School Safety Committee and Fairview
School Principal In July/August to,find out the revised Fairview School
traffictparking restriction plan. Then Sean Won will arrange a meeting with
the residents and Fairview School. After the mutually agreeable parking
restriction plan is finalized, he will send out surveys to collect the resident's
opinion.
B) LIONS SCHOOL
a) Background Information
Lions School Principal requested the following restrictions because new Lions
School is oriented to the east direction Instead of the south directiow
In order to get this on this month's agenda, time was limited. Therefore, no
surveys were completed. All residents whoare affected were notified of the
Safety Commission Meeting schedule.
1. Loading Zone
on the West Side of School St from Council Tr to Sha-Bonee Tr
No Stopping, Standing, Parking between 8:00 A.M. and 4,00 P.M.
on School Days
on the East Side of School St from Council Tr to Sha-Bonee Tr
Normally, parents will, drop off & pick up students on the west side of
School Street. Therefore the west side of School Street should bee
Loading Zone (Drop-off and Pick -Up Only). To improve the safety of the
students, parking on the east side of School St should also be
restricted. Note that the Village temporarily installed No -Parking -Any -
Time Signs on the east side of School St to reduce congestion during
construction.
2. No Stopping, Standing, Parking between 8:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M.
on School Days
on North Side of Council Tr from 220 ft to 320 ft West of School St
Both sides of the School Bus Turn Around should be clear of any parked
cars to improve the sight distance of school bus drivers. Therefore,
parking on both sides of School Bus Turn Around should be restricted.
S. Do -Not -Enter School Days 8:00 - 9:30 A.M. and 2:30 - 4:00 P.M.
North Bound School St at Council Tr
Do -Not -Enter Signs have been installed here for some time. But they
were removed during construction to reduce congestion. However, this
5
:NDAI
Ci
SIG
PHONE NO.
v,4��
- S� .......... c
'7 7
3/
VZ-