Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW Agenda Packet 10/10/2000 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time: Mount Prospect Senior Center Tuesday, October 10, 2000 50 South Emerson Street 7:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL Mayor Gerald L. Farley Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Dennis Prikkel Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer Trustee Irvana Wilks I1. ACCEPTANCE OF DEFERRED MINUTES OF AUGUST 22, 2000 ACCEPTANCE OF DEFERRED MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 12, 2000 ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 II1. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD IV. REVIEW REVISED CORRIDOR PLAN DOCUMENT AND LOGO Wolff Clements and Associates and Graf/X Communications Group have been working with Community Development staff and the Plan Commission to develop a comprehensive set of guidelines to assist in the revitalization of important commercial corridors within the Village, At previous Committee of the Whole meetings, primary and secondary corridors were identified along with other key focal points. Subsequently, conceptual designs were developed for entry signs, banners and improvements for specific corridor locations. Considerable discussion at the previous meetings centered around the proposed "keystone logo" design. Based on commentary from Village Board and Plan Commission members and Village staff, the logo has been redesigned and the Corridor Guideline Report finalized. Wolff Clements, Graf/x Communications and Village staff would like to make what, hopefully, is a final presentation of the report and logo design. The Plan Commission has been invited to attend Tuesday evening's meeting and participate in the discussion. If the Village Board is satisfied with the logo redesign and the body of the report, staffwould recommend forwarding same on to the Plan Commission for the purpose of incorporating it into the Village's Comprehensive Plan. By incorporating this document into the Comprehensive Plan, staff is in a better position to pursue its implementation in conjunction with futura private development and redevelopment projects. Representatives from the consulting firms along with appropriate staff will be on hand to answer questions and facilitate discussion. NOTE: ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING BUT BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY NEEDS SOME ACCOMMODATION TO PARTIClPA TE~ SHOULD CONTA CT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT I00 SOUTH EMERSON, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 60056, 847/392-6000, EXTENSION 5327, TDD #847/392-6064. V. AMENDMENTS TO REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX Earlier this year, the Village Board directed staff to review that Section of the Village Code covering the requirements of our Real Estate Transfer Tax. The Real Estate Transfer Tax was first implemented in 1987. Since May 1, 1990, the Tax has been set at $3.00 for every $1,000 of value of the transaction. Many communities rely on this Tax as a significant revenue source. In 2000, it is estimated that the Village will receive approximately $650,000 in Transfer Tax revenue. While the Tax is fairly common and the $3.00 per $1,000 rate is also very prevalent, the Mount Prospect Code does vary significantly from other communities in that the Tax in Mount Prospect is imposed on the buyer rather than the seller. Of 15 area communities, which impose the Tax, only Mount Prospect and Niles require the buyer to pay. All the other communities place the responsibility for the Tax on the seller. Attached is a memorandum from Village Attorney Everette Hill and a draft Ordinance that, among other things, places the responsibility for paying the Tax on the seller. The other significant change in the Code would require the Tax to be paid on long-term leases--a common practice in current real estate transactions. Other minor drafting changes have been incorporated to make the Code Section more user friendly. The draft Ordinance is annotated for ease of reviewing changes. One policy question the Board will need to consider is whether to provide a rebate for those owners who paid the Tax as buyers under the old requirement and then find themselves subsequently having to pay the Tax again as the seller under the new requirements. Mr. Hill's memorandum frames the question and ancillary considerations that the Village Board will need to consider. On this latter point, the Finance Commission has opined that an open-ended (no time limit) rebate prevision be included in the revised Ordinance. Appropriate staff will be on hand to answer questions and facilitate discussion. VI. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT VII. ANY oTHER BUSINESS VIII. ADJOURNMENT CLOSED SESSION PERSONNEL 5 ILCS 120/2 (c) (1). "The appointment, employment, compensation, discipline, performance, or dismissal of specific employees of the public body, including hearing testimony on a complaint lodged against an employee to determine its validity." PROPERTY ACQUISITION 5 ILCS 120/2 (c) (5). "The purchase or lease of real property for the use of the public body." H:\GEN\Cowk4.genda\101000 COW Agenda.doc MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AUGUST 22, 2000 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:33 p.m. by Mayor Gerald Farley. Present at the meeting were: Trustees Richard Lohrstorfer, Dennis Prikkel, Michaele Skowron and Irvana Wilks. Absent from the meeting were: Trustees Timothy Corcoran and Paul Hoefert. Staff members present included Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Public Works Director Glen Andler, Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker, Police Sergeant John Dahlberg, Community Development Director William Cooney, Deputy Community Development Director Mike Blue and Senior Planner Judy Connqlly. I1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of Minutes from July 25, 2000. Motion made to approve the Minutes by Trustee Lohrstorfer and Seconded by Trustee Prikkel. Minutes were approved. Trustee Skowron abstained. Approval of Minutes from August 1, 2000 Special Committee of the Whole meeting. Motion made by Trustee Lohrstorfer and Seconded by Trustee Prikkel. Minutes were approved. Approval of Minutes from August 8, 2000. Motion made by Trustee Wilks and Seconded by Trustee Skowron. Trustee Prikkel requested a change in the language regarding the consensus recommendation from the Board concerning Community Center use for senior activities. Minutes were approved with the modification. III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. IV. WISCONSIN CENTRAL/METRA NORTH CENTRAL COMMUTER LINE DOUBLE TRACK PROJECT-UPDATE Village Manager Janonis stated that the Village staff has been in discussions for at least five years with the Wisconsin Central and Metra representatives regarding the upcoming addition of a track line adjacent to the existing track that runs through the northeast portion of the Village. In the 1960s, the railroad owner at that time removed one of the tracks to make it a single line, however, with the purchase of the line by Wisconsin Central and the addition of commuter lines, traffic has increased to the point where an additional track is necessary to handle the traffic volume. Village staff has worked diligently to minimize the impact on the adjacent residents near the Prospect Heights station including the erection of a fence and location of the boarding platform. The second track will be located to the west side of the existing track with the platform in between and construction is slated to begin in September of this year. Construction drawings have been received and reviewed and are consistent with previous commitments made by Wisconsin Central and Metra. Staff has also worked to close the pdvate crossing in the unincorporated area of Mount Prospect referred to as Morrison Avenue. The closing and relocation of the entrance to this private parcel will relieve the train engineers from blowing their whistle at this uncontrolled intersection in the future, Staff has also prepared cost estimates and purchase agreements to install quick- curb at Emmerson and Euclid if in fact the Federal Railroad Association (FRA) requires whistles to be blown at that intersection. Previous commitments from FRA have stated that if a physical device is installed to keep drivers from going around the gates, they would not require a whistle being blown. He stated the screening fence that is currently in place behind the residents adjacent to the existing platform will be removed during the construction process but reinstalled. It is his intention to put together a Resident information Bulletin for home delivery this week to provide information to the residents along the track line. This item was for information purposes only and required no Board action. V. ROUTE 83 RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT - UPATE Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker provided a progress report regarding the construction and stated that the Phase I portion of the project regarding the east side of the street is almost completed. There was a pouring of concrete all day today and another one will be scheduled for this coming Friday. He stated the bridge for the east of the road will be completed within two weeks and IDOT has approved overtime to make sure the bridge construction portion is brought back on schedule. He stated several factors including a labor strike, structural steel shortage and utility location issues have caused the project to fall slightly behind but two-way traffic is still expected by Thanksgiving and the traffic should be shifted to the newly paved east side within three weeks. He does not expect permanent traffic signals, right-of-way restoration and other final items to be completed until next spring. Police Sergeant John Dahlberg provided an overview of the Police activities during the construction process. He stated the Police Department has stepped up enforcement along Emerson and has written almost 250 citations for either speeding or Stop sign violations along Emerson. He stated that the Police and Village staff have spent substantial time addressing the traffic issues of not only Emerson but also adjacent streets in which traffic is found as an alternative to Route 83 during the construction. He stated that Public Works has been very responsive ~n putting up additional signage within short turn-around periods to improve the flow of traffic through the area. He stated discussions with IDOT have been fruitful in altering the signal timing for the traffic lights and Police personnel have been located at strategic intersections in an effort to educate drivers during the process. He stated that currently Officers are assigned to Prospect and Emerson in the evenings to improve the flow of traffic at that intersection. He stated that even after the left turn from Prospect to northbound 83 was instituted with extensive signage and barricades, 12 citations were issued for people ignoring the signage and barricades. Public Works Director Glen Andler stated that he has retained a Traffic Consultant to assist the Village in suggesting alternatives to the ICC in reviewing the staff suggestions regarding the intersection of Prospect Avenue and Route 83 near the tracks. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: A number of Trustees stated that this project has been a model of cooperation between different agencies and have recognized the extensive staff commitment to make the project move along as smoothly as possible. John Korn, 301 North William, spoke. He referred to a recent article in the Daily Herald newspaper which referred to the construction being completed next year. He felt the article was not entirely accurate due to the fact that only restoration would be completed next year and it appears as if the construction process itself should be completed on time. He suggested Village staff correct these misstatements by the newspaper. VI, MISCELLANEOUS ZONING ISSUES DISCUSSION Community Development Director Bill Cooney stated that there are three major issues that he is bringing forward this evening for general discussion and comment. Those items include lot coverage, tear downs and oversized garages. Lot Coverage This is defined as the amount of land covered by a structure or improvements to a piece of property and the ratios that are established in the current Ordinance are based on the various Zoning Districts. Several items impact lot coverage including storm water runoff and aesthetics to the property and neighboring properties. Some of the staff issues that arise with lot coverage discussions include situations where lot coverage is exceeded as existing and when a resident wants to come in to replace a deck, a patio or a driveway, they are informed they cannot replace such an improvement due to them exceeding the lot coverage. Unfortunately, many of the improvements to a large number of homes in the Village were either built in the County or built when Codes were substantially different. There are several options available for consideration including leaving the lot coverage ratios the same, or credit different amounts of.coverages as a percentage of the total, or allow administrative flexibility in allowing residents to restore existing non-conforming coverage. Tear Downs This is defined as the removal or substantial rebuild of single-family homes. This is a significant reinvestment in the community and in the housing stock within the community. While the impact on the neighborhoods may be based on various judgmental differences, the phenomenon has occurred on a very limited basis in Mount Prospect to date. Other communities have taken different approaches to this single-family redevelopment. Oversize Garages Community Development Director Bill Cooney stated it is quite typical that residents have submitted plans for significantly larger structures than current allowed by Code and the Zoning Board of Appeals is involved in considering all garages under 600 square feet. It has been very difficult to define hardship as required by the Code for a significantly larger garage than allowed by Code. General comments from the Village Board members included the following items: There was a concern regarding the definition of hardship for Variation and whether such hardship is consistently used in Mount Prospect as other communities. There was also a suggestion that some consideration be considered for lot coverage related to a ratio of the lot size. Several Board members stated they did not necessarily see an issue with allowing replacement in-kind for structures that are currently non-conforming. There were also some comments regarding the consideration for the administrative option for allowing a percentage of Variation with certain conditions regarding replacement of existing structures. Generally, the Board members felt that additional study needs to be undertaken regarding tear down and rebuild of single-family homes. There was also a concern raised regarding retaining affordable housing within the community and whether the community is at any legal exposure. It was suggested that the ZBA be offered the opportunity to provide input regarding these subjects for the Board to consider. VII, VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT None. VIII. ANYOTHER BUSINESS None. CLOSED SESSION Motion made by Trustee Wilks and Seconded by Trustee Lohrstorfer to move into Closed Session to discuss Personnel, Litigation and Property Acquisition. Meeting adjourned into Closed Session at 9:17 p.m. Meeting reconvened into open session at 10:29 p.m. IX. ADJOURNMENT No other business was transacted and the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, DAVID STRAHL DS/fcc Assistant Village Manager H:\GEN\Cow~Vfinutes~082200 COW Minutes.doc MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE SEPTEMBER 12, 2000 - I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:31 p.m. by Mayor Gerald Farley. Present at the meeting were: Trustees Timothy Corcoran, Richard Lohrstorfer and Dennis Prikkel. Absent from the meeting were: Trustees Michaele Skowron and Irvana Wilks. Staff members present included Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Public Works Director Glen Andler, Deputy Public Works Director Sean Dorsey, Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker, Project Engineer..Joel Michalik and GIS Analyst Leanne Brehob. I1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of Minutes from August 22, 2000. Minutes were held due to the number of elected officials present at the meeting. II1. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. IV. INFORMATIONAL UPDATE ON FEMA FLOODPLAIN MAPS Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker introduced Mike Hughes of Burns & McDonnell engineering firm that performed the fieldwork on behalf of the residents. Mike Hughes, Burns and McDonnell, spoke. He stated that his firm was hired to evaluate and appeal the 1997 proposed Floodplain Map and floodway designations for the northeast corner of the Village. The appeals have been very successful and they are currently in the process of getting a letter of Map revisions processed. Maps are expected to be effective November of 2000. He stated the success of the revisions is evidenced by the fact that 106 buildings were originally identified in the floodway. With the revisions, only one building is now in the floodway. He said there were also 297 buildings originally in the floodplain. Now that number is down to 122. General comments from the Village Board members included the following items: It was pointed out the Village spent approximately $80,000 to benefit 190 homes and Trustees were very happy with the results and the funds expended on behalf of the residents to protect their investment. Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker stated that a study of Weller Creek would be considered in an additional Phase and staff continues to assist residents on a case-by-case basis regarding any Flood Map revisions necessary. V. DES PLAINES RIVER LEVEE 37 UPDATE Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker stated that this Levee is proposed for the west side of the Des Plaines River running from Euclid to Palatine Road and utilizing some Cook County Forest Preserve property. The Army Corps of Engineers has proposed a schedule which would begin construction in 2003 and the Village funding commitment could range from $855,000 to $1.5 million with a significant portion of the amount being reimbursed if the necessary funding becomes available. The available reimbursement would most likely be the difference between the $850,000 and the $1.5 million, however, the Village would have to front the money initially to participate in the process. He stated discussions are currently underway with IDOT in an effort to coordinate their proposed improvements along Milwaukee Road and some possible funding assistance. Once the Levee is constructed, it would be the responsibility of the municipalities of Mount Prospect and Prospect Heights to maintain. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: Village Board members were very thankful to the staff for continuing to monitor this project and it was suggested that the Village consider utilizing Flood Control .debt monies for the funding necessary for this project when it is necessary. VI. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS) UPDATE GIS Analyst Leanne Brehob stated there are three main elements of the GIS system that are in development. These three elements are layer creation, database integration and GIS dissemination. She stated she is in the process of developing numerous layers that would overlay the existing maps to provide additional features, which can be studied and reviewed depending on the intended purpose. She stated there has been a recent completion of the property number identification to each property address and the layers are being integrated for use with the databases as they are being developed. She hoped that the GIS information will begin to be shared with other Departments beginning early next year. II. PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT UPDATE Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker provided an overview to the Village Board regarding the status of the Accelerated Street Program. He stated the Village is in year four of the ten-year program and significant savings has been realized with the ability of staff to do the design work in-house and there has been 19.8 miles resurfaced at $177,000 per mile and 12.8 miles reconstructed at $705,000 per mile. He stated in 2001, the final year of reconstruction, all streets should be completed and at that point, resurfacing would only be necessary thereafter. He stated the streets have all been rated by a consultant and continue to be evaluated. He stated the program is on schedule and on budget and staff has experimented with several innovative methods to determine whether the street life can be extended. Results are yet to be realized for those experiments but there may be additional differences in the near future. General comments from the Village Board members included the following items: Board members were extremely complimentary in the efforts to communicate with the residents who are impacted by street reconstruction or resurfacing. VIII, VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT Village Manager Michael Janonis stated these items were provided to the Board for general information purposes and required no action but they are still critical in terms of advising the Board where various projects stand. IX. ANY OTHER BUSINESS None. X. ADJOURNMENT Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:27 p.m. Respectfully submitted, DAVID STRAFIL Assistant Village Manager DS/rcc H:\GEN\Cow~Minutes\091200 COW Minutes.doc MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:33 p.m. by Mayor Gerald Farley. Present at the meeting were: Trustees Timothy Corcoran, Paul Hoefert, Dennis Prikkel and Irvana Wilks. Absent from the meeting were: Trustees Richard Lohrstorfer and Michaele Skowron. Staff members present included Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Community Development Director William Cooney and Deputy Community Development Director Michael Blue. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of Minutes from August 22, 2000 was deferred. Approval of Minutes from September 12, 2000 was deferred. Both sets of Minutes were deferred due to the limited number of Board members present. III, CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. IV, MISCELLANEOUS ZONING ISSUE DISCUSSION Community Development Director Bill Cooney introduced the topic by stating this is a follow-up discussion from several weeks ago in which floor area ratio, minor administrative variation considerations, garage size and single-family home tear-down criteria was discussed: Floor Area Ratio Discussion He stated the floor area ratio example would be based on the lot coverage and stated that the garage size and pavement area has a significant impact on the percentage of coverage ratio which is typical depending on lot size of anywhere from .63 to .75. Staff recommends a floor area ratio amount of .50. General discussion from the Village Board members included the following items: There was a discussion regarding the maximum height of a structure and the impact of height on the structure's mass. There was also discussion regarding the definition of a hardship and the need to better define a hardship for use by the ZBA members. There was also some discussion regarding whether the redefinition of a hardship would limit people's ability to maximize the use of their property. Arlene Juracek, Chairperson of the ZBA, spoke. She stated the more subjective a hardship is defined, the more difficult it is for the members to determine whether a hardship actually exists. She would suggest the consideration of a Conditional Use and the ZBA has considered economic hardships in the past including protection of mature trees. Keith Youngquist~ member of the ZBA, spoke. He felt that the definition of a hardship could be refined to help in the decision process. Consensus of the Village Board was to retain the hardship definition as is but monitor the requests for variations due to hardships to determine whether unique circumstances are present. The Board also recommended the floor area ration to be altered .{~0. Discussion on Minor Administrative Variations Community Development Director William Cooney is suggesting administrative authority to allow residents to replace non-conforming structures if they are limited to only a 10% variance. He stated there still would be the intent to have the necessary Hearings but they would be administrative hearings and appropriate back-up material would be provided to the Village Board. General comments of the Village Board members included the following items: There was a recommendation that a trial pedod be considered regarding this administrative variation option. There was also a question regarding a piecemeal approach that would possibly compromise the administrative variation and how that would be controlled. It was also pointed out that there is a need to allow neighbor input to variation changes. Consensus of the Village Board was to establish a reasonable trial period and allow administrative variations of a minor nature primarily regarding driveway, patio and garage replacements on existing footprints. ZBA Chair Arlene Juracek spoke. She stated the hardship cannot be of the petitioner's making and would feel that the minor variance being limited to specific items is worthwhile and would support the change. Garage Size Discussion Community Development Director Cooney stated that staff has researched the option of creating a sliding scale for garage sizes based on lot size, home size and rear yard setback requirements. However, after the analysis, staff feels it is unrealistic to create a sliding scale. Therefore, staff is recommending a standard size as the permitted use and requests variations for a larger size beyond that. He is recommending the Board consider a 672 or a 720 square foot garage as a permitted use. Obviously, it is expected that in order for a garage of this size, it would still have to meet the necessary requirements on the property and if there were variations necessary, appropriate Public Hearings would be undertaken. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: Several Board members felt that a 672 square foot garage would be acceptable but there were also concerns regarding the mass of the structure upon the lot and the limitations the lot size contributes to the structure itself. Consensus of the Village Board was to alter the Zoning Code to allow 672 square foot garages as permitted uses. Single-Family Tear-Down and Design Review Community Development Director Cooney stated that other towns have dealt with this issue in different manners and has summarized those options in the back-up material provided. General comments from the Village Board members included the following items: Some Board members do not see this issue as a major problem in Mount Prospect and saw this as a good option for redevelopment and shows that Mount Prospect is a very desirable community if people are willing to invest in the property. ZBA Chair Arlene Juracek spoke. She personally welcomes the redevelopment and feels that the current restrictions in place are effective and there would not be a need to alter them at this time. Consensus of the Village Board was to monitor the number of tear-downs and rebuilds to determine whether this issue starts to reduce the number of homes overall throughout the community. Mayor Farley suggested that staff look at whether the Village can require vacant property to be planted in grass instead of maintained in gravel awaiting redevelopment. Mr. Cooney stated that he would research the option of putting the property in grass and determine whether the Village could require it. Mayor Farley also suggested some staff review regarding specific yard landscaping that retains water runoff to supplement storm water management. V, VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT Village Manager Michael Janonis stated the 2001 Budget will be available starting October 6 and the review sessions will be starting soon thereafter. VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS Mayor Farley suggested the Village consider one COW meeting per month in order to maximize the available staff and Village Board time. ~LOSED SESSION The Closed Session for Personnel was cancelled. VII. ADJOURNMENT Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:14 p.m. Respectfully submitted, DAVID STRAHL Assistant Village Manager DS/rcc H:\GEN\Cow~Minutes\092600 COW Minutes.doc Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL SANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER ~ DA~: OCTOBER 6, 2000 ~ S~CT: CONDOR DESIGN G~DEL~S - OCTOBER 10~ COW MEE~G ~ ~ ~e consulting te~ of Wolff Clemen~ and Associates ~d ~affx Communications ~oup has final~ desi~s for ~idor ~p~vemen~ ~d en~ si~s. A~ched is a copy of ~e Condor D~si~ Guidelines repo~ ~at will be discussed at ~ October 10m Commi~e of the ~ole (CO~ meeting. Rep~s~nmtiv~s of ~e consulting te~ ~ll b~ at ~ meeting to pr~nt ~e document. ~ PI~ Commission h~ been invited to p~icipate in th~ discussion. Shoul~ ~e repo~ be ~cepmble, ~ next step is to consider ~ docment ~ ~ ~ndment to ~ Comprehensiw PI~. ~is ~ll ~qu~ consideration by ~e PI~ Commi~ion at a Public He~ng, fox,ding a focal r~ommendafion ~ ~ Village Bo~d, ~d ~eir adoption of~e ~n~ent. Pl~e p~s ~h info~afion on to ~e Village Bo~d for ~ review ~d consideration. S~ ~ll be at ~e October 10, 2000 CommiRe~ of ~e ~oI~ meeting to ~swer ~y questions. /mb LAW OFFICES KLEIN, THORPE AND JENKINS, LTD. Suite 1660 Patrick A. Lucanslq, 20 North Waeker Drive Rinda y. Allison E. Kenneth Friker Chicago, Illinois 60606-2903 James V. Ferolo ~ ]~. Dempsey ....... Michael T. Jumslk Terrenee M. Barni¢le Telephone (312) 984-6400 Thomas M. Melody Bruce A, Zolna Facsimile (312) 984-6444 Lance C. Malina James P. Bartley O 12) 606-7077 Ju.le E. Heubergers Richard T. Wimmer ...... Arthur C. Thorpe Michael $. Duggan Orland Park Offic~ Michael P. O'Bfien Thomas P. Bayer I5010 S. Ravinia Avenue David J'. Fish Dennis G. Walsh Suite 17 Scott F. Ulder Orland Park, Illinois 60462 Everette M. Hill, Jr. Telephone (708) 349-3888 Of Counsei Janet N. Petsche (312) 984-6446 At, h ur C. Thorp~ Facsimile (708) 349-1506 Philippe R. Weiss TO: Michael E. Janonis Village Manager FROM: Everette M. Hill, Jr. DATE: October 5, 2000 RE: Amendment of Chapter 8, Article VIII, "Real Estate Transfer Tax" The Village Board recently directed that the Administration investigate whether the Village should shift the primary burden of our Real Estate Transfer Tax to the seller of real estate in the Village. The existing Code places this burden on the buyer. After a full investigation of all the policy and legal ramifications involved in any change, you asked that I draft an ordinance proposing such a change for consideration by the Village Board. At the same time, you suggested that since the tax has now been in effect for 13 years that it might be a good time to review Article VIII in its entirety for the purpose of addressing problems encountered by the Finance Department in administering and collecting the tax. Accordingly, please find attached a draft ordinance crafted with the assistance of Doug EIIsworth. I have made notes in the margins to indicate the changes. I have also attached a copy of the existing Article VIII. As previously stated, the principal change is found in new Section 8.802(E). This change shifts the primary burden of payment from the buyer to the seller. This is consistent with most other Illinois municipalities which have established this tax. We currently place the burden of paying the tax on the buyer, but can hold up the transfer if Mr. Michael Janonis October 5, 2000 Page 2 the seller owes fees to the Village. Quoting from Lance Malina's memo to Doug on this subject: Regarding the wisdom of maintaining the tax as primarily a burden borne by the purchaser rather than the seller, there is a certain inconsistency between placing the tax on the purchaser and yet adding conditions which have to do with the past actions of the seller. Further, given that transfer stamps are often purchased just before closing and a purchaser would probably not be aware of the skeletons in the sellers= financial closet, disclosure of hundreds or thousands of dollars owed in parking fines at the time of attempted purchase could be enough to wreck a deal based simply on a lack of adequate time. Doug also observes: Many new residents to-be complain that they did not expect to have to pay the transfer tax when they decided to purchase a home in Mount Prospect. In fact, some of them complain that they pay the tax twice, when they sell their home in another town and again when they purchase their home in Mount Prospect. The current Code reads as follows: 8.803: PRIMARY LIABILITY FOR TAX: The primary liability for payment of said tax shall be borne by the grantee or purchaser involved in any such transaction unless otherwise negotiated by contract; provided, however, it shall be unlawful for the grantee or purchaser to accept a conveyance if the transfer tax has not been paid. If the tax has not been paid and the stamps affixed to the deed, then the grantee=s title shall be subject to the lien provided in Section 8.811 of this Article and the grantee or purchaser shall be liable for payment of the tax. The tax herein levied shall be in addition to any and all other taxes. The proposed new Section reads: E. Liability for Payment The primary liability for payment of said tax shall be borne by the Grantor or Seller. It shall be unlawful for the grantor or seller to convey real property in the Village and for the grantee or purchaser to accept a Mr. Michael Janonis October 5, 2000 Page 3 conveyance if the transfer tax has not been paid. If the tax has not been paid, then the grantee's title shall be subject to the lien provided in Section 8.811 of this Article and the grantor or seller and the grantee or purchaser shall be jointly and severally liable for payment of the tax. While the primary burden for payment has shifted to the seller, we have made the seller and buyer jointly and severally liable in case the transaction slips through without stamps and we are forced to lien the real estate. We had two other objectives in making this redraft. We wanted to eliminate unfair loopholes in the law. Under the existing Code, a homeowner might be forced to pay $600.00 tax on the purchase of a $200,000 home which might be held for 15 years, while a large corporation might enter into a 75 year lease for $50,000,000 and pay nothing. This ordinance attempts to eliminate that potential loophole. Doug and I understand that it is not always easy to discover long term lease deals (there are no recording requirements), but we think that most larger ones will come to our attention. We've tried to do the same for transfers involved with buyouts and mergers. Often the transfer of real estate will form the basis of the consideration for stock transfers or buyouts. Currently, there is no tax on such a transaction. The new language of 8.802 attempts to address that situation. The third objective was to make the Article more readable and easier to administer. One other matter to take note of (but not covered in the draft and Article) is the suggestion by the Finance Commission that some kind of mitigation be included in the new Article for those who are now primarily responsible as sellers but who also paid as buyers under the old Article. This could be accomplished by creating a 100% rebate or exemption of the amount paid as a buyer or seller of property in the Village, upon proof that the applicant has: (1) paid the transfer tax as a buyer under the old Article; and (2) paid again as seller under the new Article. If the rebate/exemption concept is embraced, a major issue will be whether the amount the applicant originally paid as buyer should be rebated, or the amount the applicant paid as seller (probably a significantly larger amount). There should also be a mandate that if the applicant has already received a partial rebate under 8.804, the rebate to avoid the double hit would be limited to $1.00 per $1,000. There could also be requirements placing the burden of proof for the rebate on the applicant and that any applicant would have to submit a sworn affidavit certifying whether or not any 8.804 rebate money had already been Mr. Michael Janonis October 5, 2000 Page 4 received. The double-hit rebate could be either open ended or have a time limit applied to it. If the marginal notes state that these are not substantial changes, this means that I have tried to eliminate the "thereofs" and "heretofores" and other impractical legalese, without changing the meaning and intent of the passage. The marginal notes should explain any other changes. As always, it was a pleasure to work with Doug in creating what I believe to be a good, workable product. If you have any other questions, please contact me. cc: Mr. Doug EIIsworth ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE VIII OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION 1: Article VIII, entitled "Real Estate Transfer Tax" of the Mount Prospect Village Code shall be amended by deleting it in its entirety and inserting in lieu thereof a new Article VIII, entitled "Real Estate Transfer Tax" to be and read as follows:: 8.801. DEFINITIONS: PERSON: Any natural person, trustee, receiver, administrator, No substantive changes in the executor, conservator, assignee, trust in perpetuity, trust, Definitions. estate, firm, copartnership, joint venture, club, company, joint stock company, business trust, domestic or foreign corporation, association, syndicate, society, or any group of individuals acting as a unit, whether mutual, cooperative, fraternal, nonprofit, or otherwise. Whenever the term "person" is used in any clause prescribing and imposing a penalty, the term as applied to associations shall mean the owners or part-owners, and as applied to corporations, the officers. RECORDATION: The recording of documents transferring applicable interests with the office of the Recorder of Deeds of Cook County, illinois. VALUE: The amount of the full actual consideration for any transfer covered by this Article VIII, including the amount of any mortgage, lien or liens assumed by the grantee or purchaser. 8.802. LOCAL REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX IMPOSED: New language. Specifies the documents of A. Imposition of Tax conveyance which require A tax is imposed on the privilege of transferring certain interests in real stamps, estate in the Village. For purposes of this tax, transfer shall include the execution and delivery of any of the following: 1. Deed; 2. Assignment of Title or other beneficial interest; 3. A lease or similar contract for a term of more than thirty-five (35) years (including assignment or reassignment); 4. Articles of Agreement to Convey Deed or similar document upon the future payment of money. New language. B. Corporate Transfer This is an attempt to Transfer shall also include any corporate buyout, merger, or stock capture the transfer, where the real property in the Village is specifically valued or specifically tax on a complex set forth as consideration or a portion of the consideration, for any transfer or corporate assignment of corporate equity. real estate transfer. C. Circumstances of Transfer New, Once again, we are attempting This tax shall apply to the transfer of any of the foregoing interests in to define and property that is located within the Village and shall include, but not be limited to, close up the following circumstances: former loopholes in our taxing '[. The transfer purports to vest either a beneficial interest in or legal title to structure, the real estate; 2. The interest transferred is only the possession or use of the real estate so long as consideration is paid for the possession or use. 3. Even if the consideration is to be paid in the future or the actual transfer is to be made in the future as under Articles of Agreement. Clarifies D. Rate of Tax former 8.802.A and assesses an adminis t rat ire fee for the 2 exemption seal. Except as otherwise provided in Section 8.04, the tax shall be at the rate of $3.00 for every $1,000 or fraction of $1,000 of consideration paid for the transfer. If the real estate is transferred subject to a mortgage or similar lien or an existing mortgage is to be assumed by the transferee, the outstanding balance of the mortgage shall be added to any other consideration paid for the real estate interest. If a transaction is determined to be exempt pursuant to this Article, a fifteen dollar ($15.00) fee shall be assessed for the exemption seal. This tax shall be in addition to any and all other taxes. Shifts primary E. Liability for Payment liability for tax from buyer to The primary liability for payment of said tax shall be borne by the Grantor seller, but makes both parties or Seller. It shall be unlawful for the grantor or seller to convey real property in jointly and the Village and for the grantee or purchaser to accept a conveyance if the severally transfer tax has not been paid. If the tax has not been paid, then the grantee's liable, title shall be subject to the lien provided in Section 8.811 of this Article and the grantor or seller and the grantee or purchaser shall be jointly and severally liable for payment of the tax. Former 8.810. F. Transfers inTrust No trustee of real estate shall accept an assignment of beneficial interest in real estate located in the Village without first obtaining a statement of consideration from the assignor and assignee and unless revenue stamps in the required amount have been affixed to the assignment. New language. G. Property Ineligible for Transfer. Prohibits transfer of property if the property has No interest in property may be transferred from one person to another if code the property is in violation of any building regulation or if the legal or beneficial violations, owner of the property owes any judgment, fee or fine of any kind or nature to the Village. The sole exception shall be if the transferor obtains a letter from the Department of Community Development stating that the Department has approved the transfer in order to achieve the correction of any violations. 3 New language. H. Investigation of Documentation; Immunity. Assures that the Finance Dept. The Village shall attempt to expeditiously comply with any request for will have time to investigate transfer stamps or an exemption. In any instance, the Village shall have at least requests for three (3) business days to process the application. Under no circumstances exemption, shall the Village, its agents, officials or employees have any liability of any kind Grants or nature for any failure of the real estate transaction to close or a document to immunity to Village and be recorded because the Village attempted to verify the nature of the transaction officers for or amount owed. The applicant shall have the right under all circumstances to undertaking pay the amount that the Village asserts to be due. If proof is provided that the of such amount paid was not the actual amount due, the appropriate amount will be investigations. . - - rerunaea. 8.803. TAX ON TRANSFER OF INTERESTS IN LEASEHOLDS GREATER THAN 30 YEARS. Leasehold interests of greater than thirty (30) years shall be taxed as follows: New language. 1. Upon the execution of a lease, the tax shall be paid on the present value This is an of the net lease amount that is payable over the term of the Lease. Net attempt to capture the tax lease amount shall exclude tax and utility payments. Present value shall when the transfer be figured using the interest rate paid on one year U.S. Treasury bills on is done pursuant the date of execution of the lease. to a long term lease. Such 2. If the entire lease amount is paid in a lump sum, then the tax shall be leases are often the figured on the lump sum. equivalent of an actual sale. 3. If the transaction involved the transfer or assignment of an existing leasehold interest, then the tax shall be figured on the value of the consideration paid for the transfer plus the present value of the remaining lease term. This shall be due even if the remaining lease term is less than thirty (30) years provided the original lease was for more than thirty (30) years. 4 This is an 8.804 APPLICATION FOR REBATE. iteration of the former 8.802 (B).. It is modified to Any person who has paid the real estate transfer tax at the three dollars he consistent ($3.00) per one thousand dollar ($1,000.00) rate shall be entitled to a rebate of with the twO dollars ($2.00) for each one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) of the pumhase change of price, provided that proper application is made to the Village Finance primary liability Department and further provided that the person provides proof of the following: from buyer to seller. 1. Residential Property: a. The person shall have owned and occupied a single-family residence, townhouse or condominium unit within the corporate boundaries of the Village as his or her principal residence. Such single- family residence, townhouse or condominium unit must have been sold within two (2) years of the date of the application for rebate; and the transfer tax of $3.00/$1,000 must have been paid on such transfer; and b. Within two (2) years of the date of selling the previous residence located within the Village, the person purchased and currently occupies a single-family residence, townhouse or condominium within the Village as his or her principal residence on which the appropriate tax was also paid; or 2. Nonresidential Property: a. The person shall have owned and operated a duly licensed business within the corporate boundaries of the Village and the property on which the business was located was sold; and there was a transfer tax of $3.00/$1,000 paid on such transfer; and b. Within two (2) years of the date of sale of the previous business property located within the Village, the person purchased nonresidential property in the Village and currently operates a duly licensed business at the property on which the appropriate tax was also paid. Within thirty (30) days following the receipt of application for rebate of real estate transfer tax, the Director of Finance shall verify the information provided. If, in the opinion of the Director of Finance, the applicable criteria has been met the Director of Finance shall cause the rebate to be issued to the person applying for the rebate. 5 This is a 8.805. DECLARATION FORMS. clarification of the A. Declaration of Consideration. former 8. 804. This section now includes At the time the tax is paid, or application is made for an exemption, there language shall also be presented to the Director of Finance, on a prescribed .form, a requiring declaration of consideration signed by at least one of the sellers or grantors and proof that no Code by at least one of the purchasers or grantees involved in the transaction. The violations declaration may be signed by an attorney or agent, or by a licensed real estate exist on the salesperson or broker having knowledge or the terms of the transaction. The property and declaration shall state the full consideration for the property and shall be deemed that no fees are owed the a confidential record. Village by the seller. If the property is in a land trust and the trustees are the mere repository of record legal title with a duty of conveying the real estate only when and if directed, in writing, by the beneficiary or beneficiaries, then only the land trust and not the beneficiary or beneficiaries needs to be identified. B. Certificate of Payment, Water and Sewer Charges; Certificate of No Code Violations. In order to obtain stamps or an exemption seal, the applicant must: 1. Satisfy the Village that all water, sewer and garbage collection charges have been paid in full. 2. Submit a certification from the Department of Community Development that no building, zoning or subdivision code violations exist on the property. This is the 8.806. DOCUMENT OF CONVEYANCE. old 8. 805. It expands the type of Every document of conveyance shall show the date of the transaction documents which it evidences, the names of the grantor and grantee, and a legal description subject to of the property to which it relates. the tax from only deeds to all documents of conveyance. 6 This is the 8.807. EXEMPT TRANSACTIONS. former 8.806. T have The tax imposed by this Chapter shall not apply to the following attempted to transactions: simplify some of the language which has 1. A governmental body is the grantor; caused problems for the Finance. A governmental body is the grantee and that governmental body initiated Dept. in the the action leading to the transfer, such as an eminent domain action. If past. Additionally, the governmental body merely purchased property that was already being language offered or intended to be offered for sale, this exemption shall not apply; exempting short term and residential 3. The document of transfer only assures that the property secures a debt or leases has other obligation; been added. 4. The document of transfer, without additional consideration, confirms, corrects, modifies or supplements a previously recorded document; 5. The actual consideration is less than five hundred dollars ($500.00); 6. The deed is a tax deed; 7. The deed is a release of property which was security for a debt or other obligation; 8. A court ordered the transfer and no consideration was paid for the transfer. (If the decree is a decree of divorce, consideration shall be presumed at one-half the fair market value unless satisfactory documentary evidence to the contrary is presented); 9. A transfer between a subsidiary corporation and a parent for no consideration other than the cancellation or surrender of the subsidiary corporation's stock; 10. An actual exchange of real property when both properties are within the Village limits, except that the money difference or money's worth paid for one or the other shall not be exempt from the tax; 7 11. Transfers subject to the imposition of a documentary stamp imposed by the government of the United States, except that such deeds shall not be exempt from filing the declaration; 12. Conveyances of partition; 13. Leasehold interests of a lessee occupying the premises as a residence; 14. Any leasehold interest the term of which is less than thirty-five (35) years. This is an 8.808. EXEMPTION FOR WILLS, GUARDIANSHIPS AND iteration of CONSERVATORSHIPS. former 8. 807. Once again, I believe we have No tax shall be imposed by this Article upon delivery or transfer in the simplified following instances, provided, however, that a declaration form is filed: the language, but no 1. Transfers by will or intestacy; substantive changes have been made. 2. A decedent to an executor or administrator; 3. A minor to a guardian or from a guardian to a ward upon attaining majority; 4. An incompetent to a conservator, or similar legal representative, or from a conservator, or similar legal representative to a former incompetent upon removal or disability; 5. A bank, trust company, financial institution, insurance company or other similar entity, or nominee, custodian, or trustee, to a public officer or commission, or person designated by such officer or commission or by a court, in the taking over of its assets, in whole or in part, under State or Federal law regulating or supervising such institutions, or upon redelivery or retransfer by any such transferee or successor; A bankrupt person or a person in receivership to trustee or receiver, or upon redelivery or retransfer by any such trustee or receiver back to the bankrupt or person in receivership; 8 7. Trustee to a surviving, substitute, succeeding or additional trustee of the same trust; 8. Upon the death of a joint tenant or tenant by the entirety to the survivor or survivors. This is the 8.809. REVENUE STAMPS REQUIRED: old 8. 808. No substantive changes have This tax shall be collected by the Director of Finance through the sale of been made. revenue stamps. Such revenue stamps shall be available for sale from 8:30 a.m. The language to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday at the Village offices or at other locations that prohih±teddesignated by the Director of Finance. Prior to recording, the.revenue stamps transfer of property that shall be affixed to the deed or other instrument of conveyance. Any person was Subject to affixing a revenue stamp or stamps shall mark it with his or her initials and the a compliance day, month and year when the affixing occurs. Such markings shall be made by order has now writing or stamping in indelible ink or by perforating with a machine or punch. been moved to new Section However, the revenue stamp(s) shall not be so defaced as to prevent ready 8.805 (~). determination of the domination and genuineness. 8,810,. STATE REAL ESTATE TRANSFER DECLARATION; FILING, A signed copy of the real estate transfer declaration filed pursuant to Section 3 of the Real Estate Transfer Act of the State shall be filed with the Director of Finance by the grantor of any deed or assignor of beneficial interest within ten (10) days after delivery of the deed or assignment of beneficial interest or at the time of payment of the tax, whichever first occurs. This is an 8.811. LIEN CREATED; ENFORCEMENT. update and clarification of If a document of conveyance is filed for recordation or there is an our current 8.811. The only assignment of beneficial interest conveying real estate within the corporate limits substantive of the Village without the purchase of revenue stamps in the required amount, a change is the lien is declared against the real estate in the amount of the tax. recognition that our current tax is 300% of the state tax instead of 200%. 9 The fact that the document of conveyance does not contain an exemption seal or a Village revenue stamp in an amount equal to three (3) times the amount of State transfer taxes shall constitute constructive notice of lien. The lien may be enforced by proceedings to foreclose, as in cases of mortgages or mechanics' liens. ^ suit to foreclose this lien must be commenced within three (3) years after the date of recording the deed. Nothing shall be construed as preventing the Village from bringing a civil action to collect the tax imposed by this Chapter from any person who has the ultimate liability for payment of the same. Such suit shall include interest and penalties. use~l to be 8.812. ENFORCEMENT; SUIT FOR COLLECTION. part of 8.811. No substantive Whenever any person fails to pay any tax pursuant to this Article, or any changes. purchaser or grantee accepts a conveyance where the tax has not been paid, the Village shall bring or cause to be brought an action to enforce the payment of the tax, including interest and penalties on behalf of the Village in any court of competent jurisdiction. ;No substantive 8.813. INTEREST AND PENALTIES. change from existing 8.813. In the event of failure by any perSon to pay to the Director of Finance the required tax when due, interest shall accumulate and be due at the rate of one percent (1%) per month commencing as of the first day following the day when the tax became due. In addition, a penalty of ten percent (10%) of the tax and interest due shall be assessed and collected against any person who fails to pay the tax imposed by this Article. ;No substantive 8.814. PROCEEDS OF TAX. changes. All proceeds resulting from the imposition of the tax under this Article, including interest and penalties, shall be paid to the Village and shall be credited to and deposited in the general fund of the Village. 10 Changes the 8.815. PENALTY FOR VIOLATION. penalty for failure to pay to $1,500 In addition to the remaining provisions of this Article, any person found (previously guilty in a court of competent jurisdiction of violating, disobeying, omitting, the penalty neglecting or refusing to comply with or resisting or opposing the enforcement of ranged from any provision of this Article, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine ~ 200 to $1.ooo). of not less than one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500.00). ~ew. 8.816. NONCOMPLYING DOCUMENT OF TRANSFER. Declares documents recorded in Any transfer of real property or assignment of beneficial interest recorded violation of or registered in violation of any portion of this Article shall be null and void. The this Article Village may bring an action in a court of competent jurisdiction to direct the to be void. Recorder of Deeds to indicate the invalidity of the deed or trust document on the records. ~ew. 8.817. CONSTRUCTION OF EXEMPTIONS. Attempts to establish a rule of strict All exemptions from the taxes imposed by this Article shall be strictly and construction narrowly construed, and all other provisions of this Article shall be broadly in favor of construed in order to give effect to the intent of this Article, which is to tax all the tax. transfers of real property within the Village, unless specifically exempt. No substantive 8.818. SEVERABILITY. change from old 8.817. If any provision, clause, sentence, paragraph, section or part of this Article, or application to any person or circumstance, shall for any reason by adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid, the judgment shall not affect, impair or invalidate the remainder of this ^rticle and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances. The judgment shall be confined in its operation to the prevision, clause, sentence, paragraph or section directly involved in the controversy in which such judgment shall have been rendered and to the person or circumstances involved. It is the legislative intent of the Village Board of Trustees that this Article would have been adopted had such unconstitutional or invalid provisions, clause, sentence, paragraph, section not be included. 11 New. ~ Chapter 23, Article XXlV, Section 23, entitled "Transfer of Real Makes attempts to transfer property Property with Outstanding Violations or Obligations to Village Prohibited". in violation It shall be unlawful to lease, sell, mortgage or otherwise transfer title to any real of our Code property in the Village if (1) the property or structure is the subject of a current a municipal offense, compliance order or other lawful notice of code violation; or (2) if the owner owes an unsatisfied judgment in favor of the Village; or (3) the owner owes any fee or debt to the Village. SECTION 3: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this __ day of ,2000. Gerald L. Fadey, Village President ATTEST: Velma Lowe, Village Clerk 12 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FINANCE COMMISSION AGENDA Thursday, October 12, 2000 7:00 p.m. Village Hall Building 100 South Emerson Street 2nd Floor Conference Room I Call to Order II Approval of Minutes - Meeting of September 28, 2000 III Review of the Proposed 2001 Village Budget (Overview, Village Administration, Finance and Human Services) IV Other Business V Chairman's Report VI Finance Director's Report VII Next Meeting: Thursday, October 19, 2000, 7:00 p.m. VIII Adjournment NOTE: Any individual who would like to attend this meeting but because of a disability needs some accommodation to participate should contact the Finance Director's Office at 100 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect, (847) 392-6000, ext. 5277, TDD (847) 392-6064. FINANCE COMMISSION Minutes of the Meeting September 28, 2000 Village Hall Building I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Those present included Chairman John Kom and Commissioners Charles Bennett, Vince Grochocinski, Betty Launer and Ann Smilanic. Also present were Community Development Director Bill Cooney and Deputy Community Development Director Mike Blue, Building Inspection Commissioner Bill George, Finance Director Douglas Ellsworth, Deputy Finance Director Carol Widmer and Finance Administrative Assistant Lisa Burkemper. Commissioner George Busse arrived at 7:15 p.m. Finance Commissioner Tom Pekras was absent. Chairman John Korn advised the members that the Mayor officially re-instated Commissioner Vince Grochocinski for another term on the Finance Commission. II. Approval of Minutes The minutes were accepted as presented. III. Discussion Regarding Building Inspection Process Community Development Director Bill Cooney began by discussing several improvements made in the building division. Among the improvements noted were expanded hours of operation at the customer service counter, improved customer service counter configuration and signage, updated forms and the availability of several forms on the Village's Web Page. Mr. Cooney also discussed the new simplified walk-through penuit process provided by the addition of a plans examiner and the addition of quarterly seminars designed to educate homeowners on various home improvement topics. Commissioner Charles Bennett asked Mr. Cooney if the topics covered in the seminars require homeowners to get permits. Mr. Cooney stated that many of the jobs discussed would require permits and that they have discussed the permit process itself as a topic at seminars. Chairman John Korn asked Mr. Cooney to discuss the minor variation process that was discussed at the last Committee of the Whole Meeting. Mr. Cooney had presented to the Board a process that would help speed up the variance process on structures to be built that will replace an exist'rog structure. The process would grant Mr. Cooney the authority to allow residents to replace non-conforming structures if they are limited to only a 10% variance. This could reduce the variance process from several months to only a few weeks. Mr. Cooney discussed the fact that the number of permits issued and the number of inspections performed by the building division is well over the national average. The department is currently undermanned with three full time clerks, three full time inspectors and a part time clerk and part time inspector. Another issue discussed was the need to evaluate the fee structure, Mr. Cooney mentioned that there has not been an increase in fees in nearly 25 years. Chairman John Korn stated he felt the fee structure should be looked at and increases were necessary. Commissioner Charles Bennett was in agreement. Commissioner George Busse added that some inspections could possibly be eliminated if the need was not great. Commissioner Betty Launer added that the Web Page should list the various home improvement projects that need a permit and provide a checklist of what is needed to obtain a permit. V. Discussion Regarding Purchasing Policy and Procedures Finance Director Doug Ellsworth opened the discussion on the Village's purchasing policies and procedures. Mr. Ellswonh stated that currently the various departments handle their own purchasing and whenever possible will consolidate their efforts in joint purchasing with other departments. Commissioner George Busse stated he would like to see a study to see if the Village could get discounts by volume or contracts for ordering Village wide. Mr. Busse stated that if all the departments used the same vendor exclusively the Village could possibly be getting discounts. V. Chairman's Report Chairman John Kom began by stating that the Finance Commission needed to appoint a Secretary and would like nominations. Commissioner Betty Launer motioned to nominate Vince Grochocinski. All Commissioners were in favor. Vince Grochocinski accepted the nomination of Secretary of the Finance Commission. Chairman John Korn opened a discussion regarding the Village's Real Estate Transfer Tax. The members of the Finance Commission unanimously agreed that the tax should be charged to the seller. Commissioner George Busse made a motion stating the tax should be changed from a buyer charge to the seller. He further stated that a full rebate of the original tax paid on the purchase should be issued to seller if they can prove they paid the tax when entering the Village as a buyer. Commissioner Ann Smilanic seconded the motion. Motion carried. Chairman John Korn updated the members of the Finance Commission on various topics discussed at recent Village Board Meet'rags. VI. Finance Director's Report Mr. Ellsworth had nothing to report. VII. Other Business There was no other business discussed. VIII. Next Meeting: October 12, 2000 Commissioner Ann Smilanic motioned to adjourn and Commissioner Charles Bennett seconded. All members were in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. The next meeting is scheduled for October 12, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Burkemper Administrative Assistant 2