Loading...
COW Minutes 2007 12-18-07 Page 1 of 10 APPROVED 1/8/08 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER December 18, 2007 7:00 P.M. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT: Mayor Valerie Burd Alderman Robin Sutcliff Alderman Gary Golinski Alderman Wally Werderich Alderman Jason Leslie City Treasurer Bill Powell Alderman Munns (arrived 7:25) City Clerk Milschewski Alderman Rose Spears CITY STAFF PRESENT: City Administrator McLaughlin Chief of Police Martin Assistant City Administrator Olson Park & Recreation Director Mogle Attorney Orr Community Development Director Miller Finance Director Mika Public Relations Officer Spies Public Works Director Eric Dhuse City Engineer Wywrot GUESTS: See attached list. PRESENTATIONS None. DETAILED BOARD REPORT — BILL LIST Alderman Spears questioned the following items on the bill list: o Page 10, Dan Kramer Law Offices in the amount of $2697.98. Assistant City Administrator Olson explained that this was the fee for the Pobol Annexation. o Page 15, Engineering Enterprises, Inc. Montgomery Boundary Agreement - in the amount of $1,965.75. Alderman Spears asked if Montgomery paid half of this charge. Mr. Olson stated that they did. o Page 15, Engineering Enterprises, Inc. North Star Parcel - in the amount of $1,965.75. City Engineer Wywrot explained this was the charge to reviewing the legal description for the Annexation Agreement. o Page 36, Michael and Denise Kachlic — Refund of unused liquor license in the amount of $424.70. Mr. Olson explained that this was a transfer of ownership of a business so the unused portion of the license was refunded and a new license was issued to the new owner. o Page 46, Yorkville Flower Shop — green plant in the amount of $47.00. Administrator McLaughlin explained that this was a gift to the Yorkville Economic Development Corporation for their new office. There were no further questions or comments. The Bill List was placed on to the December 18, 2007 City Council agenda for approval. Page 2 of 10 Mayor Burd asked that #2, PW 2007 -193 In -Town Road Program — Roadway Change Order #3 under the Public Works Committee Report be moved up on the agenda for discussion an a representative from Smith Engineering was present for clarification. It was the consensus of the Council to move the item up PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE 1. PW 2007 -193 In -Town Road Program —Roadway Change Order #3 City Engineer Wywrot reported that the change order was for work done on Mill and Heustis Street in order to bring the roads back to the condition they were in before the stop work order was issued. The stoppage was followed by heavy rains that washed out the roads which are on a steep slope. The roads had to be regarded, etc. before the paving could take place. Mayor Burd noted that Jason Poppen from Smith Engineering was present to clarify the confusion on the scope of work. She asked him to explain the situation and give background information. Mr. Poppen explained that the original scope of work was to resurface the road however work was stopped and the city held a public meeting. During the meeting, drainage issues were brought forward by residents. He felt that there was confusion as to what the project was initially to encompass which was just the resurfacing of the road which included new curbing. Drainage issues were not included in the original project. Due to miscommunication, the residents saw the new curbing and did not understand this. He stated that a lesson for the future was learned; part of the design process should be providing information to the residents. He felt it would be better to be proactive with the public prior to any construction project such as this. Mayor Burd stated that she and representatives from Smith Engineering discussed that they met the scope of the project and if there were drainage problems after the project was completed, the street would not have been ripped up and redone. Smith met the design standards that the city agreed to. Mr. Poppen explained that the project was designed to the scope agreed to by the City Council. Subsequently, there was work done outside of the scope such as isolated drainage issues and additional costs were incurred. Mayor Burd stated that the city learned about some storm water issues that they weren't aware of at the ward meeting. She stated that addressing these issues was not included in the scope of Smith Engineering's work. Mr. Poppen stated that residents spoke with the project manager Mark Landers and himself regarding the issues and the concerns with the curb heights. He got involved to assure and educate the public that it was a good design and why it was going to work. Alderman Golinski asked Mr. Poppen if he felt they had a good, solid design and Mr. Poppen stated that he did. Alderman Golinski stated that it was his understanding that the drainage issues could have been addressed after the asphalt had been poured. Mr. Poppen stated that some of the issues could have been taken care after paving however drainage wasn't the scope they were under contract for. He explained that the topographical survey only goes 10' up and this did not show drainage issues. Alderman Golinski agreed that education is the key and should happen prior to a project. He felt that if the residents had been better educated it wouldn't have cost the city in access of $35,000.00. Mayor Burd stated that some of that cost was for change orders that would have been made anyway due to the drainage problems. Mr. Poppen stated this was potentially correct and he felt that the project was a success. Page 3 of 10 Alderman Spears asked what the additional $15,000.00 was for and if it was related to the drainage issues. Mr. Poppen stated that the charges were from Aurora Blacktop and were probably due to the work stoppage. They had to relay binder and remobilize. Mr. Poppen explained that the first change order for $20,000.00 was for Smith Engineering's services outside the scope of the project. She asked if the project had been completed, could the drainage issues been addressed at a later date. Mr. Poppen stated that they could have. Alderman Spears stated that representatives from Smith Engineering as well as the city engineer were present at the ward meeting and explained that they stand behind their work. She noted that the work was stopped by people who were not engineers or experts in this area. She stated that this was a problem and the council should respect the staff as well as the firms they hire. The stop work order cost in excess of $20,000.00. She questioned if the residents who were behind the stoppage would want to contribute to the additional fees and she asked if there were going to be resident meetings on every project. Mr. Poppen stated that the hope is that by being proactive, issues such as these could be avoided. He acknowledged that this will cost more upfront but the meetings may change the scope of a project at the beginning. He stated that every in -town road program is not perfect because there is old infrastructure in place that needs to be retrofitted to work. Additionally, the work needs to be kept in budget. Mayor Burd clarified that some residents didn't stop the work, she did and she would do it again. She stated that when residents are concerned about something on the street in front of their house the city needs to listen to them. She stated that if many people are upset with a project, the city failed by not educating them or allowing them to present their drainage problems. City Administrator McLaughlin suggested that when the city scopes a project some funds should be kept in reserve for adjustment in the project. He noted that after the ward meeting staff gave Smith Engineering direction to engineer some solutions to the stormwater projects and to submit change orders for the work. The concerns were addressed as the street was being finished and adjustment to the design while the project is being built is a cost effective solution. To come back in after the fact and try to retrofit the drainage to the road, the cost would have been greater. He stated that doing the adjustments "on the fly" wasn't necessarily the worst cost benefit analysis out of several different scenarios. Alderman Spears asked Mr. Poppen that if Smith Engineering finished the road per their scope of work and then it was determined there were drainage issues, would anything that was already completed have to be redone. Mr. Poppen explained that they could have performed the original scope of work and not addressed the issues. Alderman Spears stated that if the city asked them to address the issues, would the city have had to pay for Smith Engineering to dig up everything and redo it. Mr. Poppen indicated that he did not know the cost that would have been incurred. He explained that there were just a few areas with drainage issues and to rectify these issues there would have been some additional cutting into the road. He felt it probably would have been more expensive to do after the road was completed. Alderman Spears asked again would they have bad to destroy the work that was completed to address the specific drainage issues and Andy Mrowicki with Smith Engineering stated basically no. Alderman Golinski agreed that it is important to work together however he wasn't notified before the unilateral work stoppage for work that was being performed in his ward. He stated if he had been notified he would have voiced his concerns about the budget and the schedule for completion with school buses hitting the road very soon after the completion. In regards to a learning experience, it would be good to learn to make a courtesy call to all the aldermen in the Page 4 of 10 ward that is affected by the situation. Mayor Burd apologized; she thought he was emailed about the situation. ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Burd noted that the developer asked that Item #2 - PC 2007 -38 Menard's 6 Addition Preliminary /Final Plat be tabled until the second meeting in January. Administrator McLaughlin explained that there is a possibility that they may not need this subdivision based on business decisions. 1. PC 2007 -36 Pobol Rezoning 2. PC 200 7-3 7 Blackberry Woods PUD Amendment 3. EDC 2007 -49 Yorkville Crossing Unit I (Wal- Mart)Final Plat — Recording Time Extension Request 4. EDC 2007 -50 Integrated Transportation Plan — Illinois Tomorrow Grant Funding Match 5. EDC 2007 -52 Aurora Area Convention & Visitors Bureau —Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement Renewal 6. COW 2007 -44 Cable and Video Competition Bill a. Right -of -way Ordinance b. Franchise Fee and Peg Fee Ordinance c. Customer Service and Privacy Protection Ordinance Mayor Burd asked if there were any comments or questions on the consent agenda. There were none. These items were placed on the December 18, 2007 City Council consent agenda for approval. I MAYOR No report. CITY ADMINISTRATOR 1.COW 2007 -47 Meeting Structure and Schedule for 2008 Administrator McLaughlin reported that the recommendation out of the last City Council meeting was tentatively to have City Council meetings on the second and fourth Tuesdays of the month and a brief Committee of the Whole meeting followed by committee meetings on the first and third Tuesdays of the month. He stated that the Administration Committee has thrown out the idea of reverting back to the full meetings schedule used in the past. Alderman Spears confirmed this. Administrator McLaughlin noted that a concern with the ability to digest the issues from COW meetings prior to the City Council meeting was expressed. Under the format he proposed (COW before committee meetings) the City Council would be a more open discussion similar to COW meeting with a vote after the discussion of item. Items could be tabled if someone was not ready to vote or if more input was needed. Alderman Spears requested that the old schedule be re- implemented. She expressed her concern with having two committee meetings occurring simultaneously; aldermen are unable to attend meetings of committees they are not part of. She also expressed the concern of having minute takers sitting around waiting for the COW to end. Page 5 of 10 Alderman Golinski stated that the old structure was eight meetings per month and an alderman had to attend six of them. He stated that he didn't have a solution to shorten the meetings and he wasn't an advocate of more meetings however he thought more, shorter meetings would be better. He noted that when a meeting ends at 11:30 p.m. he is unable to get to sleep until 2:00 a.m. Mayor Burd commented that the meetings aren't shorter; the COW's are long and everything is regurgitated at the next City Council meeting. She commented that the committee system has four aldermen handling certain topics that are brought to the COW meeting where those not on the committee can have input. She suggested that the committee meetings be abolished and there only be a COW meeting. Alderman Werderich was concerned with not being available to attend some of the committee meetings. He thought Administrator McLaughlin's idea of a short COW meeting was to offer time to comment on items on the other committee agendas. Administrator McLaughlin agreed that this was his intention. Alderman Werderich stated that he wanted to shorten meetings however he still wanted more information. He supported trying the idea and if it doesn't work it could always be changed. Alderman Sutcliff stated that when she gets a packet from a committee other than the one she is on, she likes to discuss items of concern with the chairman either by email or by talking to them. She felt that nothing has seemed to work yet so she was open to Administrator McLaughlin's proposal. Alderman Leslie suggested giving it a try however the COW should be held to under an hour. He liked the reduction of meetings. However, Alderman Munns stated that he was leaning towards returning to the old schedule with a time limit to the COW meetings. Alderman Munns noted that two issues were covered in one hour tonight and he felt there would be a lot of carryover. Alderman Spears asked who would determine which items are tabled and would special meetings be needed. Alderman Leslie felt this was good point but there should be mutual respect and a rotation system could be instituted so everyone has a chance. Alderman Sutcliff felt the reason for the COW was not to go over each item but rather those there was an issue with. Administrator McLaughlin agreed and stated that the COW would not be for debate but rather information. Discussion would be at the committee level and then at the City Council meetings. Alderman Golinski noted that the City Clerk had concerns with this schedule. He asked for her comments. Clerk Milschewski asked how she would cover the meetings with minute takers. She stated that two committee meetings a night calls for two minute takers. If the COW is to be held before these meetings and limited to an hour, she could have one minute taker cover the two meetings. However, the other minute taker will either have to sit around waiting for the COW to end or come into a meeting at 8:00 p.m. She questioned how the minute taker waiting would be compensated. She gave the example that while the COW meeting was going on tonight, a court reporter was on the clock waiting for the City Council meeting to begin so she could cover the public hearing. She noted that the court reporter is being paid to sit through a COW meeting. Also, asking the minute takers to start at 8:00 p.m. might not be attractive to them. Alderman Spears stated that originally, discussion was to take place at the COW meeting and not be carried over to the City Council meeting. This is way the Governing Ordinance limits the speaking time of the aldermen. The COW was not design to have the committee say that an item Page 6 of 10 was discussed at the committee and it is okay to vote on. She did not see a COW without discussion being successful. Administrator McLaughlin stated that he has received feedback that the City Council meetings are still going long despite the COW discussion. He noted that there are several communities in Illinois who manage under other governance beside two COW, two City Council meetings and four committee meetings. They get their work accomplished in shorter time frames. Mayor Burd asked if this should be brought forward for a vote since everyone had their opinion and no one was changing their minds. Administrator McLaughlin noted that the City Council needs to set a schedule for 2008. There is always the ability to change the schedule but one still needs to be done. Clerk Milschewski suggested that the Council have committee meetings on separate nights, abolish the COW meetings, change the Governing Ordinance to eliminate time constraints at the City Council meetings and vote after the items are discussed. It would be similar to the current meetings structure with out the redundancy of the City Council after the COW meeting. Attorney Orr commented that 99% of municipalities operate as Clerk Milschewski suggested. She noted that the difference is that the City Council meeting is where information is swapped from the committees. She felt that this method gives the committees far more worth because it will be their job to convince the other Council members of their conclusions. She stated that the City Council meetings will be longer but the public is better served because they will know there will be a full discussion at the City Council meetings. She agreed there can be no limitation to discussion at the regular meeting. She stated that experts only come to committee meetings and City Council meetings. She also noted that the committees should not meet on the same night. Clerk Milschewski noted that this method will also benefit the public who currently wait through lengthy COW meetings to make public comments. Mayor Burd was concerned that the Council would lose pay under this method and the pay schedule couldn't be changed. Attorney Orr explained that this could be adjusted as long as compensation isn't increased. For example, instead of being compensated for a COW meeting, the council would be compensated for a committee meeting as long as the total amount remains the same. Alderman Spears commented that the money wasn't an issue for her. Clerk Milschewski noted that she was the only one who stood to lose because she did not attend committee meetings. There was discussion regarding the days the committees should meet and it was determined that they should meet one on each Thursday on the month. It was the consensus of the Council to adopt this new schedule, City Council meetings on the second and fourth Tuesday of the month and committee meetings on Thursdays; the order of which to be determined by Administrator McLaughlin and staff. The compensation issue will be figured out by Administrator McLaughlin. PARK BOARD No report. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE 1. PW 2007 -182 Well No. 4 Rehabilitation Contract City Engineer Wywrot reported that this is a significant contract to award and there is a base and supplemental bi. The supplemental bid may not be needed. Administrator McLaughlin also Page 7 of 10 I I noted that there is a sole source; there is only one contractor uniquely qualified to accomplish the work needed. He noted that the city has used them before and had a good experience with them. He suggested that this be placed on the consent agenda. There were no further comments or questions. This item was placed on the December 18, 2007 City Council consent agenda for approval. ECOMOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE No report. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE 1. PS 2007 -34 Somonauk Street (Route 47— Colton) — On- Street Parking Ban Alderman Spears reported that this was discussed at the Public Safety Committee which was attended by property owners and a business in the area. The owners of Realty Executives felt that the ban would have a direct impact on their business due to their small parking lot. Chief Martin explained to the committee the public safety issue caused by parking on the narrow street especially with school bus traffic. The committee recommended the parking ban. Alderman Werderich asked if the gentleman present from Realty Executive could speak. The Council agreed and Jeff Gregory, one of the three owners of the business, addressed the Council. Mr. Gregory voiced the following comments and concerns: o The business was purchased 1 % years ago because the growing area of Yorkville attracted them. The parking lot in the rear of the building along with the on- street parking attracted them to the building. o They shared the concern regarding bus traffic but noted that usually cars are not parked on both sides of the street at the same time. They have never seen a situation of congested parking causing an issue. o Currently, between their parking lot and street parking, there are 27 parking spots available for employees and customers. The ban would limit their parking to seven parking spaces in their lot and they currently have ten employees. o It was suggested at the Public Safety Committee meeting that people could park at the school two blocks away and walk to work. It is not feasible to expect employees or clients to walk two blocks to work especially if it is snowy and sidewalks aren't shoveled. o If the ban is approved they would look for an alternate location for their business and it may not be in Yorkville. This would affect the employees who live in Yorkville and relocation would also cause a financial hardship. o The parking ban was in conflict with the business zoning. It would cause a hardship to any other business such as a doctor's office that may rent the building. o They didn't want to compromise safety however they haven't uncovered any evidence of a safety hazard in front of their location. The police were asked if they had uncovered any tangible evidence of a safety issue. o There is a safety issue asking residents or their guest to park more than a block away from their home. o Under the proposed solutions, they supported taking no action and suggested limiting parking to one side of Somonauk Street or in front of the four closest properties to the intersection. It was also suggested to him that Somonauk be made a one way west bound street. Mr. Gregory stated that if the safety issues could be addressed without a parking ban he and his partners would appreciate it. Page 8 of 10 Alderman Leslie noted that the property in question will be encroached upon when the turn lane is implemented. He understood their concerns but drives down the street often and agrees it is safety concern. He supported the ban. Alderman Spears stated that the committee discussed this at length. She felt that the city is proactive with safety issues and felt that it should be addressed before someone is injured. She explained that Alderman Sutcliff brought this forward after residents voiced their concern. Alderman Sutcliff stated that she appreciated and understood Mr. Gregory's concerns however the safety of this intersection was overwhelmingly brought to her attention by residents in the area. The parking ban was suggested by residents. She noted that the side street Colton is only two houses from the business and people could park there. She further noted that she drives by quite often and has never seen their parking lot full. She stated that when a traffic study was done, 400 to 700 cars go through the intersection in a single morning. Having to go around parked cars is extremely dangerous. Chief Martin stated that in his 29 years on the force this had been the most talked about street in regards to parking. Cars parked on both sides of the street make it difficult for traffic especially buses to get through. He noted that two traffic studies have been done at this intersection and 600 to 700 cars travel this street per day. He supported the business but he has had many residents express their concern and fear something awful will happen at this location. Because of this, he supports a parking ban from Route 47 to Colton Street on both sides of the street. He investigated Mr. Gregory's suggestions however he still feels the parking ban is best. There were no further comments. It was the consensus of the Council to place this item on the December 18, 2007 City Council consent agenda for approval. ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE 1. ADM 2007 -113 Sunflower Estates SSA 2006 -119 Abatement Ordinance Alderman Munns stated he was unable to attend the last Administration Committee meeting and turned the floor over to Alderman Werderich. Alderman Werderich reported that initially this item was set for the consent agenda however it was pulled off because the figures had changed. He spoke with Administrator McLaughlin, Director Mika and Director Dhuse who addressed his concerns. He suggested that if there were no other concerns this item could back on the consent agenda. Alderman Spears asked how the new figures were determined. Administrator McLaughlin stated that the original intent was to project the expense for the future year. This was reviewed and it was determined to take what was actually spent and bill the residents this amount on their tax bill. They will get billed one year in arrears so the figure was lowered. It was the consensus of the Council to place this item on the December 18, 2007 City Council consent agenda for approval. 2. ADM 2007 -123 2008 -2009 Tax Levy Ordinance Alderman Werderich asked for Administrator McLaughlin for input on this. Administrator McLaughlin stated that because it is the tax levy and a major thing it was thought to do a separate vote however it could be placed on the consent agenda. Page 9 of 10 Mayor Burd pointed out that the library levy is on the tax levy and done the correct way. She thanked Director Mika for her efforts. Alderman Spears asked if the library approved of what the city is doing. Administrator McLaughlin stated that it has been discussed with the library and they would like to get the full 1.5 levy. He explained to them that based on the dollar increases in the assessed valuation around the city and the dollar amount that they have received in past years he did not feel it was financially prudent to continue to give the large increase. Also discussed was their overall budget and that the city believes there is more than enough dollars being levied to cover their operating and capital budget next year. Everyone feels confident that enough money will be levied to sufficiently operate the library for the next year. The proposed levy is a 10% increase over last year and to continue moving the library up at a. 15 level would take away resources from the Police Department, Public Works, Parks, etc. Alderman Munns clarified if the library budget was due in May and Administrator McLaughlin stated that it is approved May 1 st of every year. Alderman Munns asked if the city levies this amount but wants to cut the budget would it have any effect. Administrator McLaughlin explained that there is an opportunity in the spring when the budgets are being done to adjust the tax levy before it is extended out in the tax bills. Alderman Munns asked if the library has to spend the entire amount levied and Administrator McLaughlin stated that once there is a levy and budget for the library it is at the discretion of the Library Board on how it gets spent. Attorney Orr added that what ever dollars are collected in the library levy goes to the Library Board and the funds can be carried over. Alderman Leslie stated that it was a concern of the Library Board that they wouldn't be undercut. He noted that the city has the ability to increase the levy if they see fit. He stated he was comfortable with the levied amount knowing this along with the fact that the levy will cover their budget. Mayor Burd stated that the city needs to think of a more global budget; dollars are needed for other departments. She stated that they seem to be comfortable with what they are receiving or else they wouldn't have given out bonuses. Alderman Munns commented that he felt the bonuses could cause ill will amongst employees because it is not done citywide. Administrator McLaughlin stated he addressed this with department heads where he explained the law that it is at the Library Board discretion how to expend funds along. Also he noted that many of the city employees saw significant pay increases as a result of market conditions. He stated that the library employees have not seen a market rate adjustment. He has suggested to the library administrator she review where she is at in the marketplace and make a recommendation to the Library Board. Alderman Munns noted that many people working for private companies don't get bonuses and he was concerned with giving tax payer money for bonuses. There were no further comments or questions. This item was placed on the December 18, 2007 City Council consent agenda for approval. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS Route 126 Alderman Leslie expressed his enthusiasm tah Route 126 was opened however he had a concern with the dangerous location of a utility pole. He asked Chief Martin to look at the location. Chief Martin asked Mr. Wywrot to look into it and he stated he would look at it tomorrow and address it with IDOT. Page 10 of 10 Route 47 Widening Alderman Leslie stated that the reference to imminent domain with regards to the widening of Route 47 has been brought to his attention. He noted that the city has an ordinance in place and he asked that private citizens outside of the scope of the Route 47 project a comfort level that the city will hold to its policy. Mayor Burd noted that the Route 47 project is under the jurisdiction of the state and the city has nothing to do with it. Alderman Sutcliff stated that she was told imminent domain is the last option the state uses to obtain property. Holiday Cookies Alderman Golinski reported that his wife baked cookies and they were available in the break room for a snack in between meetings. Tax Refund Alderman Spears asked for a status report on the tax levy refund. W. Olson reported that residents would be getting a letter December 31, 2007 regarding the refund. The amount still had not been finalized however the refund will be on the January 2008 water billing. Liaison List Alderman Spears asked if there is a list of the appointed liaison and Administrator McLaughlin stated that staff was still waiting on the Economic Development Committee. I Trust Fund for Senior Community Building Alderman Spears asked if the city could set up a trust fund or foundation for a senior community building. Attorney Orr stated that the city can commence the work for a foundation but it needs to have separate funding. Alderman Spears asked if this item could be placed on the Administration Committee agenda for further discussion. There was no further additional business. The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 P.M. Minutes submitted by Jackie Milschewski, City Clerk