HomeMy Public PortalAbout08.19.96 VB Minutes
0
PLAINFIELD VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
REGULAR MEETING
DATE: AUGUST 19, 1996
MEMBERS OF BOARD PRESENT
OTHERS PRESENT:
AT: MEETING ROOM
VILLAGE HALL
PRESIDENT PETERSON, R. ROCK,
J. DEMENT, R. SMOLICH, K.
STALZER, J. HEIMERDINGER.
P. MCDONALD -ADMINISTRATOR
S. JANIK -CLERK
D. BENNETT -CHIEF OF POLICE
J. HARVEY -ATTORNEY
H. HAMILTON -ENGINEER
P. WALDOCK -DEVELOPMENT/ZONING
J. DUBBIN -PLANNER
At 7:00 p.m. President Peterson called the meeting to order. Roll call was taken, all were
present. He then led the pledge to the flag.
He then proclaimed School's Open Safety Week in the Village of Plainfield for August 25-31,
1996.
No public comments.
J. Dement moved to approve the Agenda. Seconded by K. Stalzer. Voice vote. 5 yes, 0 no.
Motion carried.
J. Heimerdinger moved to approve the Consent Agenda to include the following: Minutes of
Regulaz Meeting, August 5, 1996; Bills Payable, August 19, 1996, Expenditure Report, July 31,
1996, Treasurer Report, June 30, 1996 and Treasurer Report, July 31, 1996. Seconded by
K. Stalzer. Vote by roll call. Dement, yes; Heimerdinger, yes; Rock, yes; Stalzer, yes; Smolich,
yes: 5 yes, 0 no. Motion carried.
~ O INANC -GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PROPOSITION
President Peterson asked for this to be put on the Agenda because he thought the Board was
ready. He now is hearing that they might not be ready at this time. The Ordinance was
providing for the submission to the electors of the Village of Plainfield a question authorizing the
issuance of General Obligation Bands for financing a New Village Municipal Center. On this
same issue they discussed committing far a long term lease on the Lily Cache building for
Administration, Planning Department.. J. Heimerdinger asked to table the bond issue and
encourage the Boazd to bring this up after considerable discussion and discovery. (amore
thought out and detailed plan) K. Stalzer read a statement (inserted into the minutes in full) in
PLAINFIELD VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
AUGUST 19, 1996
PAGE TWO
I•
which he feels that we should adopt an Ordinance to submit to the electors at the ballot with a
question authorizing the issuance of General Obligation Bonds for financing a New Village
Municipal Center with a cost not to exceed $7,000,000. There was discussion among the Board
whether we should proceed with the bond issues or wait until the next election in April, 1997.
President Peterson asked Chief Bennett if his department could wait an additional 6 months to
expand and refurbish the Police Department. Chief Bennett stated that his Staff needs space
immeditely. There was a lengthy discussion again on the bond issue. J. Dement also brought up
the possibility of repealing the Utility Tax. K. Stalzer moved to adopt an Ordinance "Shall
Bonds in an amount not to exceed $7,000,000 be issued by the Village of Plainfield, Illinois far
the purpose of infrastructure improvements and real estate acquisition in and azound the Village
of Plainfield, Illinois to build, furnish and equip a New Village Municipal Facility (s), such
bonds to beaz interest at the rate not to exceed nine per cent (9%) per annum? J. Peterson talked
to the Board and he felt we were still a good deal away from decision. He has put together a
Steering Committee of business people from the community, and various other citizens to help
with these important decisions. At that point, J. Heimerdinger tabled the Bond Issue until
February 21, 1997. Because of lack of second, the motion fails. J. Dement stated that he would
vote with K. Stalzer for the adoption of the Bond Ordinance if they will support the repeal of the
Utility Tax. K. Stalzer responded that he felt it would not be in the best interest. The question
was then called. Dement, no; Rock, no; Heimerdinger, no; Stalzer, yes; Smolich, yes. 3 no, 2
yes. Motion fails.
~ ntgc~l T~SI N - MCCARTI~YARIANS~
Planner Durbin presented to the Boazd a Variance Request. The applicants, Michael D. &
Sandra L. McCarthy are requesting a variance from Section 9-1 S-4 of the Zoning Ordinance
which provides bulk regulations for accessory buildings or structures. The applicants are seeking
a variance from the following language: "Private garages accessory to each single family
residence shall not exceed 900 sq. Ft. in grass floor azea and shall not be designed or used to
stare more than three vehicles. This limit shall include the total area of all attached and detached
garage structures". The Zoning Ordinance does allow homes of 3,000 sq. Ft. or lazger in gross
floor azea to have 1,100 sq. Ft. garages designed to stare four vehicles. 'The applicants home is
less than 3,000 sq. Ft. The home is currently a lawful nonconforming use because it now has
garage space designed to store four vehicles. Two of the spaces aze original to the house while
the other two spices aze the result of an addition that was constructed prior to annexation to the
Village. The applicants hope to relocate two of the garage spaces to a new addition at the reaz
while converting the existing space into living area. This would not change the total number of
gazage spaces. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends approval of the variance request, with
the added stipulation that the existing drive on Frederick must be vacated at the time of
occupancy.
PLAINFIELD VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
AUGUST 19, 1996
PAGE THREE
J. Heimerdinger moved to approve the variance request far Michael D. And Sandra L. McCarthy
with the added stipulation that the existing drive on Frederick must be vacated at the time of
occupancy. Seconded by R. Smolich. Vote by roll call. Dement, yes; Rock, yes; Heimerdinger,
yes; Stalzer, yes; Smolich, yes. S yes, 0 no. Motion carried.
~ ntcrrrccrnN -MAT ONE-REZONIN r/SP~~ USE
Planner Durbin presented to the Board aRezoning/Special Use Request. The applicants, Robert
and Diane Malone are requesting a rezoning from R-1, single family residence district, to B-5
Historic Business District. The applicants recently purchased the home located at 710 N.
DesPlaines Streeet and currently occupy the home. They are seeking to operate a home business
growing and selling herbs, herbal crafts, and nature products. The retail component of the
business, however, is prohibited by the home occupation provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
The subject property is located adjacent commercial properties, in close proximity to Lockport
Street, and adjacent to the B-5 historic business district. The applicants are seeking a rezoning to
the B-5 district to allow for operation of their busifness in compliance with the Village Zoning
Ordinance. Staff and the Plan Commission recommend modification of the rezoning from R-1
to B-S to a recommendation far approval of a special use permit to operate a home business
growing and selling herbs, herbal crafts, nature products, and associated products with a retail
component subject to the following stipulations: 1) Compliance with the requirements of the
Village Engineer; 2) Compliance with the provisions of the Plainfield Fire Protection District; 3)
Expansion of the business or additional site improvements will require Site Plan Approval; 4)
Maintain a landscape buffer between the subject property and adjacent residential uses.
J. Heimerdinger moved to approve the modification of the rezoning from R-1 to B-5 to approve a
special use permit to Robert and Diane Malone to operate a home business growing and selling
herbs subject to the Plan Commission stipulations and one additional that prior to the Malone's
using the garage far selling they would revisit with the Planning and Development Committee.
Seconded by R. Rock. Vote by roll call. Dement, yes; Rock, yes; Heimerdinger, yes; Smolich,
yes; Stalzer, Abstain. 4 yes, 1 abstain. Motion carried.
#~ DISCUSSInN - W LLIN WOODS9PTIOIV
After a lenghty discussion by the Board members it was decided to go along with the exercise of
the option by June 1, 1997, to close soon thereafter by July 1, 1997 add paragraph 3 from their
letter dated August 16, 1996 which contained uses of the property will be added, and the property
would be purchased at the price of $2.00 per sq. Ft.
A break was taken to have Attorney Harvey finalize the agreement with Clayton Olsen. 8:34
• p.m.
Meeting resumed at 8:43 p.rn.
PLAINFIELD VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
"~ AUGUST 19, 1996
PAGE FOUR
J. Dement moved to authorize President Peterson to sign the document as described. Seconded
by R. Smolich. Vote by roll call. Dement, yes; Rock, yes; Heimerdinger, no; Smolich yes;
Stalzer, yes. 4 yes, 1 no. Motion carried.
~ E - TIO NT E T F
W W D
J. Heimerdinger moved to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 1672 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION
OF CERTAIN ANNEXATION AGREEMENT AMENDMENTS BETWEEN THE VILLAGE
OF PLAINFIELD AND PLAINFIELD PARTNERS, AN ILLINOIS PARTNERSHIP AND
THE MACOM CORPORATION, subject to the Attorney's review. Seconded by J. Dement.
Vote by roll call. Dement, yes; Rock, no; Heimerdinger, yes; Smolich, yes; Stalzer, yes. 4 yes, 1
no. Motion carried.
~ nrcr~i reSION CI-LAA~ION CRFEK ANNFXA110N AGREEMEN'T'
Director Waldock explained to the Board that the developers, Wiseman Hughes Enterprises, Inc.
propose the annexation and development of a 121 acre farm site located along the west side of
~` ~ Rt. 59 north of 119th Street in Wheatland Township. The subject parcel comprises 121.4 total
acres. The draft Annexation Agreement proposes to develop the property as a Planned Unit
Development, including 20 acres of Commercial property in the south east corner of the site.
The balance of the subject site (101.4 acres) is proposed as open space/parks and single family
residential. Staff recommends approval of the Annexation Agreement for Wiseman-Hughes
Enterprises, Inc. Subject to the fallowing stipulations: 1) Compliance with the requirements of
the Village Engineer; 2) Compliance with provisions of the Plainfield Fire District, Park District
and School District; 3) Amend the Annexation Agreement to require annexation of the subject
property to the Plainfield Public Library and Plainfield Township Park District upon achieving
contiguity; 4) The $1,750 annexation fee should include the entire 101.4 acres devoted to the
residential portion of the development; 5) Add language that will provide for condemnation at
the developers cost if necessary; 6) Provide anti-monotony requirements in the covenants and
restrictions for the subdiviison; 7) Include language specifying that Champion Creek Drive will
have a 66 ft. R.O.W. and 37 ft. Back to back pavement. Staff and the Plan Commission further
recommend the approval of the preliminary plat for Champion Creek Subdivision subject to the
stipulations as follows: 1) Comply with the requirements of the Village Engineer; 4) Comply
with the provisions of the Plainfield Fire Protection District; 5) Provide a forestation plan
consistent with the goals and objectives of the Village of Plainfield; 6) Comply with the
requirements of the proposed Annexation Agreement; 7) Provide details related to the design and
engineering of 119th Street consistent with the language of the proposed Annexation Agreement.
~~~ Attorney Ed Welsh joined the Board in discussion of the Annexation Agreement. Trustee
Heimerdinger asked for a forestation plan consistent with the objectives of the Village.
• PLAINFIELD VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
AUGUST 19, 1996
PAGE FIVE
J. Heimerdinger moved to approve and requested Attorney Harvey to prepare an Ordinance for
the Annexation Agreement. Seconded by R. Smolich. Vote by roll call. Dement, no; Rock, yes;
Heimerdinger, yes; Smolich, yes; Stalzer, yes. 4 yes, 1 no. Motion carried.
J. Heimerdinger moved to approve the Preliminary Plat for Champion Creek Subdivision with
approximately 11 stipulations starting with Compliance with the requirements of the Village
Engineer - - .......to Provide details related to the design and engineering of 119th Street.
Seconded by R. Smolich. Vote by roll call. Dement, no; Rock, yes; Heimerdinger, yes; Smolich,
yes; Stalzer, yes. 4 yes, 1 no. Motian carried.
#9 C N - IN NN N T
Director Waldock stated to the Board that the developers, Pasquinelli, Inc. Are proposing a PUD
fora 283.3 acre site bounded on the east by IL Rt. 59, on the west by Van Dyke, on the north by
119th Street, and on the south by 127th Street. The PUD plan proposes 448 single family
detached homes, 306 single family attached homes, and a 6-15 acre commercial site. Staff
recommends approval of the Annexation Agreement subject to the following stipulations: 1)
Provide clarification of recapture casts in an exhibit as an attachment to the Annexatian
Agreement consistent with the Village Engineers final benefit azea report. 2) Comply with
provisions of the Village Engineer and Village Attorney.
Questions were raised if the School District happened to reject the site in this development. In
the event the sckoal site is not required by District 202, 35 single-family homes may be build in
its place on the site. Bruno Pasquinelli and Kathy West, attorney for the developers, contributed
to the discussion with the Boazd. Trustee Heimerdinger asked that if the School Boazd is not in a
position to approve this particulaz school site at this time, but maybe in a position to approve it
because of either funding or some other kind of enrollment projections, but would be able to
approve it or at least re-examine it in a yeaz or two yeazs, would the site still be availabe at that
time, or must the commitment for the school site be made in a rather narrow pazemeter, or else its
gone. With this point, I am attempting to establish a window of opportunity far the school
district. My question is haw large is that window. In the Annexation Agreement could we
establish this window of opportunity. Mr. Pasquinelli stated that 5 years would not be
unreasonable. Trustee Heimerdinger asked if that language was possible to be placed in the
Agreement. Dir. Waldock stated that it could be placed in the Agreement.
R. Smolich suggested that the signs concur with our Sign Ordinance. J. Heimerdinger moved to
apprave the preparation of Ordinance for Annexation Agreement by our Attorney for Pasquinelli
with recommendations. Seconded by R. Smolich. Vote by roll call. Dement, no; Rock, no;
Heimerdinger, yes; Smolich, yes; Stalzer, yes; Peterson, yes. 4 yes, 2 no. Motion carried.
•
"~ PLAINFIELD VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
AUGUST 19, 1996
PAGE SIX
~ ~C:i T~. ION - TH ROOKERY
Planner Durbin presented to the Boazd information regazding The Rookery, a development
proposed fora 3 acre site on Joliet Road across from the Plainfield Cemetery, in which the
Village Board considered and denied the preliminary plat on July 15, 199G. During the
discussion, members of the Boazd discussed the passibility of acquisition and development of the
site as a park towazd protecting the rookery and enhancing the public viewing opportunities.
Staff then discussed this issue with the Will County Forest Preserve District and now seek
additional Board Direction on this matter. The Forest Preserve District indicated strong support
for the acquisition of the subject property. However, that all of their current land acquisition
funds are obligated by pending grant applilcations and they would be unable to financially
contribute to the acquisition. The Superintendent of Planning and Development for the Forest
Preserve District offered, however, to support the acquisition by writing grant applications,
preparing legal documents, survey work, and other staff activities. The Director of the Plainfield
Park District also indicated strong support for the acquisition of the property, and indicated that
the Park District may be able to contribute up to $50,000 toward the acquisition, subject to Park
District Boazd approval. The acquisition of the subject property is complicated by the fact that
. the applicants currently own the property and paid a rather large sum of money for the property.
They are interested in moving towards development of the property, would not oppose the
acquisition of the property. The applicants have indicated to staff that their financial interest in
the property totals approximately $470,000 (approximately $350,000 of which was the purchase
price). Even through condemnation, it is unlikely that the Village could purchase the property
for a lower price. While the acquisition of the property would require a large amount of money,
the good news is that the state has a land acquisition grant program that could be applied. Both
the Forest Preserve District and the Park District feel that the subject property would rank very
high for this grant. The grant program would provide a 50/50 matching grant. Staff's position is
as follows: 1) The site is indeed an environmentally sensitive site, accordingly acquisition and
development of the site as a viewing area would be entirely supported by staff, if it is financially
feasible; 2) The Village is in need of new administrative offices, modifications to the Police
Station, and is soon to occupy a new Street Garage, all of which require significant financial
commitments; 3) Staff still believes that the proposed development is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, meets the requirements of the Planned Unit Development criteria, provides
additional benefits to the Village such as water and sewer extensions, and can avoid negative
impacts on the Heron Rookery. 4) Staff would still recommend approval of the Rookery as
discussed on July 1 S, 1996 unless acquisition of the property can be accomplished.
Trustee Heimerdinger asked to have the Staff continue looking for funds to acquire and make the
site a public park and viewing area for the birds. Trustee Smolich and Trustee Stalzer were not
~~ convinced by Heimerdinger's optimism or Durbin's projections.
PLAINFIELD VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
AUGUST 19, 1996
PAGE SEVEN
R. Smolich asked the Board if we were to go ahead with this acquisition, who will put in all the
money to landscape, maintain and all the other necessary amenities. He also spoke stating that
for over one and a half years this project has been gone over by a committee, and he believes
answers should be given to the development. J. Dement asked if we buy it, what do we do with
it? We have a responsibility not to hold up the developer, but I am concerned about 20 or 21
units on the property. There was a continued discussion on this item. Attorney Bill Gomolinski,
representing the Rookery Development talked to the Boazd about delaying the project, and
explained that they were incurring costs on a daily basis. President Peterson told Mr.
Gomolinski that they will have to rework the Concept Plan and are welcome to present their
plan, request a vote on it at any time you wish.
J. Heimerdinger moved to direct the Village Staff to spend 30 more days investigating the
possibility of acquiring the land for public use. If at that time the Board take action, either a
positive or negative depending on the results of the report. That report should include possible
funding methods, levels of interest of other outside sources. Attorney Gomolinski requested that
if they come back before this Board, can they waive bringing this before the Planning
Commission first? There being no second to this motion, the motion died.
• ~ D R PL IN IV
Staff has been working on creating an ordinance that would give Staff the authority to distribute
coupons to residents that collect, or allow Staff to collect, IEPA required drinking water samples.
After discussing this issue with the Village Attorney, we agree that it would be in the Village's
best interest to make this sampling incentive program a Village policy and that an ordinance is
not needed to administer this program.
J. Dement moved to approve the Water Sampling Incentive Program as set forth in memo August
12, 199b. Seconded by K. Stalzer. Vote by roll call. Dement, yes; Rock, yes; Heimerdinger,
yes; Smolich, yes; Stalzer, yes. 5 yes, 0 no. Motion carried.
DMINISTRATOR'S P .AZT
K. Stalzer moved to designate J. Dement as voting delegate to the 83rd Annual Conference
September 19-22, 1996 representing the Village of Plainfield. Seconded by R. Rock. Voice
vote. 4 yes, 1 no, 1 abstain. Motion carried.
J. Dement moved to discontinue the Health incentive program. Seconded by R. Rack. Vote by
roll call. Dement, yes; Rock, yes; Heimerdinger, yes; Smolich, yes; Stalzer, yes. 5 yes, 0 no.
Motion carried.
r~
PLAINFIELD VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
AUGUST 19, 1996
PAGE EIGHT
J. Heimerdinger moved to increase Life Insurance Policy for all Village Employees from
$20,000 to $25,000. Seconded by J. Dement. Vote by roll call. Dement, yes; Rock, yes;
Heimerdinger, yes; Smolich, yes; Stalzer, yes. 5 yes, 0 no. Motion carried.
J. Heimerdinger discussed with the Board the Family Health and Dental cost coverage. He at
that time asked to add this to Agenda on the Ways & Means Committee Meeting scheduled far
Wednesday for additional discussion.
J. Heimerdinger moved to approve the promotion of Jeffrey Durbin to Village Planner and that
promotion carries with it the responsibility of an exempt status where by Mr. Durbin would
receive no overtime pay for hours worked over 40 hours per week. Mr. Durbin's position is
effective July 1, 1996. Seconded by J. Dement. Vote by roll call. Dement, yes; Rock, yes;
Heimerdinger, yes; Smolich, yes; Stalzer, yes. 5 yes, 0 no. Motion carried.
K. Stalzer moved to approve the payout of Mr. Durbin's overtime accrual. Seconded by J.
Dement. Vote by roll call. Dement, yes; Rock, yes; Heimerdinger, yes; Smolich, yes; Stalzer,
yes. 5 yes, 0 no. Motion carried.
~"` ~ Mr. Joe Knutte of Knutte & Associates, the Village Auditors, presented information to the Board
regarding the 1995/96 Audit. Trustee Heimerdinger invited Mr. Knutte to the scheduled Ways
and Means Committee in September to make a presentation to the Committee.
Administrator McDonald spoke to the Board regarding directions they might have regarding the
letter from the PAR Group. The Board agreed to start receiving and reviewing Resumes far
Administrator around the 15th of February.
R' P
K. Stalzer moved to approve the additional work proposal for the 1996 MFT Street Maintenance
in the amount of $22,798.00 and would consist of putting asphalt on the following oil and chip
streets: Chcago Street -between Miles Avenue and Park Street, Hartong Avenue, and Park
Street. J. Dement asked if there was any discussion on crack filling. K. Stalzer stated no, not to
his knowledge. Seconded by J. Heimerdinger. Vote by roll call. Dement, no; Rock, yes;
Heimerdinger, yes; Smolich, yes; Stalzer, yes. 4 yes, 1 no. Motion carried.
PLANNER' S REPORT
Director Waldock asked the Board for clarification as to how the Staff should address denial of
projects such as The Rookery when the developers come back to the planning department
:~ seeking direction. The Board all agreed to bring the issues back to the Board directly.
PLAINFIELD VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
• AUGUST 19, 1996
PAGE NINE
Planner Durbin spoke regarding information supplied by the Will County Governmental League
requesting that the Village support a proposed "Bike to Retail" Campaign. The campaign is
proposed as a regional pilot project designed to promote bicycling as an alternative to driving to
neazby retail centers. The Will County Governmental League is seeking to raise the required
$20,000 local match through local contributions. Staff has been working with the Pazk District
toward developing and implementing aVillage-wide Bike Plan toward providing such routes.
Staff would recommend that the Baazd support the "Bike to Retail" Campaign through a
continued commitment to providing for alternative means of travel. They would not discourage
the Board from financially contributing the the "Bike to Retail" Campaign, however, we would
suggest that greater benefits will result from committing these resources towazd development and
implementation of a Comprehensive Bikeway Plan. After discussion between the Board
members they agreed to support implementation of our own Comprehensive Bikeway Plan.
R. Smolich moved to authorize a minimum of $1,000 to Planning Staff to initiate development of
a Comprehensive Bike Plan for the Village of Plainfield. Seconded by K. Stalzer. Vote by roll
call. Dement, yes; Rack, no; Heimerdinger, na; Smolich, yes; Stalzer, yes. Motion carried.
POLICE _CHIEF' S REPORT
• Chief Bennett asked the Board if it's okay to go ahead and remove the current "Village Hall"
sign in front of the building, along with the lettering on the building. All Board members have
no objections.
Chief Bennett presented a proposal from Interplan for Phase I Remodeling of the Plainfield
Police Department, 1400 North Division Street for the Boards review and approval. For
Interplan's services we shall compensate in the total amount of $27,850.00. Chief was looking
far authorization for architects' drawings sa the job could go out for bids to determine actual
costs. The Board members debated pros and cons of adding an the Police Department facility,
redesigning the existing space, and even selling the existing facility and building a completely
new one elsewhere.
J. Heimerdinger moved to authorize the expenditure $27,850.00 for plans and construction
documents that develop the basement according to plans and the first floor according modified
plans which include holding cells on the first floor similar to Option #1. Chief Bennett
explained to the Board that this is unacceptable to his department. Trustee Heimerdinger asked
Chief Bennett far a compromise that would accomplish getting this building started. Seconded
by J. Dement. Vote by roll call. Dement, yes; Rock, no; Heimerdinger, yes; Smolich, no;
Stalzer, no. Motion is defeated.
• K. Stalzer motioned to adjourn. Seconded by R. Rock. President Peterson explained to the
Board that business was not finished yet.
PLAINFIELD VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
AUGUST 19, 1996
PAGE TEN
J. Heimerdinger moved that we authorize the expenditure of $27,850.00 for predesign and
development drawings as per the recommendation by Chief Bennett. Seconded by R. Smolich.
Vote by roll call. This includes the upper and lower level and no addition. (Phase I) Dement,
yes; Rock, yes; Heimerdinger, yes; Smolich, yes; Stalzer, no. Motion carried.
R. Rock moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by J. Dement. Voice vote. 5 yes, 0 no.
Motion carried.
12:15 a.m. Meeting adjourned.
,~
~ -
SUSAN JANIK' ~~LLAGE CLERK
•
I•
I find that I possess many Titles. As Small Businessman my company along
with rts 30 employees is a leader m its field and ~s growing. I put m many hours
and reap the satisfaction that comes from a completed project. Right now we are on
the threshold of completing Wesemere Elementary School, Timber Ridge Middle
School and Indian Trails Middle School remodelling. Finishing these projects is
even more rewarding because they are in my local School District.
As a Delegate two years ago I had the privilege of being nominated by my
•
peers, my competitors in fact, to represent them at the White House Conference on
Small Business. They trusted me to represent their views vehemently and honestly!
At that convention during five intense days we took 1800 divergent issues and
turned them into 60 recommendations to the President of the United States and
Congress. I am proud to say that a1121 issues the Chicago Delegation sponsored
were in those 60 recommendations. Those recommendations are now becoming
law.
It is mytle of Village Trustee that I am most disappointed. It seems
amazing to me that 1800 people and with all those divergent views and businesses
could compromise and agree on 60 core issues, while this board can't seem to agree
on the color of the sky. I have been here a little over one year and have
accomplished few of my objectives that you, the people hired me to do. My
revelation is not intended to cast aspersions upon my fellow trustees, but rather to
explain my next move.
There is a clear split on this board. In my opinion it is mainly about the
•
philosophy of spending money. That's not to say we don't spend money. We do.
We spend a tremendous amount of money. It is the efficiency with which we spend
those dollars that I have the greatest disagreement! In my business we must spend
money on tools, equipment and education to stay ahead of the competition. While
this government does not have the profit motive, it should! Our goal should be
efficiency, but if you continue to operate government like they did in the 1$00's
who's to know? This government has no competitor. However, that does not mean
it will not go broke! As a small businessman I see the waste. Everywhere I look I
see waste and inefficiency. Every penny we save by being efficient saves the
taxpayer money. But just as in business, you must spend money to make money.
To that end is what brings me in front of you tonight.
It is the future that gets my attention. For the one title I have that I hold most
•
dear is that of Father. As a father I want a better community for my children. As a
father I must feed my children and find money for taxes. It is also as a father that
my greatest fears arise. When some low-life stole my little 3 year old's' bike right
out from under her, it was the Police I called. When the Flood hit, it was the Streets
Department who filled sandbags and pumped basements. It was the Building
Department who walked every home, house to house, to tell you if it was safe, and
us where the problem existed. It was the Administrative Department who manned
the phones and dispatched crucial personnel. Those people are professionals and
they deserve a professional environment in which to work. We can not expect
efficiency out of people who are trying to accomplish tasks in the outdated and
overcrowded facility they are now required to attend. We cannot keep throwing
money away on rent. To date we have wasted over $100,000.00 on rent. And what
do we have to show for it? A stack of bills. I am not advocating building a Taj
Mahal. Far from it! But a Multipurpose core facility that can be added on to for
years to come, accommodate future growth and handle our immediate needs.
Since this board can only seem to muster a 2-2 or 3-2 vote on any monetary
•
issue. And since I know this board could issue revenue bonds paid for with the
Utility Tax without direct voter approval. I am going to withhold my vote and use
I•
it where it will do more good. We are about to make monumental decisions that
will affect the Village for the next 20 years. Some of us feel the entare future of this
Village sways in the balance. In order that our decision will have the support and
will of the people; I will propose that we adopt an ordinance to put to
"a referendum vote of the people," a bond issue for the purpose of infrastructure
improvement and real estate acquisition in and around the Village of Plainfield to
build and equip a new Village Hall, Police Station and Streets Maintenance Garage
Facility not to exceed seven million dollars on the November ballot.
The Flood has forced this community into a decision. It is unfortunate that at
•
this time I can not know the exact cost ramification of these facilities. However,
before the November election I promise to nail down every number and distribute
to each taxpayer a written accounting of each item proposed and its cost, if any, in
additional TAX dollars. Until I know what FEMA and our insurance will pay, I am
not entirely convinced that we can accomplish this task without additional tax
money. But the choice will be up to the people of this community.