HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/23/1995 COW minutes MINUTES
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MAY 23, 199,5
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Gerald Farley called the meeting to order at 7 33 p m Present at the
meeting were Mayor Gerald L Farley, Trustees T~mothy Corcoran, R~chard
Hendncks, Paul Hoefert and Irvana Wilks Absent from the meeting were
Trustees George CIowes and M~chaele Skowron Also present at the meebng
were V~llage Manager M~chael Janoms, Assistant V~llage Manager Dawd Strahl,
Pohce Chief Ronald Pavlock, Deputy Pohce Chief Ronald R~chardson and V~llage
Attorney Everette H~II
II. MINUTES
Acceptance of the M~nutes from May 9, 1995 Mobon made by Trustee Corcoran
and Seconded by Trustee Hoefert to approve Minutes M~nutes were approved
III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
Bill Reddy of 10,5 South Elm, spoke He wanted to share a recent letter he
received which ~ncluded derogatory language concerning h~s sexual preference
He read port~ons of the letter to the V~llage Board and stated th~s is obwously hate
ma~l and wanted to bnng ~t to the Board's attention that hate crimes apparently are
possible even in Mount Prospect
Mayor Farley responded to Mr Reddy's concerns by stabng that he abhors thru
type of communication and stated that he and the V~llage Board are sympathebc
to Mr. Reddy's concerns regarding such correspondence
IV GANG SUPPRESSION ORDINANCE DISCUSSION
The rabonale for such an Ordinance ara as follows (1) The need to create a safe
enwronment for the youth of our community through the estabhshment of
reasonable regulations, (2) send a strong message that the V~llage maintains a
"zero" tolerance for gangs and their negative Influences, (3) bridge any gaps or
erase any ~ncons~stencles between ex~stmg local and State laws regarding youth,
(4) bnng all relevant youth-ralated regulations ~nto one omnibus Section of the
Village Code, and (5) provide the Pohce Department, parents, educators and other
pubhc officials of our community w~th the tools necessary to protect and nurture
our youth
Mayor Farley prowded general background mformabon concerning th~s Ordinance
and stated ~t ~s ~ntended that th~s ~s the first meeting to d~scuss th~s Ordinance prior
to ulbmate passage by the V~llage Board He feels that there w~ll undoubtedly be
subsequent reviews by the V~llage Board which w~ll ulbmately lead to a final
Ordinance version for consideration by the full Board He stated that the t~mes
have changed and ~t ~s necessary to consider such an Ordinance due to the
negative influences which are occurring within our commumty
Trustee Wilks prowded a general overview of some comments related to the
proposed Ordinance from a previously prepared statement
Village Attorney Everette Hill prowded a detailed overview of the draft Ordinance
from h~s memo summarizing the changes The rewew ~ncluded an outhne of the
new Secbons and the jusbficabon to these new Sections He also h~ghhghted
Sections of the Ordinance which have been moved from other areas of the V~llage
Code to th~s smgle location
Mary Bower of One East Lonnquist spoke She stated that the TAP group has
gone through the Ordinance very carefully and ~s supporbve of the Ordinance
because they feel ~t is necessary at th~s brae However, one of the concerns the
group d~d have is about the termination of some of the restrlcbons contained w~th~n
the Ordinance being hnked or terminating after a specific age They also wanted
to make sure they d~d not repeat State law and convert ~t ~nto a local form She
stated that TAP w~ll prowde comments to the V~llage to consider and ~ncorporate
~nto the next rews~on when it ~s rewsed
Frank Vlazny of 2103 Jody Court spoke He asked who would ~ncur the
Prosecuting Attorney expenses and whether the V~llage would be requ~rad to
provide a Pubhc Defender as part of th~s Ordinance
Attomey Hill provided a response to the prewous quesbons He stated that age
and gang activity ~s not hm~ted by the offender's age w~th~n the Ordinance He also
stated that there are regulations on the State books, however, some of th~s
regulations have been patterned to be more apphcable in Mount Prospect The
V~llage w~ll not be required to prowde a Pubhc Defender because these are
situations which, ~f the offender ~s convicted, w~ll not have a poss~blhty of facing jail
t~me
General comments by V~llage Board members included the following
The Ordinance, ~tself, has grown beyond the original gang suppression ~dea
because of the combining of various related ~tems into a s~ngle Ordinance Some
members expressed concern about over-regulabon Also, concerns about how
Pohce Officers were going to prove unlawful assembly Some members also
recommended an enhancement to age restriction language so that age is not
considered a hm~t~ng factor There is also some concern about the enforcement
of gang s~gns and Ioitenng
General consensus of the Village Board was to schedule another meeting in the
near future where a Committee of the Whole discussion could take place and
consider these items which have been raised and review the possible revisions.
V. STUDENT RESOURCE OFFICER (SRO) DISCUSSION
In early 1995, the V~llage Board first considered the concept of a Student
Resource Officer (SRO) Program for the V~llage's junior high and m~ddle schools
The SRO concept ~s modeled after the V~llage's very successful and long-standing
School Counselor Program ~n place w~th H~gh School D~stnct 214 and Prospect
H~gh School
The topic was d~scussed at two Committee of the VVhole meebngs and a Saturday
meeting of an Ad Hoc group made up of various elected and adm~n~strabve
representatives from the Village and elementary School D~stncts operabng within
the V~llage Due to t~me constraints ~mposed by the Federal Crime B~ll and the
Board's desire to take advantage of funding available for community pohclng
projects, the SRO concept was tabled m favor of ~mplemenbng a commun~ty-w~de
Problem-Solving Pohce Unit These two Officers w~ll operate throughout the
V~llage on an as-needed basis to address specific problems ~n various parts of our
community
Mayor Farley stated that this is a continuation of the SRO discussion and would
hke the Board to come to a recommended conclusion for staff d~rect~on
Manager Janonis provided a general overview of the h~story of the d~scuss~on He
stated that elementary School D~stnct 26 has expressed interest ~n entenng into
a partnership w~th the Village for the implementation of a pilot SRO Program The
p~lot Program has also been endorsed by other Mount Prospect elementary School
D~stncts D~scussmg th~s matter at th~s brae ~s timely because ~mplementabon of
the program would be m conjunction w~th the start of the 199511996 school year
Chief Pavlock stated that he has d~scussed such SRO Programs with towns of
Boise, Idaho and Tempe, Arizona Representabves from both towns stated that
the activity of gangs were substantially decreased through the SRO Officers being
assigned to the junior h~gh and m~ddle schools
Frank Vlazny of 2103 Jody Court spoke He stated that he ~s opposed to putting
more Pohce Officers m the schools He stated the problem ~s w~th parents and the
level of dlsc~phne in the schools He felt that the parents should be held
responsible for the actions of their children
Jack Metcalf of 210 North Prospect Manor spoke He stated he ~s supportive of
the project because of the lack of male role models in the schools He felt that a
pos~bve role model, be ~t a Pohce Officer, ~s warranted in the school
Shirley Smalley, Superintendent of School District 26 stated that she hopes to
estabhsh a bridge between the elementary and h~gh schools through the use of an
SRO Program at the m~ddle school She stated that many of the problems that
are currently faced by the jumor h~gh-aged k~ds were faced by h~gh school k~ds ~n
prewous generabons She stated that the School D~stnct would be interested m
prowd~ng the necessary funds s~m~lar to how the funds are prowded by D~stnct 214
for the H~gh School Officer,
Tom Munz of 605 See-Gwun, President of the District $7 School Board, spoke
He stated that Distnct 57 ~s not yet ready to participate in the Program at this t~me
but ~s interested m monitoring the p~lot Program He also stated he felt the Village
m~ght reconsider how the cost ~s d~wded up because of the overall benefit to the
V~llage and not just the schools
Betty Launer of School District 57 School Board spoke She stated that she ~s
interested in seeing how the Program would work as a p~lot and is ~nterested m
breaking down the walls between the school and commumty for a successful
program
General d~scuss~on of the V~llage Board included the following comments
Many of the Board members stated they are supportive of the p~lot Program with
District 26 felt that early mtervenbon ~s warranted for the Program
General consensus of the Village Board was to request the School District staff
and the Village staff to work out necessary details prior to final action by the
Village Board. Village Board members are also supportive of considering the
funding of this pilot in a similar fashion as D~,'u;ct 214's funding arrangement.
VI. MANAGER'S REPORT
Manager Janonls stated that TCI, the Village's cable prowder, has told many
residents that the picture quahty is poor because the V~llage of Mount Prospect ~s
not ~ssumg any construction permits for necessary improvements He stated that
it is important to get accurate information out to the c~t~zens and stated that TCI
has many outstanding Permits which have yet to be resolved and feels that the
current s~tuabon with any picture quahty is not related to the Permit situation
VII.. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
Trustee Hoefert read a hst of new businesses which have come to the community
recently.
Mot~or~ made to move to Closed Session to d~scuss Personnel and L~t~gabon by
Trustee Corcoran and Seconded by Trustee Wilks Unanimous approval to move
~nto Closed Session at 9 56 p m
Closed Session adjourned at 10 24 p m
VIII, ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10 25 p m
Respectfully submitted,
DAVID STRAHL
DS/rcc Assistant Wllage Manage~