Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0205_001MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE JANUARY 23, 1990 I. RtLLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. Present at the meeting were: Mayor Gerald L Farley; Trustees Ralph Arthur, Mark Busse, Timothy Corcoran, and George Van Geem. Absent from the meeting were: Trustee Leo Floros and Theodore Wattenberg. Also present at the meeting were: Village Manager John Fulton Dixon, Assistant Village Manager Michael Janonis, Finance Director David Jepson, Director of Public Works Herbert Weeks and Water Superintendent Jerry McIntosh. Also present were three persons from the print media. II. MINUTES The Minutes of the Committee of the Whole meeting of January 9, 1990 were accepted and filed. Mr. Joe Rohde, 317 North Wille Street, appeared before Committee members to voice his displeasure with the manner in which a single-family home was being constructed in a lot located at 315 North Wille. Mr. Rohde alleged that mistakes were made in the pouring of the foundation which caused the foundation to sit abnormally high compared to his residence. Mr. Rohde was fearful that with the severe grades on this adjacent lot would cause flooding on his property and that the height of the foundation would have an adverse aesthetic impact on his property. Mr. Rohde requested that the Mayor and Board of Trustees stop any further construction on the building until these issues were resolved. After extensive discussion among Committee members, there was a determination made to issue a Stop Work Order for a period of seven days so that the issues raised by Mr. Rohde could be resolved. The Village Manager was instructed to meet with Mr. Rohde and his engineers as soon as possible to resolve this matter. 10 Village Manager John Fulton Dixon reviewed with Committee members past efforts by the Village to purchase the Citizens Utilities water and sewer system in the northeast section of the Village. Mr. Dixon reviewed the attempt by the Village to acquire the system in the mid '70s and specifically, the 1975 Study which placed a value on the system at that time. Between the 1975 and 1990 studies, the cost of the system had increased by approximately $1.6 million. This seemingly small increase was due in large part to the fact that the cost of construction had kept pace with depreciation. Mr. Dixon indicated that the Greeley and Hansen Study focused on the purchase of the Citizens' system from a number of options including the purchase of the entire system or individual parts thereof. Other factors which may come into play when deciding the feasibility of acquisition included the impending arrangements between Citizens Utilities and the Village of Glenview for the purchase of Lake Michigan water, the status of the Prospect Heights system if it were disconnected from the Mount Prospect system and the effect of acquisition on the Village's own water system. Mr. Terry Hodnik, Engineer with the firm of Greeley and Hansen, reviewed with Committee members the results of his report entitled, "Preliminary Acquisition Feasibility Study for Chicago Suburban Water and Sewer Systems of Citizens Utilities Company." Mr. Hodnik indicated that the, Greeley and Hansen report was modeled after, and relied on the basic data supplied in the 1975 report. The Feasibility Study looked at several options for acquisition including purchase of the entire system or the purchase of any one or combination of three distinct sections of the Citizens' service area. Mr. Hodnik informed the Board that the Citizens' service area had an estimated annual average water use of 1,897,000 gallons per day. In arriving at a value for the system, Greeley and Hansen used the traditional "reproduction cost less depreciation!' formula. This formula assumes all facilities being reconstructed at today's dollars with a depreciation factor based on the estimated remaining life for each component part of the current system Based upon this formula, Mr. Hodnik explained the following acquisition costs for each of the areas and the combined total: N Acquisition option___ Area 1 Areas 1&2 Areas 1,2&3 Reproduction Cost Less Depreciation WgIer and Sgwe $ 582,000 $ 4,275,000 $12,695,000 A factor that the Board will have to consider in proceeding with acquisition is what deficiencies will be created to the remaining Citizens' system if the Mount Prospect portion is removed from it. These deficiencies, such as loss of storage facilities, pumping capacity, water sources, would have to be factored into the overall acquisition cost. The remaining portion of the Citizens' system would need to be made whole again so that it could operate as a stand-alone system. Therefore, Mr. Hodnik indicated that it was prudent for the Village to acquire only essential aspects of the Citizens' system. For example, if the Village did not require the wells, storage or pumping stations in order to provide adequate service, then those components should not be acquired. Additionally, issues regarding the handling of sanitary sewage from Prospect Heights would have to be resolved. Currently, sanitary sewage from Prospect Heights is handled by lift stations located within Mount Prospect. Another factor involved is the cost to bring the Citizens' facilities up to Mount Prospect standards. Again, Mr. Hodnik presented information regarding the cost to each area and the combined total: Water System Improvement Costs Acquisition Option Improvement Cost Area 1 $ 15,000 Areas 1&2 $ 925,000 Areas 1,2,&3 $2,382,000 Mr. Hodnik also indicated that approximately $350,000 would be required to rehabilitate two lift stations in the service area. -3- Finally, Mr. Hodnik indicated that acquisition of all three sections of the Citizens Utilities' service area would create deficiencies within the Mount Prospect system. The Village's current system does not have the flow capacities or the pressure capabilities to deliver adequate supplies of water to the northern most reaches of the Village. Therefore, some internal system improvements may be necessary or, in the alternative, the Village would have to rely on the anticipated Lake Michigan water source through the Village of Glenview. In conclusion, Mr. Hodnik indicated that the total cost options for purchase of the water and sewer system with necessary improvements to the Citizens' system and leaving out unnecessary facilities would cost in the area of: SUMMARY COSTS Total Cost Opinion Acquisition Water and Sewer Qom n, QPWQA Area 1 $ 496,000 Areas 1&2 $ 4,314,000 Areas 1,2&3 $14,745,000 There was extensive discussion among Board members. Mayor Gerald Farley was concerned about the status of the Citizens' system in Prospect Heights and how Mount Prospect's purchase might affect service in Prospect Heights. This issue would have to be determined through further discussions with Prospect Heights and further studies on the system. Mayor Farley also indicated that the value established by Greeley and Hansen should in no way be considered the final purchase price. The final purchase price would be established through negotiations and/or Court action. Trustee Ralph Arthur indicated that he was pleased with the report overall. He also expressed concerns about the status of the Prospect Heights' system should the Village pursue acquisition. It was his feeling that the entire system should be acquired and not be approached in a piecemeal fashion. Finally, Trustee Arthur indicated that the Village should get firm cost figures and then go to residents in the area with a Referendum to determine their level of support. Trustee Timothy Corcoran asked Mr. Hodnik if he had any experience before the Illinois Commerce Commission. Mr. Hodnik said that he had not. Trustee Corcoran was also concerned about the ability of the Prospect Heights' system to function as a stand -along system. Finally, Trustee Corcoran inquired as to whether there were other ways to value the property and whether values had been assigned for such items as business good -will, legal, engineering costs and other costs associated with an ongoing business. -4- Trustee George Van Geem posed several questions regarding the methodology for establishing the value for the system. Trustee Van Geem inquired as to whether the $14,745,000 cost for the Citizens' system would be the same if the Village laid parallel lines. After some, discussion, it was determined that it would cost approximately two and one-half times as much to lay parallel lines in an establish residential area. The additional costs would be associated with restoration and the problems that would be encountered in dealing with the myriad of existing utilities already in the ground. Trustee Van Geem also indicated he felt there were two major issues at play here. One was water quality and the other was the cost of the water. If, in fact, a Lake Michigan water source was developed for Citizens, it appears that a large part of the problem would be resolved. Trustee Van Geem felt that the more important issue was what the future rate trend would be for the Village and the Citizens' system. Finally, Trustee Van Geem inquired as to whether acquisition of the Citizens' service area would affect the Village's Class II fire rating. Mr. Dixon indicated that it would not. Trustee Mark Busse posed several questions regarding the affect such acquisition would have on the ability of the Mount Prospect system to provide adequate water to the balance of the Village. He also inquired as to what overall benefit the Village would receive if the system were purchased. Mr. Dixon indicated that benefits might include a larger customer base, the ability to expand Special Service Area #5 over a wider population; thus, lowering the cost to each resident and finally, there would be less complaints and follow-up on service calls and Citizens Utilities' rate cases. Several residents appeared before Committee members indicating their support for continued examination of this issue. All agreed that to be successful, residents would have to be fully informed about costs. After further discussion, the Committee members directed the staff to: 1. Contact the City of Prospect Heights to determine the status of their preliminary efforts to acquire the Citizens' water system. 2. Contact the Village of Glenview and the City of Wilmette regarding their position on supplying Lake Michigan water to the Citizens' service area and what conditions, if any, would change should the Village step into Citizens' place. 3. To make contact with a law firm with the requisite expertise to handle these types of matters for the purposes of determining what legal issues, if any, the Village might encounter. -4- V. MANAGEWS 1. Mr. Dixon reviewed with Committee members a proposal to reduce the cost to residents for rehabilitation of the Prospect Meadows Sanitary Sewer System. Because of the Build Illinois Grant the Village received as part of this project, the cost share for the Village and residents was reduced. By changing the formula, it was possible for some people to receive actual refunds while those on a payment plan have their overall obligation reduced by several years. The Village Board approved this change. 2. Mr. Dixon indicated that staff would be meeting with representatives from the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District on further discussions for development of Melas Park. 3. Mr. Dixon indicated that a meeting had been set for January 30 between members of the Village Board and Trustees for the Elk Grove Township Rural Fire Protection District. MIN! Trustee George Van Geem asked for a status report regarding Busse School. Mr. Dixon indicated that no substantive action has been taken yet and that Village staff was waiting for the Park District to establish a new meeting date. Trustee Corcoran requested that the Board consider the adoption of a Recall Provision to the Village Code. Trustee Corcoran indicated he felt this was a mechanism which was lacking in the current Code and would provide for more responsive representation of citizens. Trustee Corcoran indicated that this was a good time to consider such an item because there were no controversial issues pending before the Board. Mayor Farley indicated that he would review the matter and seek legal counsel before deciding when to place this item on a future Committee of the Whole meeting Agenda. Vil. ADJO There being no other business to come before the Committee of the Whole, the meeting was adjourned at 10:08 p.m. Respectfully submitted, MEJ/rcw MICHAEL E. JANONIS Assistant Village Manager N Village of V.a unt Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois � ��"� INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM' TO: MAYOR GERALD L. FARLEY AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM: VILLAGE MANAGER DATE: FEBRUARY 9, 1990 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF PARKWAY IN FRONT OF BUSSE SCHOOL I believe the Village has the following options to discuss and explore concerning parking on the parkway of Busse School. The Village could move the car stops that are presently between the parking spaces and the sidewalk out to the curb so that cars cannot park on the parkway. This would involve a few hours of labor of Public Works and could be scheduled within a two-week period of time with relatively minimal cost to the Village. The Village could remove the asphalt and have it replaced with grass seed. This would cost approximately $6,800. In the alternative, it could be replaced with sod at a cost of approximately $9,500. Additionally, if the Board wishes to remove the parking on the parkway, we could have this work done immediately or opt to wait until mid-June when the Creative Children's Academy is out of school. The work done at that time would be less of an inconvenience to the school program since notices could then go out at the beginning of the next school year indicating that parking and dropping off of children could not take place on that side of the building. The Suzuki Academy goes throughout the year but has a lesser schedule during the summer. Staff would be happy to explore any other suggested alternatives that may be raised as well. JOHN FULTOVDIXON JFD/rcw Village of ,,_,Jount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR GERALD L. FARLEY AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM: VILLAGE MANAGER DATE: FEBRUARY 9, 1990 SUBJECT: PART-TIME EMPLOYEE BENEFITS The Village of Mount Prospect has utilized part-time employees to enhance the productivity of the Village. We continue to utilize part-time employees when it is attractive to do so. We have had some problems in the last couple of years concerning attrition of these part-time employees because there are no benefits granted to part-time people. I am requesting that the Board reconsider this position and grant Holiday and Vacation pay in relationship to the percentage of time that the part-time person is employed. It should be clear that there is a distinction between part-time employees and seasonal employees. I am not recommending there be benefits for seasonable employees including the category of Crossing Guards. For part-time employees, I am suggesting that after a period of one year of employment that the employee would be paid 50% of the normal work hours for any day in which they are scheduled to work but did not work because the Village had an official Holiday. The Village recognizes eight specific Holidays throughout the year. For Vacation pay, I would also suggest that after the part-time employee has been employed for one full year, they would be granted vacation pay at 50% of their normal two weeks schedule up to a maximum of 40 hours. The time would be granted on an employee's anniversary date and would be good for 12 months and if not used, it would not be carried over and it would be lost. In the requested budget, there are 45 part-time positions. Seven are Elected Officials, 15 are Crossing Guards and one Blood Donor Chairperson. I do not believe any of the above classifications would qualify. Of the 22 positions that remain, 15 people would qualify by meeting the one year employment with the Village. The estimated cost of these benefits in the 1990-1991 fiscal year would be approximately $10,000. This figure is arrived at in the following manner: 8 Holidays @ 4 hours = 32 hours Vacation time (maximum) = 40 hours Hours per Employee 72 hours Number of Employees X 15 Total Hours 1,080 Average Rate TOTAL AMOUNT $9,720 I realize the amount will increase in future years but I believe it is an equitable and a reasonable amount that will be beneficial not only to the employee but also to the Village. JOHN FULTON DIXON JFD/rcw Mount Prospect Public Works Department 7EM CrrV USA INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Village Manager FROM: Deputy Director Public Works DATE: February 1, 1990 SUBJ: Yard Material Collection - Brochures In conjunction with the upcoming start of the Village's Yard Material Collection Program the Recycling commission has devel- oped a packet of information that they would like mailed to all Village residents. This packet includes three articles (at- tached). The first is a letter from the Mayor introducing and summarizing the program, the second is a brochure in a question and answer format outlining the new regulations, and the third is a brochure showing the benefits to leaving grass clippings where they fall. It is the plan of the Recycling Commission to have these packets mailed the first week of March, a week before the bags will be available and prior to the April 1st start date. The following prices were secured from two local printers for the printing, stuffing and mailing of these packets: V & G Printers, Inc. $ 8,730.00 R -Printing Co. 11,096.00 Added to the above cost there would be approximately $2,500.00 in postage. I therefore request that the Village Board waive the bidding process and award a contract to V & G Printing, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $8,730.00 Glen R. Andler I concur with this recommendation. b��, & Z/Z Herbert L. Wee GRA/eh cc: Lisa Angell Recycling Commission - W - Village of Mount Prospect OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 100 S. Emerson Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 Gerald L. Farley Rhone: 70e / 392-6000 Mayor Dear Resident, CONGRATULATIONS! SINCE AUGUST OF 1989 THE RESIDENTS OF MOUNT PROSPECT HAVE DIVERTED OVER 147 GARBAGE TRUCKLOADS OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS FROM THE LANDFILL. On behalf of the Board of Trustees and the Recycling Commission I would like to thank you for your support and participation in the recycling program. As you can see from the above figure your efforts are making a positive contribution in reducing the Village's solid waste stream. Throughout the past several months many of us have modified our disposal habits, and although it may require a few minutes of work, it is not the inconvenience we had anticipated. As with most new ventures though, fear of the unknown is often times the greatest barrier to overcome when seeking a positive change. With a monthly participation rate of 75% we have clearly demonstrated our ability to change our disposal habits and a commitment to a healthier environment. As you are aware, yard materials will no longer be accepted in Illinois landfills. Admittedly, the loss of landfill space for large volume materials such as grass clippings, leaves and brush is a concern. However, in view of the solid waste crisis, we feel the yard material issue can be addressed with positive resolve. Did you know that 20% of total waste going to the landfills is yard material? For many years the Village, with your support has diverted tons of leaves from the landfill through the fall leaf program. This year alone Public Works crews collected over 7,000 cubic yards (276 garbage truckloads) of leaves for disposal at an organic farm. It is the Village's intent to provide an equally effective, as well as, equitable approach for the disposal of other yard materials. Therefore, the Village Board of Trustees has passed the following measures for yard material collection and disposal. Residents are encouraged to leave their grass clippings on their lawns and/or use them as compost. However, recognizing this may not be an acceptable practice to some a bag system has been implemented. 1) Effective April 1, 1990 Browning FeZris Industries will provide curbside collection of bagged grass clippings and garden materials. Residents choosing to bag yard materials will be required to purchase biodegradable paper bags imprinted with the Village logo. The cost of the bag will be the sole responsibility of the resident. The price of the bag also includes the fee for collection and disposal. Collection by the scavenger will be weekly from April I through November 30. The 30 gallon biodegradable paper bags will be available'to residents at various retail sites throughout the Village, Village Hall and Public Works. 2) Brush collection will be available to all residents eight times a year, April 1 through November 30. The monthly pick up will be the first full week of the month. The Village will pay an additional fee per home/per month for this service. Enclosed please find an informational brochure outlining the new yard materials policy. I also encourage you to read the brochure on grass clippings as you will find valuable information on lawn care. Although some of you may not be directly affected by the new policy, ie, residents residing in multi -family units, commercial and industrial businesses, it is important you are aware of the state law banning yard materials in landfills as it applies to lawn maintenance of all properties regardless of zoning. (A separate mailing will be directed to property owners/managers of multi -family dwellings, commercial and industrial businesses.) The solid waste crisis is not only an issue facing Illinois residents but is seriously affecting the environment throughout North America. However, I am confident with your support and efforts we can secure a healthier environment for generations to come. Sincerely, Mayor Gerald L. Farley FINANCE COMMISSION Minutes of the Meeting February 1. 1990 Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. Commission members in attendance were Richard 8achhvber, povl Davies, John Engel, Vince Croo^ucinski, and Jim Morrison. Also present were Finance Director David Jepson, Assistant Finance Director Carol Widmer, and Jay Fritz, Dolores Haugh, Peo% Hmofert, and Wolter Rutkowski, members or the Mount Prospect Historical Society Board of Directors. II Approval of Minutes The minutes of the January 4, 1990 meeting were accepted as presented. III Mount Prospect Historical Society Dolores Haugh presented background information to the Finance Commission regarding the efforts of the Historical Society to renovate the property at 101-103 South Maple Street. Restoration costs were estimated to be $50,000 when the work began in 1989 and the Society planned to have the work performed over o two-year period. However, as work began the Society found that the repairs would have to be more extensive than they originally planned. Code requirements also added to the original estimate. The revised estimate is now $200,000 of which $120,000 remains to be raised, The Historical Society believes their fund reining efforts will generate $30,000 in each of the next two years and they have requested that the Village match the amount they raise up to a maximum of $30,000 for each year, Jay Fritz reviewed the Historical Society's operating budget. They currently have $14,000 in cash rnanrvne and for 1990 they estimate revenues of $30,000 and expenses of $26,000 which will add an additional $4,000 to their reserves. After a discussion period, a motion was the Village Board match funds raised by of $30,000 for. each of the next two formal recommendation from the Finance Village eoard, IV Finance Director Report made by Jim Morrison recommending that the Historical Society up to a maximum years. It was seconded and neeaeU. A Commission will be presented to the David Jepson presented a preview of the Village's 19e0/91 Budget. The proposed Budget for 1990/91 is $48,079,625, Dave explained that the informa- tion in the Budget flows from the Introductory Section which includes o letter from the village Manager highlighting significant items in the Budget down to departmental bvdgetm. Each department budget begins with a narrative descrip- tion of the department's budget followed by program totals and then line item detail for each program. & detailed description of personal aorvimso and capital expenditures completes each department section. ue*e also presented to the Finance Commission m copy of a report on personal services prepared in response to a request by Trustee Yen Cnew. The report provides detailed information on each department and total Village pigvnna over a four-year period from 1987/88 through the proposed 1990/91 fiscal year on salaries and benefits fbrthree classes of employees --full-time, part-time, and seasonal. The next meeting is scheduled for February 8 followed by meetings on February 22, March 8, March 22' and March 29. The meeting was adjourned at Respectfully Submitted AGENDA MOUNT PROSPECT RECYCLING COMMISSION February 15, 1990 Conference Room B, Public Works Facility 1700 West Central Road 7:30 PM I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES JANUARY 18, 1990 MEETING IV. COMMUNITY FORUM V. REVIEW CURBSIDE PROGRAM DATA VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Yard Material Program Status 1) Review Program Instructional and Promotional Materials 2) Bag - Bid Results 3) Speakers Bureau 4) Mount Prospect Park District - Classes/Seminars B. Transfer Site C. Alternate Markets for Newspaper - Animal Bedding D. Household Hazardous Materials E. Multifamily Service - Funding Sources F. Recycling Participation Mt. Prospect Park District G. Chamber of Commerce Expo March 2, 3 and 4 1) Commission Work Schedule 2) Display VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Request for Speaker - St. Raymond's Scout Troop B. Other VIII. NEXT MEETING IX. ADJOURNMENT MOUNT PROSPECT RECYCLING COMMISSION January 18, 1990 Meeting Minutes PRESENT: Dick Bachhuber, Elizabeth Herbert, Paul Hoefert, Joe Kubik George Luteri, Steve Polit, Brian Robertson and Mary Winkler. Herbert L. Weeks and Lisa Angell, Public Works Staff ABSENT: Ken Westlake and Glen Andler The meeting was called to order at 7:40 PM by Vice Chairman Steve Polit. The following typographical corrections were made to the December 14, 1989 meeting: 1) Absent: Brian Robertson and Elizabeth Herbert 2) 3rd page, under E. Response from newspapers: legislation 3) 3rd page, under B. Large appliances: PCB capacitors With the above noted corrections the minutes were approved. In an effort to provide residents and other interested parties an opportunity to speak earlier in the meeting, Community Forum has been added to the agenda and follows approval of the minutes. However, there were no residents in attendance at the meeting. Before moving on to the next item on the agenda Steve Polit asked if there were any topics not listed on the agenda that members would like to discuss. George Luteri stated he would like to update the Commission on his inquiries into the use of paper for animal bedding. Herbert Weeks stated he would like the Commission to draft a letter for the Newsletter which would clarify to residents that the Village's yard material policy is a result of state statute. At this time Lisa Angell reported the application for the Illinois EPA Household Hazardous Waste Disposal Program had been submitted. According to an EPA official there are over 30 applicants of which only 4 or 5 will be selected for sponsorship. Steve Polit will call Chairman Westlake to contact the State EPA and make them aware we would be willing to work with other local applicants for a multi -community collection. Following this report the Commission returned to the agenda and reviewed the curbside program data. In addition to the drop in the paper market it was rioted that revenues were down from the other two materials as well. The Commission reviewed the per home cost for the service in comparison to program expenditures. Mr. Weeks provided insight into the cost of the program by sharing with the Commission the proposed 1990-1991 budget for solid waste. The Commission agreed efforts should be made to increase recycling, however, there was discussion as to whether money should be the focus. It was suggested the emphasis should be on diversion rate rather than money. The Commission members will try to provide motivating articles for the Village Newsletter in an attempt to increase volumes recycled. In respect to cost/labor saving measures Paul Hoefert questioned whether we encouraged residents nottoput ... their bins out weekly if they only had a few items each week. It was acknowledged that we remind residents it is only necessary to place the bin at the curb when it is full. Mary Winkler reminded the Commission of a cost savings measure identified several months ago by Glen Andler. In some southwestern city residents place all their refuse on one side of the street so the scavenger has fewer stops hence reduced collection costs. Mary strongly supports this method and suggests the Commission keep this concept in mind. Items discussed under old business: A. Yard Material 1) Village Ordinances - the ordinances have been drafted and will be mailed to Commission members for their review prior to the next Commission meeting. At this time Joe Kubik requested to share with the Commission information pertaining to the Mount Prospect Park Districts composting class listed in their class catalog. Joe asked the Commissions permission to speak with Mr. Fred Behnke, class instructor, to see if he will be encouraging residents to leave grassing clippings on their lawns. And if not to encourage him to do so. 2) Bid for Yard Material Bags - RFPs have been mailed with a bid opening date of January 30. Lisa Angell reported yard material bags made from recycled fibers were not available. She also stated the RFPs specifically requested biodegradable composting bags because of rate of degradation and resistance to moisture. At this point discussion turned to resident feedback as a result of the yard material article in the current Newsletter. Lisa Angell indicated the Public Works Department has received both positive and negative responses from the community regarding the new regulations. The question was raised whether there would be any merit in the Recycling Commission establishing an open coffee, to interact with residents and answer any questions they may have. Lisa indicated most of the time when a resident calls with a question or complaint regarding solid waste it generally needs an immediate response or action. It is only when new programs are implemented or there are changes in existing services that an informal session may be . appropriate. Mr. Weeks suggested the Public Works annual Open House may be the best vehicle in promoting interaction between residents and the Commission. The Public Works Department has a recycling display that Mr. Weeks invited the Commission members to man at the Open House May 19. The question was also raised as to whether the Public Works staff sends out literature to residents with questions regarding solid waste/ recycling. Ms. Angell stated recycling material is sent to new residents and any resident seeking additional information is sent pertinent documentation. The same prodcedure will be followed for inquiries regarding yard materials, once the brochures are available. Dick-Bachhubep,suggested we encourage residents to share in the purchase of bags to help alleviate the cost of a bundle of bags. The Commission was also made aware that the retailers, if they choose, can sell the bags individually. 3) Establish Retailers - Public Works staff have contacted 4 retailers in the community requesting their participation in the program. Two of the hardware stores gave verbal commitments and although the other two seem supportive they were not authorized to make a commitment. The list of retailers in addition to Village Hall and Public Works will be listed on the brochure as purchase sites for bags. Based on bid schedule the bags should be available for shipment March 1, 1990. 4) Report from Education and Publicity Subcommittee - Brian Robertson reported the subcommittee had met Monday, January 8 and developed the brochures to be mailed to residents. The Commission approved the brochures as well as the accompanying letter. Brian did suggest a statement in reference to brush collection occuring on the first full week of the month be added to the letter. The Commission then reviewed copies of the proposed verbage to be imprinted on the yard material bag. Following lengthy discussion a few changes were suggested as to the format and verbage. 5) BFI Compost Site - Public Works has been notified that BFI's proposed compost site has been permitted and will be available for yard materials from Mount Prospect. B. 1990 Christmas Tree Program - Public Works staff reported the 2 week program was very successful. Approximately 80% more wood chips were collected this year than in 1989. Labor and costs were reviewed with the Commission. C. Multi -family Service - Public Works staff stated the proposal for Community Development Block Grant money was not accepted. However, the service is included with the proposed 1990-1991 budget, and when available a grant application for funding from the Department of Energy and Natural Resoures (ENR) will be submitted. As Chairman Westlake was not in attendance there was no report given on his contact with the Glass Institute regarding available funding. D. Transfer Site - Mr. Weeks reported he will be meeting with the Mount Prospect Park District and the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District next week at which time the transfer site will be discussed. He also stated this project was identified in the 1990-1991 budget requests, and that grant money will be applied for through ENR. E. Recycling in Schools/Public Buildings - Public Works staff reported bins were delivered to Forest View Elementary School and ;that Holmes Junior. -High currently recycles in-house. Dr. Sutter also contacted the Public Works and stated the various schools would be contacting the office after January 16 regarding bins. Recycling bins are currently being used in the public buildings with either curbside pick up or collection by the Public Works service representative. As Public Works staff were unable to report on Mt. Prospect Park District's participation rate Steve Polit stated he would contact their office for feedback. F. Recycling Household Goods - Public Works staff have contacted several non-profit organizations to see if they would like their names listed in the Village Newsletter. The purpose is to encourage residents to recycle their household goods. The names of the organizations will be listed in the next Newsletter. As there was no other old business to discuss the meeting moved on to new business. A. Mount Prospect Recycling Station —Public Works staff reported the recycling center no longer accepts glass but if residents were interested in taking their material to buy back center they can use New Way Recycling, 542 Colfax in Palatine. Apparently the center is no longer taking glass because they may begin taking additional paper products, ie, magazines, computer paper, etc. in the future. The Commission requested Public Works staff find out if the processing center where the aluminum is taken also accepts steel cans. If so, perhaps consideration should be given to expanding the curbside program to include steel. Other - 1) Recycled Paper - Dr. Luteri gave an update on his research into the use of recycled paper for animal bedding. He has talked to sources in Wisconsin and received favorable reports. Apparently there is a definite market in agricultural areas for the material. The Commission supported Dr. Luteri's request to contact BFI to discuss this option. He stated the long-term concern is that without increased usage for newspaper it may be landfilled. 2) Village Newsletter - Mr. Weeks suggested an article be put in the Newsletter detailing the state/law regarding the ban on yard materials in the landfill. Although the Commission took no action on this particular subject, it was suggested by Steve Polit that the Commission become more involved with contributing articles to the Newsletter promoting recycling. Steve also sought input on organizing a Speakers Group among the 'Commission. Paul Hoefert indicated he would be willing to participate in such a group. The next meeting will be Thursday, February 15. As there was no other business the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 PM. Respectfully Submitted M. Lisa Angell MINUTES VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT VILLAGE BOARD AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ELK GROVE TOWNSHIP RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT TUESDAY, JANUARY 30,19" At 7:34 p.m., Mayor Farley caked the meeting to order. Present at the meeting were; Mayor Gerald Farley; Trustees Ralph ur, Mark Busse, Timothy Corcoran, Leo Floros and George Van Geem; Village Manager Dolan Dixon, Mount Prospect Fire Chief Edward. Cavello; Mount Prospect attorney James Stucko. In attendance from the print media were representatives of the Daily Herald, the Times and the Journal. Marianne Sheridan then called the Elk Grove Township Rural Fire Protection District Board to order. All Trustees were present. Also in attendance was Dick Cowen, the attorney for the District. Mayor Farley started the meeting by asking that there be a frank and candid discussion of the lawsuit concerning the Agreement that was signed in 1988 between the Elk Grove Township Rural Fire Protection District and the Village of Mount Prospect. He further indicated he wished to cooperate and explore any questions there may be concerning this Agreement. Attorney Richard Cowen for the Fire Protection District thanked Mayor Farley for calling the meeting and asked that there be a closed Executive Session meeting to explore concerns in a frank and candid manner. At 7.37 p.rn.,, it was Moved by Trustee George Van. Geem and Seconded by Trustee Busse that this meeting be moved to an Executive Session, This passed unanimously. The press was asked to leave the room. Allothers remained. At 9.02 p.m., the meeting was reopened on a Motion of Trustee Arthur and Seconded by Trustee Van Geem. There then was a Motion to adjourn by Trustee Timothy Corcoran and Seconded by Trustee Arthur. All voting aye. The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, JOHN FULTON DIXON Village Manager JFD/rcw TO: MAYOR GERALD L. FARLEY AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM: FINANCE COMMISSION DATE: 5 FEBRUARY i990 SUBJECT: FUNDING OF THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY At a meeting of the Finance Commissic-In or, I February 1990, the quest.tort of the possible funding r_,; the Historical Society was discussed at some length. Fo,_tr- members of the Society's staff headed by President Delores Hough were present and presented the backgro-.Lnd of the Society's request for monetary support From the Village. After considerable discussion, including many questions directed tID the Society's staff, the Commission voted unanimously to recommend to the Village Board that a maximum support amount of $30,000 be included in the 1990-1991 Village budget with the proviso that the amount actually available would not exceed the amount that the Society would raise through their, own efforts. -his amount -_If funding would apply to the 'rehabilitation of the Society's building crly, and would not include any of the general operational costs of the organization. Although funding for subsequent years was discussed, the Commission is making no recommendatic,ri beyond the 1,390-1991 budget year. Copies tc'. Commission members Finance Director Respectfully submitted, For the Comm scion, 'Richard A. 'Bachhl_tber, Chairman I 8:00-8:30AM 6:30-9:OOAM III. 9:00-9:30AM IV. 9:30-10:15AM V. 10:15-10:30AM VI. 10:30-11:OOAM VII. 11:00-12:OOAM VIII. 12:00-1:0013M IX. 1:00-1:30PM X. 1:30-3:0013M XI. ADJOURN AGENDA DOWNTOWN STRATEGY SESSION SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1990 COFFEE & REFRESHMENTS WELCOME & AGENDA FOR WORK SESSION -MAYOR FARLEY A. PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG. SITE DECISION B. IMPACT OF NEW PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG. ON DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT C. DIRECTIONS ON HOW TO BEST PROCEED WITH REDEVELOPMENT POSING THE PROBLEMS - VILLAGE STAFF & CONSULTANTS A. LAND USE - DAVE CLEMENTS B. PARKING - KEN FRITZ C. FINANCING - DAVE JEPSON D. PUBLIC SAFETY SUMMARY - FRED BORICH DEVELOPER PERSPECTIVE AND EXPERIENCE A. RESCORP - NORM KATZ B. NORDON INVESTMENTS - DICK BALDWIN COFFEE BREAK SMALL GROUP DISCUSSION TO TARGET PRIORITIES LUNCH & INFORMAL DISCUSSION TECHNICAL EXPERT PANEL A. LAND USE - JACOUES GOURGUECHON B. PARKING - JOHN HOLM C. FINANCIAL - ARTHUR HALL D. MARKETING - CHERYL BAXTER REVIEW OF OPTIONS IDENTIFIED BY PARTICIPANTS CONSENSUS BUILDING: REVISIT AGENDA AGREEMENT TO SEE IF GROUP HAS ACHIEVED RESOLUTION