Loading...
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.