HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW Agenda Packet 02/11/2003 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
AGENDA
Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time:
Mt. Prospect Community Center Tuesday, February 11, 2003
1000 West Central Road 7:00 p.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL
Mayor Gerald L. Farley
Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Michaele Skowron
Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Irvana Wilks
Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer Trustee Michael Zadel
II.
ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF
JANUARY 14, 2003
ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF SPECIAL VILLAGE BOARD WORKSHOP OF
JANUARY 28, 2003
III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
IV. OVERVIEW OF SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM
The Village currently contracts with ARC Disposal Company for waste hauling services
covering garbage collection for all residential properties within the Village, recycling services
and yard waste disposal and brush pickup. The current contract with ARC is set to expire on
December 31, 2004. While that might seem like a long time away, it is imperative that the
Village begin to prepare for the rebidding of the contract during the first quarter of 2004.
Given technological changes in how waste pickup is handled, the further evolution of the
philosophy of recycling, the desirability of incorporating commercial waste pickup into the
existing municipal franchise and the question of cost and cost allocation suggests that now
is not too early to begin review and discussion of the state of solid waste disposal and
recycling in the Village. Technological changes alone will most likely do away with the
current "two can" system, to be replaced by a fully automated "toter" system. Recycling
technology has evolved to the point where separation of recyclables at curbside will no
longer be necessary.
Including commercial solid waste in the collection stream has a number of potential benefits.
First, the greater overall volume of waste is likely to result in overall unit cost reductions of as
much as 10%. Second, again due to the overall volume of waste involved, it is very likely
that commercial waste generators (businesses) would also realize better pricing than they
currently receive based on individual contracts. The Village of Skokie has a highly
successful program that includes commercial waste disposal. Staff is currently researching
the merits ora similar program here.
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 A T lO0 SOUTH EMERSON, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 60056, 847/392-6000,
EXTENSION 5327, TDD #847/392-6064.
In 2003, the refuse disposal program will cost the Village an estimated $3.3 million. Roughly
$2.5 million of that cost is covered by property taxes. The balance of the cost is covered by
the sale of garbage/yard waste stickers and other direct charge fees. The sticker cost of
$1.75 has not changed since 1996 and no longer fully covers the costs associated with
sticker usage. Additionally, Mount Prospect is one of only a handful of communities that
does not direct bill customers for refuse disposal services. The lack of a fee based program
means that a substantial portion of the Village's property tax levy is devoted to this particular
service as opposed to funding other core services such as public safety and infrastructure
maintenance (Public Works). It may be appropriate to look at how this service is currently
funded and whether there is a more equitable way to cover the cost of same.
Tuesday evening's discussion is designed to provide an overview of the current system and
to highlight technological changes the industry is currently undergoing. Staff will also
provide a recommended timeline for accomplishing the tasks necessary to have a new
contract in place by January 1, 2005. Appropriate staff will be on hand to facilitate
discussion and answer questions.
V. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT
VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
VII. ADJOURNMENT
CLOSED SESSION
LAND ACQUISITION
5 ILCS 120/2 (c) (5). "Re purchase or lease of real property for the use of the public
body."
MINUTES
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
JANUAY 14, 2003
II.
III.
IV.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Gerald Farley, in the Mt. Prospect
Park District Community Center, 1000 West Central Road. Present at the meeting were:
Trustees Timothy Corcoran, Paul Hoefert, Richard Lohrstorfer, Michaele Skowron, Irvana
Wilks and Michael Zadel. Staff members present included: Village Manager Michael Janonis,
Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Public Works Director Glen Andler and Village
Engineer Jeff Wulbecker.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of minutes from November 26, 2002. Motion was made by Trustee Zadel and
Seconded by Trustee Corcoran. Minutes were approved. Trustee Hoefert abstained.
CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
Paul Dowd, Public Works employee and President of local SEIU 73 spoke. He stated that
the employees are still working without a contract and have been working without a raise for
sometime. He is requesting Village Board involvement in the next meeting with Village staff.
Mayor Farley responded stating the Village Board will not become involved in the negotiation
process and remains confident that the staff has the full knowledge and backing of the Village
Board.
LEVEE 37 DISCUSSION
Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker provided a summary of the background that initiated the
study for Levee 37. He stated much of the discussion for the floodwall was initiated after the
floods of 1986 and1987, He stated previous consideration about raising River Road was
undertaken but it was found that construction of the Levee was more effective and less costly.
He stated the Feasibility Study was completed in June of 1999 and value engineering was
completed in February of 2000. Preliminary engineering was completed in 2001 and there
are various agencies involved including the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, IDNR, IDOT,
Cook County Forest Preserve and the communities of Prospect Heights, Mount Prospect and
Des Plaines. He stated the proposed levee would be on the east side of River Road between
Euclid and Palatine and would consist of a concrete wall that would vary in height from one
foot to seven feet.
VI.
He also stated that IDOT would reconstruct Milwaukee Avenue and improve the intersection
at Milwaukee and River, which would be incorporated into the fioodwalt. He stated the wall
would be constructed in an effort to protect the Village from a ten-year flood level and all 114
buildings currently in the flood plain would be removed saving the homeowners approximately
$650 a year for flood insurance since they no longer would be in the flood plain. The project
cost of $13 million is primarily covered by the Federal government at 65%, IDNR at 31%,
local shares split between Prospect Heights, Mount Prospect and Des Plaines amounts to
approximately $250,000 each or 2% plus the need to mitigate the land cost. There is a need
for an easement of land before moving forward on the project and there needs to be flood
level water compensation which would be Buffalo Creek expansion further up River Road in
Lake County. If the issues are resolved in a timely basis and agreements can be reached
with the Cook County Forest Preserve, the construction could start as early as 2004.
Village Manager Janonis stated there are existing funds available for funding assistance once
it is approved and the project is determined to move forward.
Consensus of the Village Board was to provide funding for the local share of this
project.
2003 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TOPICS DISCUSSION
Village Manager Michael Janonis provided a summary of the process for choosing
Committee of the Whole topics, which the Village had used in the past. He stated the priority
for early meetings in 2003 would be the financial discussion, which would hopefully be
completed by the end of March. The next Committee of the Whole meeting on January 28
would be a finance workshop initial meeting and would not be televised. Village Manager
Janonis went through each item for consensus of the Village Board and all suggested items
were incorporated and accepted for discussion purposes. Village Manager Janonis stated he
would facilitate the necessary timing for the topics based on recommendations or available
resources. Additional items included shopping cart removal discussion and speed limit study
as part of a traffic issue discussion. It was also recommended that a Corridor Study review
be added to the list.
LOCAL ETHICS DISCLOSURE FORM DISCUSSION
Village Manager Janonis stated this topic had come up in the past and is being
brought forward due to some confusion between the local disclosure statement and
the required disclosure statement that must be filed by the County annually.
Trustee Skowron provided a summary of the issues that she sees with the
disclosure statement. She stated the Village version is not significantly different than
the County's version but the Village version does have additional property disclosure
and there is a need to define conflict of interest for clarification and use on the form.
She also suggests that the Village Attorney be included in the discussion on this
topic.
General comments from Village Board members included the following items:
2
t was recommended that the Code itself be streamlined to incorporate this item in
one specific location so it is not necessary to search for the details throughout the
Code to determine compliance. There also was a comment regarding the clearest
definition of conflict of interest as it relates to the proposed regulations.
Consensus of the Village Board was to defer this item so that it can be
rescheduled with involvement and discussion of the Village Attorney
participating. There were several minor items clarifying the disclosure
statement, which are recommended to be completed in the interim for
consideration.
VII. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT
The Village Manager reminded everyone that the January 28 Finance Workshop will be not
be televised and will take place at the Police and Fire Building training room.
VIII. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
IX.
Mayor Farley wanted to recognize the Mayor of Des Plaines for his involvement in getting
the Levee 37 Project moving.
Trustee Hoefert requested a status report on the Louis Street townhomes, downtown traffic
signals and Costco.
Village Manager Janonis stated the Zoning change is currently underway with Louis Street.
He stated the downtown traffic signals have a software issue, which is being addressed by
IDOT. Costco is still interested in the Randhurst site, however, the project has been delayed
due to possible reconfiguration at the Randhurst site.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:09 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
DS/rcc
DAVID STRAHL
Assistant Village Manager
3
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL VILLAGE BOARD WORKSHOP OF
THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
JANUARY 28, 2003
CALL
TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
FUTURE
BUDGET
'DISCUSSION
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Gerald Farley called the meeting to order at 6:49 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present upon roll call:
Trustee Timothy Corcoran
Trustee Paul Hoefert
Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer
Trustee Michaele Skowron
Trustee Irvana Wilks
Trustee Michael Zadel
Also present:
Village Manager Michael Janonis
Assistant Village Manager David Strahl
Finance Director Doug EIIsworth
Deputy Finance Director Carol Widmer
Village Manager Janonis provided an introduction to the discussion
and highlighted the fact that the Board and staff needed to get to
the bottom line in terms of revenues for future budget years. The
current estimated 2004 deficit is $1.4 million with no new initiatives.
He also highlighted the revenue mix that the Village currently has.
He also stated that a five-year projection may be too far out for
appropriate revenue discussions and suggested a two to three year
period instead. He also provided a review of the material provided
to the Village Board in the informational packet. He led the
discussion regarding the establishment of the methodology for
discussion.
Methodolo.qy
1. Review potential external impacts and acknowledge those
impacts upon future projection of revenue and expenditures.
2. Assume Costco not be considered in the revenue mix at this
time due to the unknown date when the revenue would become
available to the Village.
3. Determine the scope of government services and the functions
of government.
4. Equity of revenues linked to expenditures and services provided
by the Village.
Initiatives
Village Manager Janonis provided a summary of the possible
initiatives to be considered in upcoming budget years.
1. Service levels and needs.
2. CIP funding source - Approximately $550,000 needed annually.
3. Traffic Unit - $550,000 estimate.
4. Fire Department Five-Year Plan. Additional personnel -
$200,000; replacement of north side station - $1.5 million
5. Public Works expansion for vehicle maintenance - $800,000
(shift of Fire vehicle maintenance facility to Public Works).
6. Retiree health insurance costs, potential impact and cost
estimates of benefits.
7. Levee 37 cost projected to be $300,000 to the local participants
but Village share less.
8. Randhurst Mall triangle study- approximately $75,000
9. Boxwood and south side resource center discussion.
10. Alter property redevelopment.
Possible Options for Consideration with the Finance Commission
Extension of computer replacement schedule.
Extension of vehicle replacement schedule and the utilization of
the funding gap between actual replacement compared to
funding.
Review of Revenue Options Prior to Next Meetinq
The Village Board is to review the set core and non-core activities
and services provided by the Village as presented in the material
prior to the next discussion.
Department Heads are to provide cost and service
recommendations for possible initiatives or expenditure reductions.
There was discussion regarding several Village Hall topics
including landscaping, brick selection and some reductions in the
project cost.
2
DJOURNMENT
There being no other business considered at the Special meeting,
Trustee Wilks made a Motion and Seconded by Trustee Lohrstorfer
to adjourn the meeting.
Upon roll call:
Motion carried.
Ayes: Corcoran, Hoefert, Lohrstorfer,
Skowron, Wilks, Zadel
Nays: None
The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
David Strahl
Assistant Village Manager
3
NTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS
SOLID WASTE COORDINATOR
FEBRUARY 6, 2003
RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE SERVICES
The attached packet of information provides a detailed overview of the Village's solid waste
management program as well as program options for the 2005 Solid Waste Contract. An oral
presentation with graphics will be presented as scheduled at the February 11,2003
Committee of the Whole Meeting.
Public Works Director Glen R. Andler
Deputy Public Works Director Sean P. Dorsey
FEBRUARY 5, 2003
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
EXCLUSIVE RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE CONTRACT
Current Services
Hauler
ARC/HILLSIDE DISPOSAL and RECYCLING COMPANIES, iNC.
(REPUBLIC SERVICES)
Term
May 1,2000 - December 31,2004
Service
Single and Multifamily Units
ARC Disposal and Recycling Company has been the Village's exclusive residential solid waste hauler
since August of 1991. ARC Disposal was awarded the 1991 - 1994 and 1994 -2000 exclusive solid
waste contract through a competitive bid process. Prior to expiration of the 1994 - 2000 contract the
Village and ARC Disposal negotiated a new residential contract for another four (4) year, nine (9)
month period, April 1,2000 - December 31, 2004.
ARC Disposable and Recycling Company was purchased by Republic Services in the fall of 1998 but
maintains the ARC Disposal name.
The following information outlines residential solid waste services provided under the existing contract.
Single Family Curbside Collection Service
13,563 Properties
A. Basic Service Level
Paid through property taxes, curbside collection is conducted once a
week, Monday - Friday. Designated collection routes provide for same
day collection of household waste including bulk items, recyclables and
yard material.
ARC Rates
Household Waste
2 units of waste
Container
Bag
Bundle
Modified Volume-based
container/bag/bundle
32 gallon/50# [maximum capacity]
33 gallon/50# [maximum capacity]
5' length/50# [maximum size]
$4.32 per unitJmonth
[Units of waste in excess of two (2) require the prepaid
Village imprinted sticker for collection and disposal.]
$1.63 per sticker
Bulk Items
carpet
large toys
bicycles
barbeque grills
swing sets
microwave ovens
televisionsNCR
Unlimited Collection
furniture
mattresses/box springs
snow blowers/shovels
lawn care equipment
plumbing fixtures/vanity
exercise equipment
water softeners
propane cylinders (empty)
(included in modified
volume based rate)
User Fee
$1.75 per sticker
Brush bundles
Bundles
Unlimited Collection
April 1~t - December 15t'
5' length/3,5" limb diameter/50#
ARC Rates
$ .85' per unit/month
User Fee
Recyclables
newspaper
mixed paper
aluminum
ferrous metals
Unlimited Collection
glass
plastic (#'s 1,2,3,5,6 & 7)
chipboard
corrugated cardboard
Two (2) sort collection system, (1) paper fibers and
(2) commingled materials. The Village provides 2 - 18
gallon recycling bins to each household at no cost, Each
household is allowed one (1) replacement bin at no cost.
Thereafter,'there is a fee for Village recycling bins,
Additional Basic Service Provisions
(included in modified volume based rate)
Three (3) dean-up weeks [First full week of January, May and October]
Move-in collection
Christmas tree collection [Two week compost period, thereafter landfilled1
Curbs[de collection of loose Ioavos [October 1 through 3~ week of November]
Conducted by Village crews; disposal [s provided by ARC Disposal
Curbside bagged leaf collection [z~th week of November through December 15th]
ARC collects and disposes of bags; *cost included in brush bundle fee
User Fee Program
The user (waste generator) is responsible for paying the fee for
collection and disposal.
1. Yard Material
ARC offers two (2) fee options for users.
a. Refuse/Yard Material Sticker
One (1) sticker per container/bag per pickup
Container 32 gallon/50#
Bag Biodegradable compost bag/50#
b. Subscription Service
Once a week collection from April 1st through December 15%
Flat fee paid to ARC Disposal by subscriber per season.
Fee structure per the terms of the exclusive residential contract.
Container 90 gallon toter [provided byARC]
$2.61 per unit/month
$1.63 per sticker
$6.00 per bin
$1.7S per sticker
$200 pertoter
II.
Multifamily Centralized Collection Service
Properties Units
Apartments 36 5,688
Condominiums 25 2,160
Townhomes 7 460
Totals 68 8,308
The Public Works Department works with the property owners/managers
in providing multifamily residents with centralized collection of solid waste.
Per Village Ordinance all properties with containers one (1) cubic yard or
larger must have at least twice a week collection. [Certain properties are
allowed once a week collection as a result of a significant waste reduction
or as provided under the Village's grandfather clause.]
ARC Rates
User Fee
A. Basic Service Level
Container size, container inventory and frequency of service determines
both the waste capacity and fees.
Size
Inventory
Frequency
Containers range from 1 cubic yard to 10 cubic yards in
c.apacity. 1.5 - 2 cubic yard containers the most utilized.
Number of containers is determined by property design,
container size and service frequency.
Service frequency is determined by container size and
inventory. Service to multifamily properties is available
Monday - Saturday.
Three times a week service is the most common.
Fees
Once a week collection, i.e., "first puIl" of multifamily
refuse containers regardless of service level is paid
through property taxes. Properties are billed monthly
by the Village for additional weekly collections.
Properties may receive a 1% prompt pay discount.
Household Waste
Waste must be contained within the designated refuse containers.
No limitations.
2. Bulk Items [included in basic service fee]
Same unlimited service as curbside collection.
Recycling
Multifamily recycling services are paid through property taxes.
Properties demonstrating waste reduction receive a 10%
discount on their monthly refuse bill.
Same two [2] sort unlimited service as curbside collection.
Centralized and curbside collection.
30 properties have centralized collection.
9 properties or 340 units have curbside collection,
Containers
Fees
90 gallon toter(s) [provided by ARC]
18 gallon bin(s) [provided by ViIlage]
Toter per month
18 gallon bin per month
3
$7.02 Ix a week
$7.92 2x a week
$2.61 lx a week
III. Contractual Provisions Residential Basic Service
A. Village Projects [on-going and short-term]
Roll-off service
Municipal Waste
Unlimited collection of waste from municipal buildings.
Collection of pedestrian waste from downtown and Kensington Business Center
waste containers.
C. Recycling
Collection of recyclables from schools, churches, park districts and
non-profit organizations. Scrap metal and residential appliance drop-off
at ARC Disposal facility.
D. Natural Disasters
Unlimited collection of household debris.
IV.
Special Services
User Fee per Residential Contract
User Fee
Residential Appliances
Resident contact, direct payment to ARC Disposal
Curbside or centralized collection of residential appliances.
Back Door Service
Resident contact, direct payment to ARC Disposal
ARC will collect solid waste containers/bags from rear door.
Special Collections
Resident contact, direct payment to ARC Disposal
Optional payment system for large collections.
Residential Solid Waste Management Options
Non-contractual
SWANCC Transfer Station
Disposal site for residents able to transport
residential waste including construction debris.
SWANCC Fee
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA)
Permanent and one-day collection sites for household
hazardous waste.
One day collection sites are selected by the IEPA in
the spring and fall.
Permanent collection sites are located in Naperville
and Rockford.
$25.00 per appliance
[SWANCC gate fee]
$23.40 per month
$'14.00 per cubic yard
[3 cubic yard minimum]
$25.00 per half ton
No fee
4
0
0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
RECYCLING
YARD MATERIAL
REFUSE
m
>
February 5, 2003
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM OPTIONS
2005 SOLID WASTE CONTRACT
In August of 1991 the Village of Mount Prospect implemented a volume base solid waste
management system. Although this system has proven effective in managing the Village's
residential waste stream, industry standards, economic constraints, and customer satisfaction
necessitate a comprehensive evaluation of the existing program.
In December of 2004 the existing residential contract with ARC Disposal and Recycling will
expire. The remaining time of the contract provides an excellent opportunity to fully evaluate the
current program and research and consider options that may benefit the Iong-tem solid waste
needs of our community in the most efficient and cost effective manner.
The following is a brief outline and description of options that merit further consideration.
Residential Collection Systems
in response to OSHA regulations and the grew[rig demand from municipal managers
solid waste haulers have significantly invested in automated and semi-automated
collection systems. With an automated system residents receive a toter dedicated for
waste storage and collection.
The automated collection system can be utilized for either one or all solid waste
collections, recycling, refuse and yard material. ARC Disposal provides a semi-
automated collection for the collection of yard material with the subscription service.
The toters are available in a range of sizes from 34 to 95 gallons and offer many
benefits. The attached fitted lid significantly reduces neighborhood litter. The capacity
of the toter eliminates the need for additional bags/receptacles. The wheeled toter is
easy to handle and remains in place when empty.
A. Automated collection
Curbside toter - the collection vehicle has an arm that extends to the curb,
grabs the toter and lifts the toter and empties it into the side compartment of
the vehicle then returns the empty container to the curb.
Semi-automated collection
Curbside toter - the driver places the toter on a lift that raises the toter and
empties it in either the rear or side compartment of the vehicle. The driver
returns the toter to the curb.
II.
Solid Waste Fee Structure
As the solid waste industry has evolved so has payment for residential solid waste
services. Many local governments have implemented innovative and more equitable
fee structures. And, there are many communities that continue with a contractual flat
rate fee schedule. However, regardless of the billing method in each scenario the
resident, or waste generator is responsible for the cost of service.
A. Volume Based the cost is based on the volume of waste collected each
week.
B. Weight Based the cost is based on the weight of the waste collected each
week
C. Stickers
each unit of refuse, debris requires a prepaid sticker(s)
D. Subscription resident chooses service level
E. Flat Fee
contractual rate for monthly service
III. Commercial Solid Waste Services
Cost effective solid waste management with recycling opportunities may be available
to the business community through an exclusive municipal solid waste contract. The
success of the commercial so[id waste contract administered by the City of Skokie
and recent input from the Chamber of Commerce suggests there would be a financial
benefit to the business community with an exclusive commercial contract. In addition,
surveys conducted by the Village's Solid Waste Commission in 1998 and 1999 showed
many local businesses were interested in this approach for cost effective solid waste
services.
If an exclusive contract is to be pursued the Village would be responsible for the
bidding process. Consideration may want to be given to the potential savings to
both the Village and business community if the commercial contract was bid together.
SWANCC has offered to assist the Village in developing commercial solid
waste program. Similar to the Skokie program SWANCC would survey the
business community to confirm support of such a program and gather inventory
data. When SWANCC conducted the Skokie survey, Skokie required a minimal
45% response rate before moving forward with bid development and process.
Staff recommends the Village of Mount set the same standards.
2
MAYOR
Gerald L. Farley
TRUSTEES
Timothy J. Corcoran
Paul Wm. Hoefert
Richard M. Lohrstor fer
Michaele W. Skowron
Irvana K. Wilks
Michael A. Zadel
Village of Mount Prospect
Community Development Department
100 South Emerson Stceet Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
VILLAGE MANAGER
Michael E. Janonis
VILLAGE CLERK
Velma W. [owe
Phone: 847/818-5328
Fax: 847/818-5329
TDD! 847/392-6064
NOTICE
THE THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2003 MEETING OF ']'ltlq PLANNING &
ZONING COMMISSION HAS BEEN CANCELLED. AN AGENDA WILL BE SENT
PRIOR TO TIlE NEXT MEETING, FEBRUARY 27, 2003.
Dated this 7th day of January 2003.