Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW Agenda Packet 04/10/2001 ORDER OF BUSINESS SPECIAL MEETING Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time: Mount Prospect Village Hall, 2"d Floor Tuesday 100 South Emerson Street April 10, 2001 Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 6:15 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Mayor Gerald "Skip" Farley Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Dennis Prikkel Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer Trustee Irvana Wilks III. CLOSED SESSION LITIGATION 5 ILCS 120/2 (c) (11 ) - Litigation, when an action against, affecting or on behalf of the particular public body has been filed and is pending before a court or administrative tribunal, or when the public body finds that an action is probable or imminent, in which case the basis for the finding shall be recorded and entered into the minutes of the closed meeting. IV. ADJOURNMENT COMMI'I-I'EE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time: Mount Prospect Senior Center Tuesday, April 10, 2001 50 South Emerson Street 7:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL Mayor Gerald L. FaHey Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Dennis Prikkel Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer Trustee Irvana Wilks I1. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF MARCH 13, 2001 III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD IV. REQUEST FOR WATER FROM PROSPECT HEIGHTS PARK DISTRICT AND LIBRARY DISTRICT Late in 2000, the Village Manager's office was contacted by representatives of the Prospect Heights Park District inquiring about the possibility of securing a permanent water supply from the Village of Mount Prospect. The inquiry was also made on behalf of the Prospect Heights Library District. The inquiry was prompted by the recent defeat of a Referendum in the City of Prospect Heights to secure a Lake Michigan water source. The quality of water produced by the Districts' wells apparently was resulting in costly filtration efforts and long-term damage to capital equipment. A formal request came to the Village in December of 2000 (attached). The Village Code allows for Mount Prospect to enter into Intergovernmental Agreements with entities outside of the Village corporate limits for the purpose of selling water. The Village currently has in place Agreements with the City of Prospect Heights and the Elk Grove Township Rural Fire Protection District. An Agreement with the Prospect Heights Park District would benefit a number of Mount Prospect residents as the Park District's corporate boundaries include Colony Country, Old Orchard Country Club Village and Wedgewood Terrace developments within Mount Prospect. There is no such overlap with the Prospect Heights Library District, however, their total water usage would be minimal. From the technical side, the Village's water system would have no problem providing these two entities with the volumes of water they would require. The Village already has an interconnect at the intersection of Elmhurst and Camp McDonald Roads supplying the City of Prospect. An appropriately sized water main could be extended off the intemonnect and provide service to these two entities. It is a given that all design and construction costs for the main extension would be borne by the two entities. The sale of water would be patterned after the Intergovernmental Agreements already in place with the City of Prospect Heights and the Elk Grove Township Rural Fire Protection District. NOTE: ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING BUT BECAUSE OP A DISABILITY NEEDS SOME ACCOMMODATION TO PARTICIPATE, SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT fO0 SOUTH EMERSON, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 60056, 847/392-6000, EXTENSION 5327, TDD #847/392-6064. While staff has no reservations regarding their requests from either a technical or policy standpoint, it is ultimately the Village Board's decision to enter into such an Agreement. Staff is seeking direction on how to proceed. Representatives from the two entities have been invited to attend Tuesday evening's meeting. Appropriate staff will be on hand to answer questions and facilitate discussion. V. REVIEW OF SENIOR CENTER/HUMAN SERVICES ACTIVITIES A Committee of the Whole discussion topic requested by two Board members covered a review of how the Human Services Department tracks and accounts for the services it provides to its customer base. The Finance Commission expressed a desire to undertake a similar review as part of its 2001 Work Plan. The basis for the request was to achieve a better understanding of the make-up of the Department's customer base and a better understanding of the service demands of various sub-groups within that client base; i.e., seniors, youth, indigent, etc. The Finance Commission undertook discussion of this topic at their March 22 meeting. A copy of the draft Minutes are included for your review. Basically, the Finance Commission felt that the Human Services Department clearly served a broad spectrum of community residents and that it was in the best interest of the community to more clearly identity the Department's client base. This would help to publicize the work of the Department and become a better known resource within the community. The Finance Commission also felt that changes should be made to the format of the Human Services' budget presentation. The various service categories should be broken out within the budget along with more specific program costs. Again, it was felt that this would better identify the varied activities of the Department and allow better analysis and resource allocation during the budget process. The information package provided by the Human Services Department provides a detailed outline of the various services it provides to the community, along with a glossary of terms and a breakdown of staff allocation by primary service category. This information will facilitate discussion. Appropriate staff will be in attendance. VI. VlLI,AGE MANAGER'S REPORT VII, NY ER I VIII. D~D_J_O_M.~,~. _M_ _~ H:\GEN\CowV~genda\041001 COW Agenda.doc MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MARCH 13, 2001 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:36 p.m. by Mayor Gerald Farley. Present at the meeting were: Trustees Timothy Corcoran, Paul Hoefert, Richard Lohrstorfer, Dennis Prikkel, 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 Forester Sandy Clark, Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker, Traffic Engineer Matt Lawrie, Project Engineer Donna Brown and Public Information Officer Maura Jandris. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of Minutes from February 13, 2001. Motion made by Trustee Corcoran and Seconded by Trustee Wilks to approve the Minutes. Minutes were approved. III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD George Clowes, 604 South Elm, spoke. He is appearing before the Village Board this evening to share an article that appeared in the Mount Prospect Journal on March 2, 2001 about a situation of a jogger being involved in a confrontation with a newspaper delivery person. From the information presented in the article, the delivery person apparently was ticketed although the jogger was in violation of the Village Code. He wanted to reinforce the idea that people are to use the sidewalks for such activities including jogging. Trustee Corcoran stated that there is a dilemma about forcing people to use the sidewalks due to possible trip hazards and a review of the risk should be considered. IV. WISCONSIN CENTRAL DOUBLE TRACK UPDATE Village Manager Janonis provided an overview of the planning process that has led up to the construction of the second railroad track east of the existing line and what is being done to mitigate the impact on the nearby homes. He stated there are plans for a screening fence to be installed and the closing of an uncontrolled intersection, which would no longer require the engineer to blow a warning whistle when approaching the intersection. He also stated that there will be an installation of a device to minimize illegal crossings at Euclid and he would expect the majority of the work to be completed during the summer. He stated that there were several citizens involved in coming to a solution, which did not adversely impact the residential area and commends those residents for their involvement. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: It was noted that the user projections when the original study was done to justify the station were well below what the actual ridership rates are. It was also noted that the Federal government is providing the majority of the funding. Richard Hendricks, 196 Christy Lane, Twin Lakes, Wisconsin, spoke. He stated that he was happy to see the Morrison Street crossing being closed and has a concern about the location of the tracks between Kensington and Central as to whether they will match up with the tracks being constructed further north of the line. V. 2001 ROAD CONSTRUCTION PREVIEW Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker reviewed several Village projects that are expected to be done this construction season including several State and County projects. He stated the Mt. Prospect Road crossing will be replaced during a two-week period in April and the remaining work yet to be done on Route 83 should be completed by June. He also highlighted the Village Street Lighting Project on Route 83, which will take place from May through September. He also stated Rand Road is to be resurfaced through the community and Northwest Highway will also be resurfaced. He also stated that Central Road between Arthur and Kirchoff will be resurfaced and would likely impact the traffic flow within the community even though the project is wholly outside of Mount Prospect. He stated that work continues on the downtown traffic signals. He stated that 18 streets, or 4.1 miles of street, are slated for reconstruction this season and 16 street or, 3.7 miles, are slated for resurfacing. He also stated that the Streetscape Phase 2 work will be underway this season in addition to some Weller Creek improvements. This item was presented for informational purposes only. VI. UTILITY PERMIT PROCEDURE UPDATE Traffic Engineer Matt Lawrie highlighted the right-of-way restoration issues that the Village has experienced over the last several years due to the proliferation of companies installing conduit and fiber in the Village right-of-way. He stated that Village does have a permit procedure and most companies have been following such procedure, however, it has required extensive staff time to work with the utility companies to ensure work is completed as promised. He stated, for example, during 1998, 55 Permits were requested. From 1999 to date, 550 Permits have been requested. Even though the majority of the Permits were related to the Ameritech New Media cable installation, the volume of the work is at such a level that it has become difficult to monitor the various companies. He stated it is not unusual for extensive communication between the contractor and the Village leading up to the project and then a different contractor will take over the actual digging and will cause issues unrelated to previous discussions during the pre-construction meeting. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: There was a concern raised that the rights-of-way continue to be disrupted and there needs to be accountability for what is going on in the rights-of-way. It was also suggested that a shorter restoration period be considered and a significant Bond be posted to ensure performance and completion of the Village's satisfaction. There was also concern about the disruption of the Village sidewalks and removal of equipment on a timely basis. General consensus of the Village Board was to request that staff review the procedures and see where such procedures can be improved to improve response time and improve restoration timeframe. VII. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT None. VIII, ANY OTHER BUSINESS Trustee Hoefert stated that he noticed there were audio issues related to the recent Village programs coming through the AT&T cable system and requested staff review that situation and correct as necessary. There was no Closed Session. ADJDUE LT Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted, DAVID STRAHL DS/roc Assistant Village Manager H:\GEN\Cow\Minutes\031301 COW Minutes.dcc 3 VILLAGE Of MOUNT PROSPECT HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR GERALD L. FARLEY AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM: NANCY MORGAN, HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT DATE: APRIL 4, 2001 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF THE HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT GLOSSARY OF TERMS STANDARD IN THE SOCIAL WORK PROFESSION Advocacy assists individuals in obtaining services by the professional staff making phone calls, letter writing, etc. Case Management entails assessing the complete needs of the individual, developing. a plan of care, and coordinating services for that individual. Counseling - Long Term is ongoing, with an indefinite number of counseling sessions. Counseling - Short Term is four to six counseling sessions. Elder Abuse is the abuse, neglect or exploitation of an older individual; financially, emotionally (psychologically), physically or verbally; intentional or unintentional. Hands On or Direct Services is when a professional staff' member provides services for a client face to face or over the phone. Interventions interrupt the status quo to examine, mediate or develop possible solutions to specific problems for an individual Lending Closet provides the short-term use of available medical equipment by residents. Medicare Cost Share Expenses are Medicare premiums, deductibles and co- insurance amounts that most people are expected to pay out of their own pockets. There are three programs through Public Aid that can help people pay for all or some of these expenses. (See page 3.) Outreach is when professional staff provides services at an out of office location, for example at an apartment tire, a train accident, a community disaster or a critical incident. Also, staff may provide in-home services for frail residents, which elevates the need for them to come to the office. Police Social Services provides support, referrals, advocacy, short-term counseling, etc. to families who have had an incident involving a Police Department. Practical Assistance offers help with the completion of complicated or involved paperwork/applications. Referral Services is the act of giving names of individuals, companies or agencies that may provide a service, without giving recommendations. Screenings provide medical tests to determine resident's health status and to aid in preventing ill health. Support Groups offer individuals, who have a similar focus, the opportunity to share support with one another better enabling them to endure the hardships that have brought them together. 2 EXAMPLES OF PROGRAMS THE DEPARTMENT PROVIDES THROUGH "PRACTICAL ASSISTANCE" Circuit Breaker Program - A program that may provide a yearly grant for relief from property tax, mobile home tax, rent, or nursing home charges that qualifying senior and disabled persons pay on their residences. Residents eligible for this program will also receive vehicle license plates discounts for one vehicle. Pharmaceutical Program - This is an optional benefit of the Circuit Breaker that helps pay for approved medications used for the treatment of Alzheimer's Disease Arthritis. Cancer, Diabetes, Glaucoma, Gout, Heart, High Blood Pressure, Lung Disease and Smoking Related Illnesses, and Parkinson's Disease. Medicare Cost Share Expenses programs: QMB - (Qualified Medicare Beneficiary) Individuals/couples who qualify on the basis of age, income, and assets are eligible to have their Medicare premiums, Medicare co- insurance and deductibles paid by Public Aid. SLIB - (Specified Low-Income Beneficiary) Individuals/couples who qualify on the basis of age, income, and assets are eligible to have their Medicare premiums paid by Public Aid. A little higher income is allowed than for people on the QMB. QI-2 - (Qualified Individual-2) Individuals/couples who qualify on the basis of age= income, and assets are eligible to have some of their Medicare part B premium paid. 3 THE DEPARTMENT'S FOUR BUDGETARY CATEGORIES During the mid to late 1980's, this department had a change in focus that expanded its vision from primarily working with one age group, senior citizens, to working with at-risk residents of all ages. In an effort to more clearly represent the department's programs in their proper Budget Categories, we totally reorganized the Budget Categories to more accurately reflect the department's current focus. Since the 1995 budget process, the Budget Categories have been: 01-Administration, 02-Social Services, 03-Nursing Health Services, 04-Senior Programs. The following gives a description of the four Budget Categories, examples of services, programs, supplies, etc. that are located in these Budget Categories, and pementage of time each staff member spends in these Budget Categories. Administration - Line items located in this category relate to the over all management of the department. Items used by the entire staff such as the copy machine, printing, postage, general office supplies, staff safety equipment, etc., as well as staff supervision, computer development, administrative meetings, etc. are located in this category. Below please find the percentage of time staff spends in the Administration area: Director - 45% Deputy Director- 45% Office Manager- 25% Total is equal to 1.15 FTE Social Services - Line items located in this category relate to the Social Workers programs. Programs such as Police, Bilingual, At-risk Youth/Families, and Senior Citizen Social Services, as well as Visions, Case Management, Advocacy, Practical' Assistance, Counseling, etc. are located in this category. Below please find the percentage of time staff spends in the Social Services area. (See page 6 for additional information): Director - 40% Deputy Director- 45% Social Worker - 100% Bilingual Social Worker - 100% Community Program Assistant (part time) - 100% Social Work Intern (part time) - 100% Office Manager- 40 % Secretary - 60% Total is equal to 4.82 FTE 4 Nursing Health Services - Line items located in this category relate to the Registered Nurse programs. Programs such as Blood Pressure Clinic, Cholesterol Screenings, Outreach Nursing, Immunization Clinic, Annual Health Fair, Flu Shots, Lending Closet, etc. are located in this category. Below please find the percentage of time staff spends in the Nursing Health area: Community Outreach Nurse - 95% Assistant Nurse (part time) - 100% Secretary - 15% Total is equal to 1.25 FTE Senior Programs - Line items located in this category relate to specialized programming for Senior Citizens. Although the Senior Center is included in this category, the Senior Program category is not exclusively devoted to the Senior Center. Programs such as the ElderHonor, Discount Taxi Program, Volunteer Opportunities, Senior Class and Program Registrations, etc. are located in this category. Below please find the percentage of time staff spends with Senior Programs: Director- 15% Deputy Director- 10% Community Outreach Nurse - 5% Office Manager - 35 % Secretary - 25% Total is equal to .9 FTE The Senior Center does not have a Budget Category of its own or a dedicated staff person who is in charge of developing Senior Center programs. The philosophy behind the Senior Center has been that it is a "Seniors Helping Seniors" Senior Center. Traditionally, there has been a great deal of volunteer involvement from the sen~ors themselves, especially from the Senior Citizens Advisory Council in developing programming ideas. Some senior citizens have actually volunteered to be class instructors, program leaders and have been in-charge of opening and closing the building dudng non-business hours, The format in which our Senior Center has developed is actually quite unique. Many communities have a Senior Center with a separate budget and dedicated staff. Many are located in a stand-alone building or in a building with related recreational activities for other age groups. Combining the Senior Center with Social Services and Health Services of the Human Services Department has been the most economical way of providing senior activities for residents. This is not to say that this is the best way to organize the senior activities of a Senior Center, but it is definitely the most economical way of providing these activities. 5 ESTIMATE OF STAFF'S TIME WORKING WITH THE SENIOR CENTER Although the department does not break down the pementage of staff's time spent with the Senior Center, the following is an estimate of this breakdown: Senior Program Other Senior Staff Bud.qet Cateqory Senior Center* Programs** Director 15% 10% 5% Deputy Director 10% 5% 5% Community Health RN 5% 0% 5% Office Manager 35% 25% 10% Secretary/Receptionist 25% 20% 5% Of the 8.12 FTE's in the Human Services Department, .6 FTE or 7.3% of staff's time ~s spent working with the Senior Center. * Class development, class/program registration, room set-up, refreshments etc. **ElderHonor, Discount Taxi-Cab Program, Volunteer Recruitment, etc. SENIOR CENTER OERATION COSTS Because the Senior Center is operated within the Human Services Department without dedicated budget or staff, its operational costs have traditionally blended in with the' whole of the Human Services budget. In our current examination of this department's priorities concerning the Senior Center, this "blending" makes it difficult to easily see the cost of the Senior Center's operation. The Senior Center's operational costs are a percentage of the whole Senior Program Budget Category plus a very small percentage of the Administration Budget Category. By using the estimated percentage of staff salaries, fringe benefits and budget line items from these two categories of the Estimated 2000 Human Services Budget, and offsetting that amount with specific Senior Center revenues from the year 2000, the total operating cost of the Senior Center is $32,500. The Human Services Estimated Budget for the year 2000 was $607,212. The amount spent on the Senior Center was less than 5%% of the total budget. 6 USAGE OF SENIOR CENTER BUILDING BY SENIOR CITIZENS FOR THE YEAR 2000 ANNUAL WEEKLY ACTIVITY PARTICIPATION AVERAGE RECREATIONAL 26,006 500 Bingo, Chorus, Diner's Special, Drop-ins, Evening Pinochle, Friday A.M. Bddge, Fdday P.M. Bridge, Grandmother's Club, Line Dancing, Men's Club, Monday Bridge, Open Door Social, St. Raymond's Club, Senior Center Anniversary Party and Indoor Picnic, Sunday Activities, Tai Chi, Tea In Paradise, Women's Club Bridge, Women's Club Card Party, Women's Club Pinochle, Young At Heart. BUS TRIPS 1,128 22 EDUCATIONAL 2,456 47 Advisory Council meetings, Ceramics Class, Computer Class, Driver Refresher, Exercise Class, Health Awareness Class, Investment Class, Investment Club, Sewing Class, What's Up Discussion Group. MISCELLANEOUS* 6,026 116 Caregivers Support Group, Cholesterol Screening, Circuit Breakers, Flu Shots, Hearing Screening, Income Tax Assistance, Monday Blood Pressure Clinic, VIP Medical Assistance, Village Tax Rebate Program. Total 35,616 685 * Senior Citizens are primary participants. 7 ESTIMATE OF STAFF'S TIME SPENT IN THE AREAS OF YOUTH, ADULTS, FAMILIES AND SENIORS REGARDING THE SOCIAL SERVICES BUDGET CATEGORY Although the department does not break down the percentage of time Social Services Budget Category spends in the specific areas of Youth, Adult, Family and Senior Citizen, the following is an estimate of the professional staff's time spent in these four categories: Director (40% in Social Services) Youth 4% Adults 4% Families 26% Seniors 6% Deputy Director (45% in Social Services) Families 2.25% Seniors 42.75% Social Worker (100% in Social Services) Youth 25% Adults 25% Families 30% Seniors 20% Bilingual Social Worker (100% in Social Services) Youth 10% Adults 30% Families55% Seniors 5% Community Program Asst. (100% in Social Services) Youth 80% Family 20% Social Work Intern (100% in Social Services) Youth 35% Adults 30% Families 20% Seniors 15% Average Percentage of Staff Time Spent in the Four Areas of Social Services Budget Category: Youth 25.66% Adults 14.83% Families 25.54% Seniors 14.79% 8 UNITS OF SERVICE DEFINITION It is the perspective of this department that regardless of the time spent with a client, the actual service provided is the critical factor. Because of this perspective, we feel it is important to define a Unit of Service as the accounting of each service provided to a client. For example, an individual receiving Short Term Counseling would equal one Unit of Service for each counseling session. In another example, a resident could come in for help with Practical Assistance, and receive additional services of Advocacy and Case Management. That person would have received three units of service. The time spent with each resident was the same but there was a different count of services provided or Unit of Service. In another example, a social worker may spend three hours filling out fifteen Circuit Breaker applications with residents. While it takes approximately twelve minutes to complete one application and every Cimuit Breaker application is counted as one Unit of Service, each client was helped to receive up to $700 cash back from the state, assistance with prescriptions that could well exceed $2,000, and a discount on their license sticker of $54. In another example, a social worker may spend an hour talking with a lonely individual about volunteer opportunities. That is one Unit of Service. In these four examples, twenty Units of Service were provided to eighteen clients. For each one of these Units of Service, the service is the critical factor to count. Different services vary in the amount of time they take to complete. The length of time spent with a client or the number of clients seen is not the critical factor with Units of Service. The reality regarding the accounting of services provided by this department is that they are undercounted due to the fast pace, high volume, multi-dynamic situations dealt with simultaneously by staff. The pementage of time staff spends in the four Budget Categories is calculated and used when developing the annual budget. The pementage of time is used to determine the correct allocation of funds allotted to each budget area. To recap, the Unit of Service is used to reflect actual numbers of services. Time Spent is used to reflect staff's time for budgetary purposes. H:\GEN~NLOU~HSDglossary.doc 9 FINANCE COMMISSION M SOF TING DRAFT MARC~ 22, 2001 VILLAGE HALL BUILDING I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Those present included Chairman John Korn and Commissioners Charles Bennett, George Bnsse, Vince Grochocinski, Tom Pekras and Ann Smilanic. Also present were Village Manager Michael Janonis; Community Development Director Bill Cooney, Community Development Deputy Director of Community Development Mike Blue, Building Division Coordinator Bill George, Director of Human Services Nancy Morgan, Deputy Director of Human Services Jan Abemethy, Finance Director Douglas Ellsworth, Deputy Finance Director Carol Widmer and Finance Administrative Assistant Lisa Burkemper. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Tom Pekras motioned to approve the minutes of January 25, 2001 seconded by Commissioner Charles Bennett, the minutes were accepted as presented. III. DISCUSSION REGARDING BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS AND PERMIT FEE INCREASE Commissioner George Busse began the discussion by asking Mr. Cooney if the commission could see a list of the different types of permits issued, how many of each is issued and what the particular costs for the various permits are. Mr. Busse also asked what the historical growth bas been in the number of permits issued as well as the number of inspections performed. Community Development Deputy Dkector Mike Blue stated that the number of inspections ~s growing at a faster rate than permits. Currently there are approximately four inspections performed for each permit issued. Building Division Coordinator Bill George provided examples of several scenarios in which permits are issued and how from beginning to end the process works. He provided examples of the various inspections that are performed along with examples of the work involved throughout the inspection process and lastly, how final approval of a project is achieved. Chairman John Korn complimented Community Development Director Bill Cooney for the article in the Village Newsletter about planning a construction project. Mr. Korn stated that the article would be very helpful to residents who are having work done on their homes. IV. DISCUSSION REGARDING HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT PROGRAMS, RESOURCE ALLOCATION AND LONG-TERM FUNDING Commissioner George Busse stated that he would like clarification on how time is allocated within the department and how money is allocated and if it can be allocated more effectively. Commissioner Ann Smilanic stated she thinks that most people in the Village think Human Services is for Senior's only. Human Services Director Nancy Morgan began with an overview of the history of the Human Services Department. Ms: Morgan stated how the department has evolved from providing only senior activities and services to the addition of services for families and youth's, home nursing care and social services and finally Community Programs. Commissioner George Busse said he would like to see the budget reflect more specific categories within the Human Services Department. Mr. Busse would like to see the budget reflect the following categories: I-Administration, 2-Nursing, 3-Youth, 4-Social Services, 5-Recreation and Education. The commission would like to change the perception that seniors come first, therefore they agreed that Human Services should modify the way they advertise the various services they provide. Commissioner George Busse also mentioned that Human Services should review how and where their money is spent. Mr. Busse suggested that Human Services look at spending money on the programs that will make the biggest impact and have the most interest. V. DISCUSSION REGARDING MULTIPLE BOND RATINGS Finance Director Doug Ellsworth led a discussion on whether the village should go out and solicit for two bond ratings. Mr. Ellsworth stated the advantages and disadvantages of obtaining two bond ratings. After an in-depth discussion, the commission agreed that they did not see a valid reason to solicit for two ratings. Commissioner George Busse motioned that the village should continue to use only one bond rating. Commissioner Tom Pekras seconded the motion. All commissioners voted in favor of the motion. VI. DISCUSSION REGARDING CREDIT/DEBIT CARD ACCEPTANCE Finance Director Doug Ellsworth led a discussion on the possibility of accePting credit/debit cards for customer service transactions throughout the village. One dilemma mentioned by Mr. Ellsworth was the fact that there are mandatory fees imposed by the credit card companies that the village would be responsible for. If the village were to enhance their customer service and accept credit/debit card payments the cost of providing this service would be 2-3 % of the transaction. Commissioner George Busse asked Mr. Ellsworth approximately how much money this would be _a year. Mr. Ellsworth stated that it could quite possibly equate to $20,000 - $25,000'a year. There was an open discussion by commissioners on their views on the acceptance of the cards and most members voiced their opinion against acceptance. They felt that there was not enough of a demand at this time from the residents to warrant the need for the cards acceptance. Commissioner George Busse motioned to not accept credit/debit cards at this time, which was seconded by Commissioner Ann Smilanic with all commissioners in favor. VII. OTHER BUSINESS Chairman John Korn handed out a draft of a letter to Mayor Gerald Farley regarding the Finance Commissions dissatisfaction with how some departments have asked for additional funds for their budget. He stated this letter would be typed and distributed to the appropriate individuals. 2 VIII. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT Chairman John Korn summarized the topics discussed at several of the most recent board meetings. Mr. Korn mentioned that the Manager's office was putting together a survey that will be distributed to new residents to see what they like or what attracted them to the village. The Finance Commission feels that the survey should target the residents that are leaving the village instead. The commission feels that the value of the new residenfis input is less valuable than that of the resident who is leaving. IX. FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Finance Director Douglas Ellsworth advised the Finance Commission that Pre Budget meetings will begin next month and that the Police Department, Fire Department and Community Development Department are scheduled for the meeting in April. X. Next Meeting: April 26, 2001 Commissioner Ann Smilanic motioned to adjourn and Commissioner Tom Pekras seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. The next meeting will be April 26~. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Burkemper Administrative Assistant Finance Department 3