Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout11.22.99 COW Agenda ' ~ ~ VILLAGE aF PLAINFIELD WILL COUNTY'S OLDEST COMMUNITY WORKSHOP OF THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES HELD ON MONDAY, NOVEMBER 22,1999 AT THE VILLAGE BOARD ROOM 530 W. LOCKPORT STREET, SUITE 20b, PLAINFIELD 7:00 P.M. 1) CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL, PLEDGE 2) MINUTES -Workshop Monday, November 8, 1999 Richard A. Rock PRESIpENT TRUSTEES Stephen J. Calabrese John H. Cherry Michael Collins Kathy O'Connell Steven L. Rathbun Raymond Smolich Susan Janik VILLAGI; CLERK 3) COMMITTEE STRUCTURE. At the Village Board meeting of May 17, 1999, the Committee of the Whale was adopted replacing four working committees. The motion adapting the Committee of the Whole included a review process following asix-month trial period. That review is now before us. The Committee of the Whole system has permitted all of the elected officials to receive all of the information at the same time. Participation, influence and direction was equal among the elected officials. i Major policy questions received the central focus. Topics such as Renwick Road Bridge, downtown architectural services, Village Hall space analysis, intergovernmental issues and development plans were investigated, reviewed and modified by input from the entire Village Board. Less significant issues required the staff to synthesize data and prepare public briefs for consideration at regular Board meetings increasing staff and Board efficiency. The individual committee system stretched staff time and availability and delayed progress far a number of issues such as Des Plaines Street reconstruction, Van Dyke Road and the Facility Plan. Additionally, the staff from time to time became confused upon receiving direction from the Village Board that might conflict with direction of the individual committee. Attached is a report prepared in 1997 discussing most of the issues of Board structure. The staff unanimously recommends continuation of the Committee of the Whole. 4) BOLINGBROOK INTERCHANGE INITIATIVE. At a recent meeting Mayor Claar and his staff reviewed with the Village Board and the public the results of Bolingbrook's feasibility study for the expansion of the interchange at Route 126 and I-55. At the meeting the Board decided to defer any action ar comments until it had more time to evaluate the study and its alternatives. As Mayor Claar had indicated at that public meeting, the study is a concept plan presently and none of its individual alternatives represent final construction components. The study does however point out the relationships to our work . in extending 143rd Street east from Route 59 and provides an opportunity to work with other municipal jurisdictions in securing federal financing and state approvals. 530 W. LOCKPORT STREET, SUITE 206 •PLAINFIELD, ILLINOIS 80544 ($15) 436-7093 Fax ($15) 436-1950 The Staff recommends that the Village of Plainfield work cooperatively with the Village of Bolingbrook to explore the alternative to use Route 126 as an extension of our work on 143rd Street. Some of the Bolingbrook alternatives may affect negatively the Lakeland Development or increase traffic on 135th Street significantly. Our full participation will protect these interests. Your direction can be useful to our consultant for our Phase I Study on 143rd Street, but not preclude the option of extending 143rd Street beyond Route 126 as originally considered. (Information previously distributed) 5) INVESTMENT POLICY. Discussion of proposed investment policy for Village operating funds. State Statutes require the adoption of an investment policy by January 1, 2000. Seeking a recommendation for adoption at the December 6, 1999 meeting of the Board of Trustees. 6) LIBRARY MATTERS UPDATE. The administrator will update the Board and the public on the status of negotiating with Library. 7) ANY OTHER BUSINESS $) EXECUTIVE SESSION for the purpose of discussion on property acquisition. DEFERRED ITEMS Joint Meeting with Plan Commission -Jeff Durbin Ordinance Updates -Jeff Durbin Open Space Definition -Jeff Durbin Infrastructure Maintenance Fee-Chris Minick Radium Compliance -Allen Persons Oswego Boundary Agreement -Terry Burghard DesPlaines Street Power Lines-Terry Burghard Bolingbrook Rt. 126 Interchange-Terry Burghard • Richard A. Rock PFtESidENT C~ J TRUSTEES Stephen J. Calabrese VILLAGE OF PLAINFIELD Michael co f s WILL. COUNTY'S OLDEST COMMUNITY KathyO'Cnnnell Steven L. Rathbun Raymond Smolich Susan Janik VILLAGE CLEflK November 17, 1999 To: Mayor Rock and the Board of Trustees ~~ From: Chris Minick, Finance Director ~ Subject: Investment Policy Enclosed is a copy of an investment policy for the Village. State statutes require that we have an investment policy in place by January 1, 2000. I have modeled this policy from the samples as provided by the Illinois Government Finance Officers Association and the Illinois Municipal League. I have also included a sample of the monthly investment report as required by the policy. This report reflects the actual report that would have been submitted far September of 1999 had the policy been in place. The Village's investments to date have been reasonably simple. We have invested mainly in the . Illinois Funds (formerly IPTIP) and CD's from local banking institutions. The Illinois Funds is an investment pool of communities and taxing districts from all over the state. This money is then "pooled" and the Illinois Funds invests in securities as authorized by State statutes. The investment earnings are then allocated to the participants on a pro-rata basis. The Illinois Funds is administered by the State of Illinois Treasurer's Office. Funds in this pool are extremely liquid; they may be withdrawn at any time by the participants and used to pay obligations. The pool's 365-day rate of return as of the date of this memo is 5.84%. This is a typical annual rate of return for this pool. By way of comparison, the rate of return fora 360 day US Treasury Security was 5.48% for the week ended November 12, 1999. The Village has also traditionally invested in certificates of deposit from local financial institutions, mainly New Lenox State Bank and First Midwest Bank. The Village requires a combination of FDIC Insurance and collateral from these institutions for Village funds on deposit. As of April 30, 1999, the date of the Village's last review, all deposits with NLSB and First Midwest Bank were either fully insured or collateralized with securities held by the Village's Agent in the Village's name. This is the safest type of collateral that there is, and means that the Village would need to authorize any change in collateral provided for these deposits. This investment mix has traditionally been followed because the cash flow and liquidity needs of the operating funds of the Village are short-term and the Village has needed to assure that adequate cash is on hand to pay obligations as they come due. Because the Illinois Funds allows withdrawal of any deposits on an immediate basis, the Village has used this investment vehicle to maximize its investment earnings while maintaining liquidity for cash flaw purposes. 530 W. LOCKPORT STREET, SUITE 206 pLAINFIELD, ILLINOIS 60544 (815) 436-7093 Fax (815) 436-1950 The Police Pension Fund is not covered by the provisions of this policy. I have no authority or standing on the Police Pension Board to authorize any transactions or investment decisions. The Pension Board will need to pass its own investment policy based on its needs and current practices. I am recommending adoption of the investment policy at the next scheduled meeting of the Village Board on December 6, 1999. This time schedule will comply with the deadline as imposed by State statutes. Village of Plainfield Investment Policy I. Policy It is the policy of the Village of Plainfield to invest public funds in a manner which will provide the highest investment return with the maximum security while meeting the daily cash flow demands of the Village and conforming to all state and local statutes governing the investment of public funds. II. Scope This policy includes all funds governed by the Board of Trustees of the Village of Plainfield, except for pension retirement system funds. Those funds are covered by a separate policy. Except for cash in certain restricted and special funds, the Village of Plainfield will consolidate cash balances from all funds to maximize investment earnings. Investment income will be allocated to the various funds based on their respective participation and in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Re-allocations of this interest income may be made to the General Fund to reimburse the General Fund for administrative costs incurred in administering the investment program. III. Standards of Care Investments shall be made with judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived. The standard of prudence to be used by investment officials shall be the "prudent person" standard and shall be applied in the context of managing an overall portfolio. Investment officers acting in accordance with written procedures and this investment policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and the liquidity and the sale of securities are carried out in accordance with the terms of this policy. N. General Objectives The primary objectives, in priority order, of investment activities shall be: 1. Legality -conformance with federal, state, and other legal requirements 2. Safety -preservation of capital and protection of investment principal. 3. Liquidity -maintenance of sufficient liquidity to meet operating requirements that may be reasonably anticipated. 4. Yield -attainment of a market rate of return. The portfolio shall be reviewed periodically as to its effectiveness in meeting the Village's needs for • safety, liquidity, rate of return, and its general performance. • V. Delegation of Authority Management and administrative responsibility far the investment program is hereby delegated to the Finance Director, who, under the delegation of the Board of Trustees, shall establish written procedures for the operation of the investment program. VI. Ethics and Conflicts of Interest Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with the proper execution and management of the investment program, or that could impair their ability to make impartial decisions. VII. Authorized Financial Dealers and Institutions The Finance Director will maintain a list of financial institutions authorized to provide investment services. Where possible, preference for investment of Village funds will be given to financial institutions and brokers/dealers located within the Village of Plainfield. In addition, a list will also be maintained of approved security brokers/dealers selected by credit worthiness VIII. Authorized and Suitable Investments Investments may be made in any type of security allowed for in Illinois statutes regarding the investment of public funds. Investments shall be made that reflect the cash flow needs of the type of funds being invested. IX. Collateralization Funds on deposit (checking accounts, certificates of deposit, etc.) in excess of FDIC limits must be secured by some form of collateral, witnessed by a written agreement and held at an independent third party institution in the name of the municipality. X. Safekeeping and Custody All securities transactions entered into by the Village will be conducted on a delivery vs. payment (DVP) basis. Securities will be held by an independent third-party custodian designated by the Finance Director and evidenced by safekeeping receipts and a written custodial agreement. XI. Diversification The entity shall diversify its investments to the best of its ability based on the types of funds invested and the cash flaw needs of those funds. Diversification can be by type of investment, number of institutions invested in, and length of maturity. XII. Maximum Maturities To the extent possible, the Village of Plainfield shall attempt to match its investments with anticipated cash flow requirements. Unless matched to a specific cash flow, the Village will not directly invest in securities maturing more than one (1) year from the date of purchase. Reserve funds may be invested in securities exceeding one (1) year if the maturity of such investments is made to coincide as nearly as practicable with the expected use of the funds. Because of inherent difficulties in accurately forecasting cash flow requirements, a portion of the portfolio should be continuously invested in readily available funds such as LGIPS, money market funds, or overnight repurchase agreements to ensure that appropriate liquidity is maintained to meet ongoing obligations. XIII. Internal Controls The Finance Director is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure designed to insure that the assets of the Village are protected from loss, theft or misuse. The internal control structure shall be designed to provide reasonable assurance that these objectives are met. The internal controls shall address the following points: + Control of collusion • Separation of transaction authority from accounting • Custodial safekeeping + Clear delegation of authority to subordinate staff members • Written confirmation of telephone transactions for investments and wire transfers. XN. Performance Standards This investment portfolio will be managed in accordance with the parameters specified in this policy. The portfolia should obtain a comparable rate of return during amarket/economic environment of stable interest rates. Portfolio performance should be compared to benchmarks with similar maturity, liquidity, and credit quality as the portfolio. Such benchmarks may include the Illinois Funds rate of return, the 90-day T-bill rate of return, or other benchmarks as deemed appropriate based on the parameters noted above. XV. Reporting The Finance Director shall prepare an investment report at least monthly. The report should be provided to the Board of Trustees and available on request. The report should be in a format • suitable far review by the general public. XVI. Marking to Market A statement of the market values of the portfolio shall be issued to the Board of Trustees on a quarterly basis if the Village holds any investments in its portfolio subject to market value fluctuations. XVII. Investment Policy Adoption The investment policy shall be adopted by the Board of Trustees. The policy shall be reviewed on an annual basis by the Finance Director and any modifications made thereto must be approved by the Board of Trustees. C] Village of Plainfield Sample Cash and Investmen t Report 30-Sep-99 Account Principal Coupon Purchase Maturity Institution LLumber ~Am4.lJJlt Rate ~~ ~-~ New Lenox Stat~B~n~C Operating Account 300801189 1,648,425.75 2.00% N/A N/A DARE Account 300804852 25,279.98 0.00% N/A N/A CD 300774084 199,171.51 4.75% 7/8/99 1/6/00 CD 300774085 165,976.23 4.75% 7/$/99 1/6/00 CD 300906208 80,527.94 5.05% 10/29/98 10/29/99 CD 300774082 65,734.15 4.75% 7/10/99 1/8/00 CD 300774114 131,266.07 4.75% 6/3/99 6/3/00 CD 300774115 132,383.51 6.10% 12/5/97 12/4/99 CD 300774116 130,447.43 4.50% 9/1/99 11/30/99 Institution Total: 2,579,212.57 First MidwestBank:_ Utility Bill Payment Account 6703492 79,336.81 1.50% N/A N/A K-9 Account 1300440003 23,295.87 1.50% N/A N/A CD 227649 135,191.71 5.00% 7/14/99 10/14/99 CD 227644 269,130.46 5.00% 7/7/99 10/7/99 CD 227645 309,324.04 5.00% 7/11/99 10/11/99 CD 227646 129,452.64 5.00% 7/5/99 10/5/99 CD 227647 371,188.88 5.00% 7/11/99 10/11/99 CD 227648 92,869.20 5.00% 7/10/99 10/10/99 CD 242801 67,858.08 5.00% 7/14/99 1p/14/99 Institution Total: 1,477,647.69 General Account 713913969-0 6,911,955.53 5.05% N/A N/A Motor Fuel Tax (MFT) Account 713913970-8 939,351.26 5.05% N!A N/A Institution Total: 7,851,306.79 Fo nders BanLL_ Utility Bill Payment Account 5049317 10,178.45 4.00% N/A N/A 11,918,345.50 C] C~ To: Mayor and Board of Trustees From: T.L. Burghard, Village Administrator Date: May 19, 1997 Subject: Committees Prior to the Board meeting of May 5, Mayor Rock asked me for my observations on Committees and the methods by which the Board organized it's business. Background In Illinois, Village Boards and City Councils have great latitude in organizing and processing their public business. Actually, state statutes do not mandate to a Village Board a committee structure of any kind, although they require certain Boards and Commissions such as the Pension Boards and Plan Commission for oversight functions. Similarly, our local Code of Ordinances does not require and create the individual committees that we have utilized in recent years. These committees are established and operate by custom and are not codified. Presently there are six committees: Ways and Means Economic Development Growth Management Public Works Public Safety Planning and Development I understand that these committees were initiated by Mayor Peterson during his recent term and assume that the total of six such committees is an attempt to involve and divide the workload among the six Trustees. Each Trustee is a member of two committees and each committee is made up of two Trustees. There are several obvious situations where, in name at least, there appears to be overlapping areas of responsibility. For example, Economic Development and Planning and Development are closely related and interdependent. Public Works surely has a number of issues that relate directly upon Public Safety as well as upon Ways and Means. Fortunately, from what I understand, no serious "jurisdictional" conflicts ever developed and perhaps the appearance of overlapping responsibility may occur in name only. In many governmental structures, the jurisdictional disputes of committees hobble the organization completely. As long as we have cooperation among elected officials I assume that cannot happen here in Plainfield. L' C~ Some Options For simple clarification the committees may need a change of name and not necessarily purpose. Existing Committees Renamed Committees Ways and Means Economic Development Growth Management Public Works Public Safety Planning and Development Finance Community Development Development Ordinance Review Public Facilities Police Zoning and Plan Review This type of structure follows functional lines, is understandable, and common in a number of municipalities; but, among other problems, overlapping jurisdiction remains and an. opportunity for severe disfunction exists. For example, does the Water Department discuss its requirements for long term capital improvements with the Public Facilities Committee (planning the improvement) or with the Finance Committee (funding the improvement)? Probably both. Community Development would have an interest also since such an improvement may meet existing development needs or future needs of a project long stalled by inadequate facilities. Do Growth Management and Economic Development Committees have a relationship to oversee the plans of a major subdivision or should that rest entirely with Planning and Development? Because most functions clearly cut across committee jurisdictions, at least those functions that have some long term significance, the problem with overlapping would remain. Change in name only has no effect upon purpose and, thus, na effect upon overlapping. The overlapping and jurisdictional issue may be due in part to having six committees and only two Board members an each committee. An example of this may be a Trustee who sits on the Finance Committee but not on the Public works Committee. If a major capital expense is discussed and adopted at the Public Works Committee but its funding runs contrary to the existing fiscal needs of the Village, its approval by the entire Board is going to be troublesome because the member. of the Finance Committee may give greater priority to other projects. Reducing the number of committees and adding a third Trustee to each remainder committee enhances the Board's ability to reduce overlapping, advances the dissemination of necessary information and initiates the construction for a workable consensus. The various committee functions become sharpened in scope and mare manageable; the membership, and hence the understanding of information, becomes expanded; and, consensus building can begin. 2 But the reduction in the number of committees and adding members to the remainder also bring a new set of problems. How shall the Chairmen of committees be chosen? By seniority an the Board? By custom? By prior experience? Should Trustee Dement be the Chair of the Finance Committee since he has been on that committee (Ways and Means) for a number of years and understands the financial workings of the Village? Should Trustee O'Connell be the Chair for the Planning and Development Committee since she has prior experience as a member with the Plan Commission? Should we operate as the Federal government does and permit the senior elected officials with the longest tenure effectively choose their committees? If we reduce the number of total committees, say four committees rather than six, how do we determine which duly elected official is without a Chair? If the Mayor nominates other Village Officers should his position organize committee assignments? There are procedural problems here and I sense a dispute of jurisdiction. Aside from the issues of who should be where and why, reducing the number of committees does not eliminate overlapping. Adding committee members initiates the possibility of a consensus but does not create it. Additionally, if we continue with the system of multiple committees, and make no other changes, we actually increase the committee work load. If there were a hundred items of work for six committees before and the work load remains the same, the average work load among four committees is now increased by a factor of 25%. More work for fewer resources. Findings In the short time that I have been with the Village, but filtered through my seventeen years of municipal experience, I observe the following: A) Your present system of Committees is inefficient. It is a time consuming measure that seldom produces clear directions and requires that final action be taken by the entire Board. B) The Village Board is bagged dawn in day to day detail and seldom has the opportunity to effectively explore overall policy. C) Your clients, whether they are developers, local businesses or citizens, find the present system cumbersome, confusing and prolonged. D) The limited staff is stretched thin in achieving committee needs for information and attending too many meetings. E) Elected officials do not receive all the same information or operate in a similar working environment. • A Goal I propose a two fold solution. Eliminate multiple committees altogether; and, focus upon policy issues rather than day to day details. Our oaths of office command the standard of upholding the Constitution and the faithful discharge of the duties of our particular office. Unstated, but assumed within triat oath is the management and advancement of the Public Trust. Inherent in the Public Trust is the mandate that public business be pursued legally, openly, forthrightly, and with an adequate balance for the short and long term benefit to the public's interest. In that pursuit, our individual objectives are clearly secondary to that of the public's. While it is often difficult to articulate the public interest coherently, each of us has a sense, or feel, for what is fair and equitable as opposed to burdening and self serving. Whatever system we adopt must in the end help us articulate the public's interest and advance the Public Trust. On a temporary basis, and I stress TEMPORARY, The Village Board can experiment with a Committee of the Whole system that meets on the off-Mondays, limits and concentrates its Agenda to policy matters and delegates ordinance enforcement to the appropriate bodies. The Board could consider an Ordinance establishing a Committee of the whole (COW) for twelve months from the date of its adoption and requiring that at the end of the twelve month experiment a formal evaluation be conducted by the Board to see if the trial system has met its objectives. I can envision the following objectives of a COW system, and the Board members may want to add or clarify these objectives: A) Does the entire Board gain a better or worse understanding of community issues when compared to the present system? B) Daes the COW system build or hinder consensus? C) Is the Board's valuable public time sufficiently allocated to identifying and managing major policy issues? D) Is the staffs expertise and the Advisory Board's and Commission's work correctly utilized in providing the Board with policy background and options? E) As a unit, does the Board better utilize the experience of its own members? Within a COW system all issues and all data are presented and shared with the elected officials equally. All discussion and deliberation take place at a regularly scheduled evening meeting and each elected official has the opportunity far equal input. The power of the Board to act as a unit is simplified, its actions distinct, clear and understandble to staff, clients and the • a • public. The number of public gatherings and meetings is greatly reduced, review processes consolidated and the use of tax revenues focused upon community issues rather than day to day details. Disadvantages of the COW include the possibility of greater public conflict among elected officials, a distancing from same of the day to day Village operations and subsequent contact with individual staff members responsible for those operations, and a possibility of longer public meetings. It is this last disadvantage, longer public meetings, that drives the second goal of this recommendation ... the Board focus upon community policy issues rather than day to day detail. This change requires the discipline to demand clear analysis and direction from Advisory Boards and staff; and, in turn, to trust their evaluations and recommendations as they relate to our plans, goals and our local ordinances. And, where our plans, goals and ordinances are deficient they need to be outlined, redefined and officially adopted. The Board sets overall policy direction; the staff and Advisory Boards carry out that policy. If they cannot or do not carry out the legally adopted policy then these people should be changed. If our policies do not legally and clearly adopt our goals, they too should be changed. We cannot expect performance or achievement unless we determine and communicate direction and standards by which we will measure that achievement. For example, if development within our community has not satisfied our expectations it is not because we have not expended sufficient time, effort and money. A new development brought to us is reviewed nine times from concept plan to final plat. A business property that is currently zoned properly still appears before us several time for site plan approval. On the one hand we state publicly that we want good development and need to shift the tax burden away from existing residential properties. On the other hand, our procedures and codes transmit quite another idea, readily consumes private and public finances, and delineate uncertainty to all. I recommend that the Board better utilize its limited resources by establishing realistic goals and procedures, remand their enforcement to the appropriate bodies while clearly holding them accountable and emphasize an outlook as to how this community relates to the region. A COW system can and does provide this venue. Twice a month the Board as a whole will discuss such issues. The Board may have a need for some individual Trustee liaison assignments to the School District, the Chamber of Commerce, regional Planning Agencies, or specific assignments that are topic related as with electric deregulation, area land fills, pending legislation in Springfield and system wide transportation needs. There are time and issues that do dictate the need for Ad Hoc Committees. Specifically, at budget time each Spring the Board may find a Budget Committee useful in processing the volumes of data into one coherent document. Similarly, the review and modification of the • , Comprehensive Plan or the local Transportation Plan may be best served by a Board Ad Hoc Committee. But in each such instance there should be three members assigned and they should reflect all Board interests as a real attempt to build consensus and satisfy the Public Trust. Recommendation 1 recommend that the Mayor and Board of Trustees instruct the Village Administrator to have an Ordinance prepared to temporally adopt a Committee of the Whole system with an evaluation to be conducted at the end of the one year trial. The ordinance should be scheduled for the next available Board Agenda for discussion and consideration. Respectfully submitted, T. L. Burghard cc All Department Directors Village Attorney • 6