Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW Agenda Packet 07/13/2010 of 4flo,■1 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time: Mount Prospect Village Hall Tuesday, July 13, 2010 50 South Emerson Street 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER- ROLL CALL Mayor Irvana K. Wilks Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Arlene Juracek Trustee John Korn Trustee John Matuszak Trustee Steven Polit Trustee Michael Zadel II. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTESOF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MAY 11,2010 ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 8, 2010 III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD IV. 2011 -2015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN In 1997, the Village Board formally adopted its first comprehensive 5 -year Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). In previous years, the Village used a number of separate documents in its capital projects planning. While each of these documents was useful in its own right, none offered an overall picture of the Village's capital needs. The establishment of a formal 5 -year Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) provides a comprehensive view of the Village's capital needs for consecutive rolling five -year windows. The proposed 2011 -2015 CIP is generally comprised of projects that involve the purchase or construction of long - lived, tangible assets at a cost of $25,000 or more. The total cost of all requests for all years included in the plan is approximately $54.1 million. Many of the requests in the plan are simply continuations of established projects. Others are projects not currently in progress but have been discussed by the Village Board on previous occasions. Some requests are being presented for the first time through the CIP. Given that the CIP is intended to afford a comprehensive view of the Village's capital needs, it is fitting that all of these project requests be included in the proposed plan. Of the $54.1 million of project requests included in the proposed CIP, $40.4 million, or 74.6 %, is for the continuation of established projects including approximately $17.8 million for street resurfacing. A project's inclusion in the CIP does not guarantee its funding and accomplishment. The CIP is a planning document. As such, it is subject to change. The CIP is reviewed and updated on an annual basis. The next CIP will cover the years 2012 through 2016. 1 2011 project requests included in the proposed CIP amount to $6.7 million. This is a decrease of $1.1 million from first -year projects in the 2010 -2014 CIP. First -year projects in 2011 include the ongoing street program, improvements to the water and sewer system infrastructure, flood control projects, and tree replacement program. In 2011, the Street Improvement Program accounts for $2.1 million and Combined Sewer Improvements account for $1.0 million of the first year total. Of the total projects proposed for 2011, $5.3 million (approximately 79 %) is for the continuation of established projects including $2.4 million for the water /sewer program. The proposed 2011 -2015 CIP was distributed on June 11, 2010 to the Finance Commission and the Village Board. The Finance Commission held a meeting on June 24, 2010 to review the proposed document. Once the Committee of the Whole completes its review of the proposed 2011 -2015 CIP, it will be presented to the Village Board for formal acceptance on July 20, 2010. Staff will make a presentation on the projects included in the five -year plan and will be on hand to answer questions and facilitate discussion. V. Results of Request for Proposal for Fixed Asset Appraisal Services In June, the Village solicited a Request for Proposal (RFP) for an appraisal of its fixed asset inventory. The objective of the appraisal is to establish an accurate asset inventory and to place values on the various village assets for financial reporting and insurance purposes. A total of five firms responded to the solicitation, two were invited to make a presentation in person. The finalists were rated based on their responses to the questions in the RFP and the in- person interview. Staff will present its recommendation for the selected vendor. Total cost of the appraisal project will fall below $20,000. Per the Village's Purchasing Policy, the Village Manager's has authority to approve contracts up to this amount. Staff will make a presentation on the results of the RFP and will beon hand to answer questions and facilitate discussion. VI. MANAGER'S REPORT • Status VII. ANY OTHER BUSINESS VIII. ADJOURNMENT 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 cbsed meeting. NOTE: ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING BUT BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY NEEDS SOME ACCOMMODATION TO PARTICIPATE, SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 50 SOUTH EMERSON, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 60056, 847/3926000, EXTENSION 5327, TDD #847/392.6064 2 MAYOR Mount Prospect VILLAGE MANAGER Irvana K. Wilks Michael E. Janonis TRUSTEES VILLAGE CLERK Paul Wm. Hoefert M. Lisa Angell Arlene A. Juracek A. John Korn M P Phone: 847/392 -6000 John J. Matuszak Fax: 847/392 -6022 Steven S. Polit TDD: 847/392 -6064 Michael A. Zadel www.mountprospect.org Village of Mount Prospect 50 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 ORDER OF BUSINESS SPECIAL MEETING Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time: Mount Prospect Village Hall Tuesday 50 South Emerson Street July 13, 2010 Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 6:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Mayor Irvana K. Wilks Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee John Matuszak Trustee Arlene Juracek Trustee Steven Polit Trustee A. John Korn Trustee Michael Zadel 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 * * * ** ANY INDIVIDUAL WITH A DISABILITY WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 50 SOUTH EMERSON STREET, 847/392 -6000, TDD 847/392 -6064. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MINUTES June 8, 2010 CALL TO ORDER — ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. in the Village Board Room of the Village Hall, 50 South Emerson Street, by Mayor Irvana Wilks. Present at the meeting were Trustees Paul Hoefert, Arlene Juracek, John Korn, John Matuszak, Steven Polit, and Michael Zadel. Staff present included Village Manager Michael Janonis. II. REQUEST DEFERRAL OF MINUTES FOR MAY 11, 2010. A request to defer the minutes from the May 11, 2010 Committee of the Whole meeting was approved on a motion by Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Korn. Mayor Wilks indicated that there would be no need for a Closed Session regarding litigation as listed on the agenda. That discussion would be rescheduled to a later date. 11. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD Mr. Thomas Schneider - 1 S. Emerson Street addressed the Board regarding contingency plans for increased commuter parking demand in Tight of United Airlines' decision to relocate its operation from Elk Grove Township to Chicago. Mr. Schneider felt that Mount Prospect could be home to as many as 500 UAL employees. He was concerned that the shift could put a strain on downtown commuter parking. Village Manager Michael Janonis responded that it was a point well taken and that staff would begin reviewing present commuter parking capacity as well as other parking options. Mr. Janonis also pointed out that another rail option was the Metra North Central line at the north end on Mount Prospect. While the station is technically in Prospect Heights it would be convenient for Mount Prospect residents and at this time the parking lot is very under utilized. The Board thanked Mr. Schneider for bringing this to their attention. 111. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT Village Manager Michael Janonis reminded residents that Saturday June 12 was the next Coffee With Council and invited all residents to attend. The Village Manager also noted that Saturday June 19 was the date of the Fines Arts Festival as well as the Blues Fest, both taking place in downtown Mount Prospect. The Village Manager had nothing more to report. 6/08/10 Committee of the Whole IV. ANY OTHER BUSINESS Trustee Hoefert inquired as to the status of various abandon construction sites around the Village and staff efforts to see that they were properly maintained. Village Manager Janonis indicated that he thought citations had been issued to at least one site. The Village Manager also indicated that the Board may have to modify the property maintenance code to be more specific about the requirements for maintaining abandon construction sites. Trustee Hoefert also expressed his concern and displeasure with the recent Cook County Board decision to install red light cameras at County routes within other municipalities. He noted that Schaumburg and Arlington Heights seem to be especially hard hit. Trustee Matuszak stated that he was in complete agreement with Trustee Hoefert and it was the consensus of the rest of the Board members. Village Manager Janonis indicated that Schaumburg and Arlington Heights were considering passing ordinances that prohibited placement of such cameras without the municipalities consent. The Village Board directed staff to research Mount Prospect adopting a similar ordinance. Trustee Polit suggested that even though Mount Prospect was not on the current list of intersections, it would be prudent to identity potential sites and to conduct some data analysis regarding traffic counts, accidents, etc. Trustee Korn mentioned that a group of Serves librarians from our Sister City were currently in town on a visit. He noted that a Monday welcoming reception was well attended. Trustee Korn also indicated that the Lions Club Farmers Market kicked off last Sunday with a very good opening day crowd. V. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Wilks asked for the motion to go into Closed Session for the purposes of discussing under PERSONNEL 5 ILCS 120/2 (c) (1). On a motion by Trustee Juracek, seconded by Trustee Matuszak a roll call vote was taken and the Mayor and Board adjourned into Closed Session at 7:25 p.m. The Board adjourned out of Closed Session at 8:50 p.m. The Community of the Whole meeting was adjourned at 8:52 p.m. 6/08/10 Committee of the Whole Page 2 of 2 u \\ni nme.nw\9n1numinii ITFS\CnW Minutes 6- 08- 10.doc COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MINUTES May 11, 2010 CALL TO ORDER — ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. in the Village Board Room of the Village Hall, 50 South Emerson Street, by Mayor Pro Tem Arlene Juracek. Present at the meeting were Trustees Paul Hoefert, John Korn, John Matuszak, Steven Polit, and Michael Zadel. Staff present included Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Community Development Director William Cooney, Environmental Health Coordinator Bob Roels and Village Attorney George Wagner. II. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JANUARY 27, 2010. Motion made by Trustee Polit seconded by Trustee Zadel. Minutes were approved ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 23, 2010. Motion made by Trustee Korn seconded by Trustee Polit. Minutes were approved III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD David Toeppen — 409 S. Hi -Lusi spoke. He wanted to advise the Village Board about the need to consider taking advantage of a new lighting technology at the new Randhurst Development. He stated the new technology allows for very minimal light trespass and he has seen these new light fixtures in action and would recommend considering them. He stated the new fixtures require less height and are flat lenses with full cut off. He also stated similar lights are in place at the new Wal Mart store in Mount Prospect. William Cooney responded stating that the PUD that is in place for the Randhurst Development already includes the cut off light requirement. IV. FERAL CAT UPDATE Mayor Pro Tem Juracek provided a summary of previous discussions from January 2010. She also stated that staff was requested to undertake some additional research at that time. She stated the purpose of this meeting is to discuss various decision models which could eventually lead to a Village ordinance or policy. She stated that at the conclusion of this discussion there will likely be at least one more Committee of the Whole meeting to discuss possible ordinance issues prior to finalization. 5/11/10 Committee of the Whole H: \VILM \Cow\2010 \MINUTES \COW Minutes 5- 11- 10.doc Village Manager Michael Janonis spoke. He stated that there are no clear solutions which will make everyone happy and there are questions regarding studies from both sides of the aisle. He stated staff has no specific recommendations regarding this issue and it is truly a public policy decision and subjective topic depending on your point of view. He also stated that there are legal ramifications attached to each possible decision option. Assistant Village Manager David Strahl provided an overview of each decision model. Decision Option I The current process is complaint driven. Whereby, Village inspectors go out to check on possible complaints primarily to determine whether someone is feeding cats that would create a health hazard or a nuisance due to cats defecating on other properties. He also stated that by Village ordinance there are to be no more than three total dogs and cats per property. He stated that if a violation is found the violator is advised of the violation and given a period of time to rectify the situation. If they fail to rectify the situation a citation is issued and there may be court proceedings to enforce the ordinance. He also stated that if the address has a registered colony, it is confirmed with the local sponsor and if there are violations according to Village ordinance those violation concerns are forwarded to Cook County for investigation of the colony. There could be a situation in the future whereby the County determines the colony is in compliance with County ordinances, but not with Village ordinances, such a conflict would likely result in legal proceedings at the Circuit Court level. However, there have been no situations which have progressed to that level to date. There are also some different definitions of "owner" is in terms of a citation for control of the cats between the County and the Village. Decision Option II This could be described as modifying the current process and any complaint that is filed regarding a registered cat colony is directed to the local sponsor for resolution. This would consist of possibly two tracks, the typical track regarding an issuance of a complaint by the Village, reinspection and legal proceedings if failure to comply in case of the violation not being a colony. If a colony was the root of the complaint, then the County would be responsible for investigating and resolving the complaint. Another scenario is that the Village would terminate proceedings once the County completed its investigation and released its results relating to a registered colony. Decision Option III This could be described as utilizing the current process with a modification of utilizing humane traps coordinated through staff for placement. This process would have three basic directions. If a complaint was received, an inspection would be undertaken and if it was determined not to be a sponsored colony, staff could set up a trap to capture the animal and if the animal is not registered to a colony it would then be euthanized. If a trapped animal was registered to a colony it would be released on site. If an animal could not be trapped, the process for inspection /reinspection and legal proceedings would be follov.A� Committee of the Whole Page 2 of 5 H: \VILM \Cow \2010 \MINUTES \COW Minutes 5- 11- 10.doc the current process. The final aspect of this approach is to advise the sponsor of a nuisance violation and depending on the results from the County's investigation as to the nuisance, a resolution might be accepted from the County. However, if the Village was dissatisfied with the result it could challenge the inspection report through legal proceedings. This scenario would increase staff time to set and monitor traps and to work with an animal control contractor and would likely result in capturing numerous wildlife for euthanizing. Decision Option IV This option is the creation of an animal control division within the Community Development department. This process would still be triggered by a complaint from a resident, although the Village would have staff available to focus the majority of their activities on animal nuisance violations, whereby the Village staff would try to determine the owner once the animal was trapped and it was not wild life. If after the animals have been identified and the nuisance is not abated, this could result in additional court proceedings, either through utilizing the sponsor or through colony for failure to comply with the judgment. This program would be estimated to cost approximately $150,000 a year for one full time staff person, vehicle, equipment training and immunizations, in addition to the extensive cost of maintaining and providing the traps. Decision Option V This option is similar to the existing process, whereby it is complaint driven however, the Village would lend traps to property owners that are being exposed to a nuisance for the trapping and relocation or euthanizing of the trapped animal. The main issue with this option is the cost of the animal control contractor and the possibility that the resident that trapped the animal would relocate the animal illegally. Decision Option VI This option is to refer all cat nuisance complaints to Cook County animal control for their investigation and recommendation. Decision Option VII The final Option VII is to register local feral cat colonies within the Village and manage their proliferation in an effort to minimize the nuisance created by the colonies in the immediate surrounding area. This option for decision consideration is to require registration of feral cat colonies caretakers through the Village so that the Village is aware of these locations and to insure that if there are nuisance issues they are addressed in a timely manner. However, this scenario would likely result in legal proceedings with the County and the colony sponsor without some type of involvement from the colony sponsor. 5/11/10 Committee of the Whole Page 3 of 5 H: \VILM \Cow\2010 \MINUTES \COW Minutes 5- 11- 10.doc General comments from the Village Board members included the following items: • There were general concerns about Options 5, 6, 4 & 3 and it was also suggested that another option could be added as Option VIII whereby the colonies would be prohibited all together. • The remaining Options of 1, 2, and 7 could be considered for further discussion. Marilyn Furer - 2000 W. Lincoln spoke. She stated that she would support Option VII and suggested that the Village focus on protecting the residents regarding complaints and consider treating all cats as strays. She stated that animals should be contained on your own property if you choose to care for them. Linda Wilcox — 1714 Pheasant Trail spoke. She stated that she feeds the animals out of a sense of need but does not leave out the food overnight. She stated that this discussion has allowed her to open up communication with her neighbors regarding the resolution and retention of a cat colony in the area. Serna Fried of the Feral Feline Project spoke. She stated the colony locations are not publicly identified in compliance with the Cook County ordinance and Cook County has investigated complaints in the past. She stated that she would cooperate with the Village in confirming a colony location if a complaint is lodged through her agency. General comments from the Village Board members included the following items: • It was suggested that the ordinance may be created to prohibit feeding unless ownership can be confirmed. Thereby, there is no question about the responsibility of the animals. Julie Fillic — 301 S. Elmhurst spoke. She stated that even with the feeding prohibition the colony is allowed to feed the cats thereby violating the number of cats that are allowed on a single property. She said she would support Option VII if the cats could be contained within a registered colony and deterrents on neighbor's property could be extensive enough to keep animals off the property that was not connected with the colony. Lisa Pacina — 303 S. Elmhurst spoke. She stated that she would support Option VII for containment and the caretaker agreement requires communication with the residents which has not taken place in her situation. General comments from the Village Board members included the following items. There was the general consensus that Option VII would be the most likely option with some modifications. Those modifications included the following items: •3 Focus on defining the nuisance threshold. • The Village would only know of a colony after a complaint was investigated and confirmation from a sponsor. ❖ It would require the colony to work with staff to eliminate the nuisance through containment options. ❖ If the colony does not contain the cats to address the nuisance or eliminate the nuisance then a violation and possible court proceedings could be undertaken. 5/11/10 Committee of the Whole Page 4 of 5 H: \VILM \Cow\2010 \MINUTES \COW Minutes 5- 11- 10.doc ❖ A three animal limit would need to be relaxed for a colony if it was registered, but would still require the nuisance to be addressed. ❖ There would be a need to work with the sponsoring organization to accept this regulation and cooperate with caretaker agreements and nuisance elimination on a more active basis than exists today. ❖ Obviously these options would require additional education and responses from the TNR program for the standards to be followed. Consensus from the Village Board was to direct staff to review Option VII with these suggested modifications and prepare an ordinance for future consideration. V. VILLAGE MANAGER REPORT Village Manager Michael Janonis stated the Village is planning an American Idol Party assuming the Idol from Mount Prospect continues through the process. He also stated this upcoming weekend is the Village wide Garage Sale and the Public Works Open House. VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS Trustee Korn stated that plans were becoming more firm regarding the 4 of July festival with a schedule of events to be released very soon. Trustee Polit reminded the audience of the dates for the up coming car shows. Trustee Juracek provided information regarding a Historical Society fundraising event for the first peak at Fire Station 14 VII. ADJOURNMENT Motion made by Trustee Korn seconded by Polit to move into Closed Session at 9:33p.m. The Board reconvened into Open Session at 9:42 p.m. There was no other business and meeting was immediately adjourned. .( 5/11/10 Committee of the Whole Page 5 of 5 H: \VILM \Cow\2010 \MINUTES \COW Minutes 5- 11- 10.doc Mount Prospect Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE BOARD AND FINANCE COMMISSION FROM: FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE: JUNE 9, 2010 SUBJECT: PROPOSED CIP: 2011 -2015 Attached hereto is the proposed 2011 -2015 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). The projects being considered for the year 2011 total $6,737,880. The five -year total for all projects is $54,132,847. We encourage you to read the Manager's transmittal letter beginning on page ii. This correspondence describes the purpose of the CIP, highlights some of the more significant projects, and reviews project funding. To help you evaluate our ability to fund the requested projects a five -year financial forecast is provided for the major operating and capital project funds that support funding for the CIP. These forecasts can be found in Section H of the document. In general, the projects being presented directly relate to the monies expected to be available. However, from reviewing the CIP requests in conjunction with the five -year financial forecasts I would like to direct your attention to several project areas. General Fund The CIP is showing the five -year average of projects being paid from General Fund revenues as $416,000 (A -10). This is slightly higher than the amount of capital projects typically funded by the General Fund on an annual basis due to a new project related to a proposed storm sewer inspection program. The program is proposed as a ten -year inspection cycle and is anticipated to cost $100,000 annually. I would like to point out the five -year financial forecast for the General Fund. This forecast is showing an operating deficit in 2011 of $2.7 million with annual deficits increasing each subsequent year through 2015 ($6.1 million). Based on this information it is likely that many non - critical projects will be deferred. See the complete five -year forecast for the General Fund beginning on page H -1. Motor Fuel Tax Fund (MFT) Receipts from motor fuel taxes beginning after 2011 are expected to grow by just 1% through 2015. Due to this low level of growth in revenue, the street resurfacing program for 2011 was scaled back. The program for 2009 and the current year (2010) have also been scaled back to the level of available funds. The street improvement budget for 2012 -2015 still reflect full program costs. These project years will also need to be scaled back if revenues cannot support the higher levels. Proposed CIP June 9, 2010 Page 2 of 3 Capital Improvement Fund The Capital Improvement Fund is meant to support intermediate sized capital expenditures for various departments that are non - recurring in nature. Some examples of these projects are Detention Pond Improvements, Emergency Generators and public building improvements. Supported by a one - quarter cent home rule sales tax, there is approximately $1.1 million annually available for these types of capital projects. Projects included in the five -year plan after 2012 will need to be further prioritized with some deferrals to bring the total annual amount down to what can be supported with current revenue streams. Street Improvement Construction Fund Projects The forecast for the Street Improvement Fund (H -11) is showing a positive fund balance of $192,921 at the end of 2010, but the fund balance will become a significant deficit by the end of 2012 due to stagnant revenues. Revenue to support the program comes from the state and local motor fuel tax and one - quarter cent home rule sales tax. Each of these revenue sources is expected to either show minimal or no growth over the next several years resulting in fewer funds available to fund the street program. Adjustments to the amount of work planned each year will be necessary if these revenue sources do not rebound during 2011. Flood Control Construction Fund Proiects Major projects in this fund are set to resume in 2011 when funding from the home rule sales tax becomes available. Previously, the tax was allocated to support debt service from earlier flood control projects. Beginning in 2011, approximately one -half of the tax is freed up to fund various projects. Prospect Meadows storm sewer and ditch improvements ($1,000,000) is scheduled for 2011 -2013. In addition, the Hatlen Heights storm sewer project is slotted to begin in 2015 and is expected to cost $1.9 million. It is anticipated that there will be sufficient funds on hand by that time to begin the project. See the complete five -year forecast for the Flood Control Construction Fund beginning on page H -12. Water and Sewer Fund There are several large capital projects included in the CIP for 2011 -2015. The first is the ongoing Combined Sewer Improvement project started in 2005. The total cost for the project was originally estimated at $15 million and expected to take 10 years to complete. Funding for this project comes from a $5 per month sewer construction fee and basic sewer usage fee. Based on early results, overall pricing is coming in lower than originally estimated and completion will likely occur before the planned 10 years. Other major projects include ongoing sewer and water main replacements /rehab averaging $891,000 per year and water tank rehabs totaling $975,000. The cash and investment balance is projected to decrease through 2015 so projects will have to be prioritized and deferred to a level where they can be supported by ongoing revenues. I: \CIP \2011- 2015 \2011 -2015 CIP - Board Memo June 2010.doc Proposed CIP June 9, 2010 Page 3 of 3 Funding to be Determined The CIP is showing two projects where funding has yet to be determined. These projects include the Ash Removal and Ash Replacement programs expected to cost $1.8 million over a ten -year period. Work began in 2009 on a program to treat Ash trees in an effort to prevent infestation of 800 existing White, Blue and Manchurian Ash trees. These trees are not part of the program and will not require removal and /or replacement. Meetings to review the CIP are scheduled for June 24 (Finance Commission) and July 13 (Village Board). Staff looks forward to discussing the project submittals and their impact to operations. Copy: Michael E. Janonis, Village Manager Dave Strahl, Assistant Village Manager Lynn Jarog, Deputy Finance Director Department Directors I: \CIP \2011 - 2015 \2011 -2015 CIP - Board Memo June 2010.doc MAYOR Mount Prospect VILLAGE MANAGER Irvana K. Wilks Michael E. Janonis TRUSTEES VILLAGE CLERK Paul Wm. Hoefert M. Lisa Angell Arlene A. Juracek A. John Korn Phone: 847 /392 -6000 John J. Matuszak Fax: 847/392 -6022 Steven S. Polit TDD: 847 /392 -6064 Michael A. Zadel www.mountprospect.org Village of Mount Prospect 50 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 COFFEE WITH COUNCIL SATURDAY JULY 10 2010 9:00 -11:00 a.m. VILLAGE HALL COMMUNITY CENTER 50 SOUTH EMERSON STREET ANY INDIVIDUAL WITH A DISABILITY WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 50 SOUTH EMERSON STREET, 847/392 -6000, TDD 847/392 -6064. MAYOR Mount Prospect VILLAGE MANAGER Irvana K. Wilks Michael E. Janonis TRUSTEES VILLAGE CLERK Paul Wm. Hoefert M. Lisa Angell Arlene A. Juracek A. John Korn Phone: 847/392 -6000 John J. Matuszak Fax: 847/392 -6022 Steven S. Polit TDD: 847/392 -6064 Michael A. Zadel www.mountprospect.org Village of Mount Prospect 50 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 MOUNT PROSPECT POLICE PENSION BOARD SPECIAL MEETING MONDAY, JULY 12 2010 2:00 p.m. VILLAGE HALL 50 South Emerson Street 3rd Floor Village Board Executive Conference Room Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Rose Disability Pension Discussion IV. Closed Session V. Adjourn ANY INDIVIDUAL WITH A DISABILITY WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 50 SOUTH EMERSON STREET, 847/392 -6000, TDD 847/392 -6064 Mrnrnt Psspecct Director Deputy Director Glen R. Andler Sean P. Dorsey Mount Prospect Public Works Department 1700 W. Central Road, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 -2229 NOTICE THE JULY 12, 2010 MEETING OF THE SAFETY COMMISSION HAS BEEN CANCELLED. THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR MONDAY, AUGUST 9 AT 7:00 P.M. AN AGENDA OR CANCELLATION NOTICE WILL BE SENT PRIOR TO THIS MEETING. DATED THIS 1 DAY OF JULY, 2010. Phone 4 778 7 . }..F`' Fax 84/72;)3-93/ , , , otiw';. mount'i.J` i spent org