City Council Minutes 2011 05-24-11 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE UNITED CITY OF YORKVE LLE,KENDALL COUNTY,ILLINOIS,
HELD IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS,
800 GAME FARM ROAD ON
TUESDAY,MAY 24,2011
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Golinski called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Clerk Warren called the roll.
Ward I Gilson Present
Colosimo Present
Ward II Kot Present
Milschewski Present
Ward III Munns Present
Funkhouser Present
Ward IV Teeling Present
Spears Present
i
Also present: City Clerk Warren, City Treasurer Powell, City Attorney Orr, City Administrator/Interim
i
Director of Park and Recreation Olson,Police Chief Hart,Public Works Director Dhuse,Finance Director
Fredrickson, City Engineer Wywrot,and Community Development Director Barksdale-Noble
QUORUM
A quorum was established.
AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
- Alderman Gilson suggested we remove 2011-12 from the Consent agenda for discussion purposes.
i
Amendments approved unanimously by a viva voce vote
- I
PRESENTATIONS
1. Blackberry Creek Watershed Plan Update
Presented by Tara Neff from the Conservation Foundation.
Tara Neff was there to give an overview and look for input from the United City of Yorkville.What
is a Watershed?It is the area of land that catches snow/rain as it finds its way to a river or stream on
the ground water. Everyone is in a watershed.No matter where you are,you are still a part of a
watershed.How we use our land has a huge impact on the quality of water.The most important thing
when you look at watershed planning is that the watershed scale has become the planning and
management unit of choice for water concern.Areas of concern for our regional area watershed are
fluorides used for deicing operation.The fluorides that find their way into our rivers and streams are
permanently in our water. They have a huge impact if you are relying on ground or river water for
your drinking water. Another issue of concern is stream bank erosion.Not only are we losing
valuable top soil we are also increasing siltation and sedimentation downstream. When you have turf
grass or no naturalized buffer zone along a stream segment, 90%of what you apply to turf grass
becomes run off and runs directly into the stream.Algae is another concern for Watershed.Are
nutrients getting into our waterways?These are a result of runoff.It is unsightly and harmful to our
product life.
One of the biggest areas of concern for the Blackberry Creek Watershed is flooding. The first plan
was created in 1999 was the result of the flooding back in 1996 flood.How we use our land in the
Watershed has a huge impact of our water quality and also has a huge impact on the volume or the
amount of rainwater that you have to deal with and the rate in which you will have to manage that. So
when you change surfaces from pervious to impervious surfaces you have a potential strain on the
sewer system. Another thing is Fecal Coliform is another problem like goose poop or livestock.
Looking at Fecal Coliform as an indicator for more harmful bacteria like ecoli that are found in fecal
matter.When you use native grasses or native vegetation if you'll notice around retention ponds there
sometimes a lot of geese there and they leave fecal matter. If you have naturally higher grasses along
I�
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-May 24, 2011 -Page 2 of 15
those ponds to discourage them from being there because they are afraid they may become prey for
our predator.Those are some of the concerns we are looking at addressing through our Watershed
Plan.
Our Watershed plan is involving across municipal boundaries.We are looking to involve local stake
holders who are the experts and who are aware of the concerns in their areas. They are historically
more able to give input on the concerns.What they try,what has worked and what hasn't worked and
what they may want to try in the future. The Watershed Plan results in a plan that addresses specific
problems with solutions so that you can use this approved plan then to apply for federal dollars to
implement recommendations in the plan.Watershed plan recommends the voluntary methods to
protect and enhance our water quality. It develops an action plan for restorative and preventative
measures. It focuses on a waterway and its tributaries, so again the watershed scale not just the stream
here in our backyard but a collaborative approach. It is not a legally binding document,it is not a
means for enabling our uses,It is not a required of global comprehensive plan.
There are nine required elements that must be incorporated in a Watershed plan.That is identifying
and quantifying the causes and sources of impairments. There is this list that is required to be
incorporated in your plan.Includes things like education and outreach,and that is another component
that we will be looking to complete.Along with assessed financial and resources that might be
necessary to improve water quality based on the best management practices you might incorporated
and also creating a way to measure your successes toward achieving some of the goals in our
Watershed Plan.There are additional regional criteria that we have looked at incorporating into our
Watershed Plan.It takes a look collectively again at comprehensive land use plans. Trying to
determine what impact those might have on future water quality issues. And we have also been asking
our different stake holders on our Watershed to submit their ordinances and codes so that we can
compare those with the US EPA's water quality score card, so to give a little bit of reference, see the
attached diagram,we are looking in the darker green area is the Blackberry Creek watershed and this
is how it fits into the larger Fox River basin and the Fox River basin is the third largest tributary to
the Illinois River. One of the great things about this basin is that it has all of these great natural
resources.
I
We did a water resource inventory.There are all these great manmade and natural and human
resources throughout our Watershed. The draw of having this hugely attractive area is that land use
may be developed which increases population which increases drains on resources. The quality of the
lower Fox River basin gives us a point of reference for our Watershed.Blackberry Creek Watershed
again you can see is here,outlined in the dark black, and it extends through parts of Kane and Kendall
county.It has six municipalities that we are trying to get to come together,work collaboratively, share
ideas and to get a handle on things.We also have available from previous efforts who worked
collaboratively throughout the Blackberry Creek Watershed the original management plan that was
primarily used to address the flooding concerns.This plan is different for it is more concerned with
water quality concerns and practices for storm water runoff issues.There is also available Blackberry
Creek Watershed alternative futures analysis. That was published in 2003 and that helps us look into
the future to determine how this affects our water quality.
Currently the Blackberry Creek was assessed and found to be fully supporting for aquatic life and
found not supporting for primary contact,which is swimming, due to the presence of fecal coliform.
Blackberry Creek was not assessed for secondary contact which would be boating,fish consumption
or aesthetic quality. We know that flooding is another area of concern that we have throughout the
Watershed. What happens is with this impairment due to the presence of fecal coliform,the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency sent a grant to the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning
which is a Regional planning resource in Northeastern Illinois to complete the Watershed plan. Their
job is to make sure that we incorporated those nine required elements they will be in charge of
finalizing and compiling all of the information to make sure that we meet our deadline. CMAP,the
Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning, contracted with the conservation foundation to provide
planning, coordination, and technical assistance and The Fox River Ecosystem Partnership or PREP
which is one of the Illinois Department of Natural Resources Conservation Program. That brings us to
where we have been and where we are and where we plan to be.This is an abbreviated planning time
table which started in September and it will conclude in December.We have looked at a lot of things.
This summer May,June, and July is part of the reason she is here today,we are really seeking input
from local stake holders about what are some areas or projects that you can see in your community
that should be incorporated into the plan.Again you can apply for the federal funds for
implementation by having this approved Watershed plan,but your projects that have been identified
and included in the plan also get priority.That is why it is kind of important.You know better where
there might be some stream bank stabilization problems or maybe you need some wetland restoration
or maybe there is a filter strip that needs to go along an agricultural field. There's lots of these things
that you know exactly where they are and how that might be helpful that we would be very interested
in incorporating into this plan. That's what we are doing this summer. We will conclude everything
I
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting e it-M 24 1 -
gu �of the City Council May ,20 1 Page 3 of 15
i
so our final draft copy to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.After getting their feedback
and finalizing all of the other concerns the plan will be finalized in December.
What we are asking you to do is to continue participating in our monthly stake holder meeting, all of
our agendas and presentations and meeting notes and draft documents are available on the Fox River
Ecosystem Partnership website. We will be coming back around once the plan is finalized to look at
how the UCY actually adopt the plan which is not stating that whatever is in the plan you are going to
agree to do ABCD. It is simply stating that as a city you have agreed to the collective integration of
this plan. If you have any questions you can contact me. I am Tara from the Conservation Foundation
and I will leave my card so you may contact me. Thank you very much.
Mayor Golinski stated that he had a question.
Isn't there a rating scale for Blackberry Creek?Is there a rating on it like ABC?
Tara Neff from the Conservation Foundation answered that she doesn't think that it is necessarily a
rating so much as it is the information that the IEPA compiles based on the designated uses if
it is found to be not support of any of those five designated uses it goes on to their 303D list of
impaired waterways and that document is available,the 2010 document, integrated water quality
report is still in draft format for it has not gone through all the qualitative and quantitative finalization
process but fecal coliform is definitely, one of the biggest challenges is that fecal coliform is the
impairment but the source is not known so there are a lot of potential contributors so that will be a
challenge and something that will really be looking to appropriate local or state feedback on.
Mayor Golinski thanked Tara Neff from the Conservation Foundation and stated that next we have a
brief presentation by City Administrator Olson and Chief of Police Hart on the Whitewater Course
Maintenance Obligations.
2. Glen D Palmer Dam Bypass and Marge Cline Whitewater Course Maintenance Obligations
See attached power point presentation
City Administrator Olson gave a presentation on the Glen D Palmer Dam Bypass which is called the
Marge Cline Whitewater Course. This presentation has already been given to the Park Board in an
informal setting. The power point presentation includes weekly maintenance,monthly maintenance, semi-
annual maintenance to be done four times a year and annual maintenance with items to purchase and
their estimated costs included.The presentation also lists other issues which include insurance,life safety,
park issues,and concludes with a timeline.
City Administrator Olson asked Chief of Police Hart to speak on the public safety issues of the Marge
Cline Whitewater Course. Chief of Police Hart states that as City Administrator has already mentioned
that the city needs to keep a close watch in the area as well as the fire department has been working on
training for white water rescue. That is now one of our primary concerns. Citizens have donated money
by the Paddle association to purchase life vest. Like City Administrator Olson stated the main point the
city has is fisherman fishing in the channel may cause conflict and will need to be stopped.
Mayor Golinski asked if there were any questions.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
i
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Walt Stagner, Wildwood H,He first had a question about the last presentation.How much is Geneva
Kayak going to charge the city for training?City Administrator Olson asked Mayor Golinski if the Mayor
would like him to answer.Mayor Golinski stated yes and City Administrator Olson answered that it was
free for it was part of our lease agreement.Walt Steepner planned on talking briefly about the issue that
won't go away,the bike path,but he was glad that he was here to see the presentation on the Watershed
Plan because that brought up a couple things in his mind.First of all,after seeing the presentation, clearly
he thinks the best way to deal with minimal impact on the Watershed is to actually decrease the
population of the human race.He thinks we need to let the animals live, so he will be doing everything he
can to decrease the population of the area. Second of all,the thing that troubles him about things like the
Watershed is that people talk about grant money.Where does this grant money come from?Is there a
grant tree?He has a problem with that after seeing City Administrator Olson presentation about what the
city will be responsible for regarding the river route. That is a list of eventually what the city will be
responsible for in the Watershed.It was stated in the presentation that,that is not the case and there is
nothing binding here.Anybody that has anything to do with seeing the way government works,knows
that is not true. Eventually it has a way of becoming binding and once binding; it has a way of costing the
taxpayers. On the bike path,Alderman Gilson sent out an email that discussed the annual maintenance
i
I'
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-May 24,2011 -Page 4 of 15
cost of the bike path, even if it is built by private funding. That is money that we the taxpayers are going
to have to pay to the tune of$12, 000 dollars or so a year.That does not factor in the cost of lawsuits
which will happen.People will get hurt and there are all kinds of accidents that happen on the bike path,
so that cost of$12,000 per year of maintenance to be borne by the city and ultimately by the taxpayers,
the tax payers can probably double or triple that, so he would encourage the city to do whatever it has to
do to say the city cannot and will not be responsible for the maintenance of that bike path if and when it
becomes something that is part of the infrastructure.He doesn't know what the city can do but encourages
the city to explore all the options. Also watching City Administrator Olson's presentation,Walt S. states
that City Administrator Olson always talks about the worst case scenario but he believes that the city
should take the worst case scenario and double or triple the cost. The worst case always seems to be a lot
worse than it really was thought to be.Thank you very much.
Jesus Alaniz, Colonial Parkway,He wanted to clarify some comments that he made last week after Robyn
Sutcliff spoke about speaking to Dick Durbin.He thinks that some of his comments were not clear.He
believes that Robyn Sutcliff had everything backwards and hopes people realized that. He remembers that
there was one time a few years ago there was a speaker that spoke at the University of Illinois Chicago,
when his son was graduating. While running for public office the speaker spoke to the issue of
immigration.As a Hispanic,he took no offense,however he did take offense to the actions for the
incidents that took place a few months earlier relating to the protests for open borders,amnesty and the
desecration of the U.S. flag, as well as the Mexican flag being flown above the American Flag. This same
speaker called these folks as people that came here merely to seek their dreams.He was present and stated
that the speaker was Lisa Madigan.Lisa Madigan is not our friend.He also took issue with Robin
Sutcliff s comment that she was speaking to Dick Durbin to see what she could do for the City Of
Yorkville.By the Constitution of the United States,we don't need Dick Durbin. We The People will
decide if we will support Dick Durbin or not.It was Thomas Jefferson who said, "In questions of
power then,let no more be heard of confidence in man but bind him down from mischief by the chains of
the Constitution".Again this goes to what Thomas Jefferson said the state is broken, our country is
broken, and yet again we have grant money.Where the grant money comes from when we are broke,he
does not know.We do have our homes, it is our property.We work hard,we maintain our property. He
would like to remind the council of two English Poems written and repeated in the Colonial days. "The
poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the Crown.It may be frail; its roof may
shake; the wind may blow through it;the storms may enter,the rain may enter,but the King of England
cannot enter; all his forces dare not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!" "For a man's house is his
castle and each man's home is his safest refuge".Jesus Alaniz asks Mayor Golinski that in the decisions
that Mayor Golinski will be discussing in the coming months and years that Mayor Golinski remembers
the citizens property and that it is We The People that build the city and not any states attorney,U.S.
Senator, or any member of the House of Representatives.Thank you.
Dave Richmond, spoke about the water ordinance which is on agenda 2011-12 that was on the consent
agenda and was taken off for this evening.He knows that this is not the forum to have a discussion and
the committee meeting is the time for discussion.He was at that forum and not sure if any new concerns
have arisen since that meeting. This water ordinance has no cost to the city and the only liability to the
city is that the City will not take potable water from the contaminated area which is in Orange Street.
He asks this evening and encourages a vote on this ordinance to move forward and he also encourages the
council to vote yes on the ordinance.
CONSENT AGENDA
I
1. CC 2011-43 Minutes of City Council—April 12,2011
2. CC 2011-44 Minutes of Special City Council—February 26,2011
3. CC 2011-45 Bill Payments—$955,142.11 —approve bill payments in the amount of$955,142.11
4. PW 2011-26 Com2 Electronics Recycling Contract Renewal—authorize Mayor to execute
5. PW 2011-28 Water Department Reports for March&April 2011
6. PW 2011-36 Sunflower Estates Unit 3—Warranty Punchlist—authorize the calling of Travelers
Bond#B21867156M in the amount of$4,000.00 if the warranty punchlist work is not
completed by June 10, 2011
7. PW 2011-37 Heartland Circle—Warranty Punchlist—authorize the calling ofAmerican Southern
Insurance Company Bond#B98804-010285 in the mount of$4,000.00 if the warranty
punchlist work is not completed by June 10, 2011
8. PW 2011-38 Game Farm Road/Somonauk Street Project—ROW&Temporary Easement
Acquisition(802 South Bridge Street)—authorize City Administrator to approve acquisition
and payments for up to 27 parcel transactions, subject to available funding and for those
acquisitions where the property owner accepts the original appraised value of the acquisition
9. ADM 2011-20 Treasurer's Report for April 2011
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-May 24,2011 -Page 5 of 15
Mayor Golinski entertained a motion to approve the consent agenda as modified.
So moved by Alderman Munns; seconded by Alderman Kot
Motion approved by a roll call vote Ayes-7 Nays—0 Present— 1
Colosimo-Present,Milschewski-aye, Spears-aye,Munns-aye;
Funkhouser-aye, Gilson-aye,Teeling-aye,Kot-aye
Alderman Colosimo wanted to clarify that the reason he voted Present for the Consent Agenda as
modified was that his last check as the administrative hearing officer was on the bill payment list and he
didn't feel it was appropriate to vote since he was part of the bill list. He has no objection to anything on
the consent agenda.
Mayor Golinski stated that next on the agenda is the Public Works Committee Report and before we go
forward,you'll notice that the agenda is changed a little bit.We kind of moved things around to help
stream line these meetings a little bit and we moved the committee reports to the top of the agenda.That
is pretty much the meat and potatoes of why we are here to discuss this and there is no point discussing
these things at 10:30 or 11:00 at night.We will see how this new agenda format works out. If we have
problems with this we can fix it and see what we like.Public Works Committee.There are two items on
the Public Works Committee Report. One we pulled out of consent agenda and bike trails.
Alderman Gilson asked if we should do PW#1 first and Mayor Golinski stated that he would think so.
Public Works Committee Report:
1. PW 2011-33 Cost of Maintaining Bike Trails
Alderman Gilson stated Public Words 2011-33 Bike Trail Maintenance Costs.This is just an
informational item and asked City Administrator Olson if he wanted to inform Alderman Gilson
stated that we talked about this in committee.
City Administrator Olson stated that the discussion in the committee revolved around what is the actual
cost of maintaining,repairing,and replacing bike trails over the bike trails lifespan. The question revolved
around the Route 47 section.Need to make a decision on whether or not we want to fund it in the next
few months as part of expansion project. The committee, after doing the committee's analysis, found the
maintenance cost City Administrator Olson had quoted was wrong. City Administrator Olson had stated
about$10,000 per year for the six bike trails as part of the bike trail referendum. If the city wants to seal
coat every three years,which is recommended,the city is going to maintain 10%total bike trail square
yardage by repairing potholes and budgeting for replacement of those trails costs of those are much
higher. Staff error occurred for the staff did not spend as much time as they did last time. Secondly the
actual maintenance cost on the City of Yorkville's current trail has been significantly under what we
showed on the spreadsheet,for the city hasn't ever done any maintenance. The city has let the current
trails go as is.The first seal coating was done a year or two ago and it was done on all our trails.When the
council looks at that cost, $10,000 is a realistic estimate given the level of maintenance performed. Given
that information,the cost of maintaining possibly twenty miles of trails at that level is realistic but not to
the upkeep to a comprehensive level necessary to maintain the trails over a longer period of time. At the
meeting the committee asked City Administrator Olson to extrapolate those costs for all six new trails.
The budget as figured for all six trails in place considering a comprehensive maintenance schedule(seal
coating,pot hole repair,and future replacement)would be $66,757.39.This number could be reduced or
increased based on the cost of asphalt.
Alderman Gilson pointed out that the original estimates are considerably lower than what is shown today.
Our constituents were led to believe the maintenance cost of this project would have been considerably
lower. Alderman Gilson wants the council to understand that he put this item on the agenda so the issue
would be discussed out in the open.
Alderman Teeling asked if on the paths the city has now does the city budget this much money for them
currently.
City Administrator Olson stated no.
Alderman Teeling asked City Administrator Olson if the city is going to start budgeting for them. If the
city is going to use this information to say this is how much the trails are going to cost then this is the
actual cost of what the city should be spending on the trails we currently have. She believes that the
maintenance costs of the proposed trails may be overstated. She asked how many miles of trails do we
currently have in the city and what has been its maintenance costs?
City Administrator Olson stated that he does not know for sure.
Alderman Teeling asked how much do we budget annually.
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-May 24, 2011 -Page 6 of 15
City Administrator Olson stated at this point there is currently nothing budgeted other than the cost of seal
coating which was three or four thousand dollars.
Public Works Director Eric Dhuse stated that it was 7 cents a square foot.
Alderman Teeling asked if we have filled the potholes.
Public Works Director Eric Dhuse stated that came more from our dealings with Fox Hill that were filled
back in 2009.Those estimates were from HOA. The city trails are fairly new so the potholes will more
than likely get bigger and worse over the trails lifespan
Alderman Teeling asked if the trails the council are talking about are the ones that are over ten years old.
City Administrator Olson stated those in River Edge is one of them.
Alderman Teeling spoke about the safe route to school money that is going to be put into fixing
sidewalks. She asked if the city is going to budget for maintenance for those as well.
City Administrator Olson stated that is the prerogative of the City Council.
Alderman Teeling stated if the council is going to use this to say this is a bad thing to do and this is how
much this is going to cost then the council needs to be realistic and look at the past and what the city has
spent on the bike trails it currently has.
City Administrator Olson stated the city has not. Currently the city's to date numbers have been way far
below what he has estimated and it is probably higher than what he stated for the bike trail referendum
but it is certainly nowhere near$66, 000 dollars.
Alderman Teeling stated if the council is going to use this,it needs to look at the history of how much the
city has spent on the trails it currently has.
Alderman Spears stated her feelings are that twice the referendum was voted down by our residents, our
taxpayers, so she would like to have the people that are going to be collecting donations and the people
that are going to donated to be the ones to cover the maintenance expenses since the majority of the
people have already said no to the bike trails. If we are going to have people who donate, God bless
them, terrific. Let those people cover all the maintenance as well because we don't want this burden to go
onto the tax payers who said no.They not only said no once they said no twice.As far as the sidewalk
program,the safe walks to schools, she believes that is beneficial for the community, for our children.
She would like to see it in other areas also where we don't have sidewalks for our children to walk. This
is Grande Reserve's citizens biggest complaint,the children are walking in the streets.As far as this bike
trail that was voted no twice then let"s collect enough money the$66, 757.00 dollars and all the
maintenance as well.
Alderman Teeling stated that she did ask about the Grande Reserve safe walk to school and it did not
qualify. She feels that the bike trails are beneficial for the City for our town has other children that use
them.
Mayor Golinski asked if anyone else has questions or comments on the bike trail maintenance costs.
i
Mayor Golinski stated that he does have one question.Alderman Gilson brought us a good point.
If citizens are going to be doing a fundraising effort,then they need to know how the city council feels. If
the council feels that the city should not accept private donations because of the maintenance cost and the
city council will not vote to fund and put the trails in,the citizens do not need to go through a fund raising
effort. It is a waste of time.
Alderman Colosimo stated the concern he has was that it went through a Referendum twice and the
citizens have said no. If the question went to referendum twice stating if the city can receive free bike
trails,would the citizens be willing to pay the maintenance there may be a different result.The only
guidance is the two referendum votes of the citizens.He stated that we represent the people and asked the
citizens to contact their Alderman if they would like to give their input.If we get a strong citizen decision
one way or the other then that would influence the council's decision.As of today he would have to vote
no.
Alderman Munns stated that he agrees with Alderman Colosimo.He voted to put it on the referendum and
it was voted down twice with a resounding voice from the community.Unless another plan comes up
where the city council can fund the maintenance,if there was a vote today he would be voting no on the
bike trails.
I
i
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-May 24, 2011 -Page 7 of 15
Mayor Golinski asked if there was anyone else.
Alderman Funkhouser agrees with Alderman Munns statement.When maintenance is looked at, the city
council needs to take a proactive measure for this.History is a good indicator of how the city has run
items in the past.The council has seen this in our infrastructure that the city has under maintenance.The
city council need to take a proactive step.If this is an item that would be approved by the council and the
council decides to move forward,the council needs to be proactive.The council cannot take the low end
of the maintenance costs and assume it is a fair assessment for he believes that in these times it is not.He
feels that taking the low end of costs has led to some of the city's financial problems in the past.
Alderman Teeling stated that she assumes the city is going to increase the budget for the trails and
sidewalks in the city.
Alderman Gilson asked Alderman Teeling if she was advocating that the city does not start budgeting for
maintenance on the city's infrastructure.
Alderman Teeling stated that she was not saying that. She stated that the city is using numbers that the
city has not ever used before on the bike trails now. She feels the city needs to increase their budget to
take care of the trails we have now.
Alderman Gilson stated the city needs to start budgeting for streets, sidewalks, and all other areas that the
city has not budgeted for in the past.That is the essentials of government. To not be proactive about these
issues now would be a bad move on the City's part.
Alderman Colosimo agrees with Alderman Gilson. If anyone walks around his neighborhood in Ward I
there are huge potholes. The city has to take care of the infrastructure it has before the city starts thinking
about new infrastructure. He would love bike trails and this is not a question of if the citizens want bike
trails it is a question of priorities. The city does have to budget for infrastructure but must take care of the
infrastructure we have currently. The only money that the United City of Yorkville gets is the money
from the resident's tax bills. In Alderman Colosimo's opinion,until these issues are taken care of it would
be a very hard sell to install the bike trails.
Alderman Milschewski asked City Administrator Olson to clarify why the city hasn't spent the money on
the trails the city already has. Is it because the trails have not needed it or that the city does not have the
money.
City Administrator Olson stated that it is a little of both.It is a budget decision each year. Last two years,
this year included,the city has spent$50,000 city wide. When the city does the budget again,if it is a
priority,the city will need to make sure the city's bike trails and sidewalks are in nice condition.There
needs to be a line item on the budget stating$20,000 for the bike trail maintenance.That will give a clear
direction to the staff that this is a priority.
Alderman Milschewski asked at what level are the bike trails now.Are the trails deteriorating or need
work?
I
City Administrator Olson stated that information he will have to bring back to the council.He knows seal
coating has been done.
Alderman Milschewski stated that it would have been helpful to have that money budgeted in the past.
Alderman Kot stated that he is for Bike Trails.The city has only so much money to spend.He is
embarrassed about some of the city's streets. Correct me if I am wrong,but the city can build these bike
trails at a later date for the land is ongoing and can be set aside for that purpose.
City Administrator Olson stated no,not for the projects associated with the Route 47 construction.
For some cases the state is not involved so the land will still be there. For Route 47 if the city says no the
state will acquire less right away than they would for bike trails.There may be a scenario that the land is
_ still there but the state does not own it so the United City of Yorkville may have to go through acquisition
of that property.
Mayor Golinski stated that the State will put in wider shoulders if the city chooses not to fund bike trails.
City Administrator Olson stated yes.
Alderman Spears stated that theoretically people could ride bikes on the wider shoulders.
City Administrator Olson stated yes.
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-May 24, 2011 -Page 8 of 15
Mayor Golinski asked if that is why they make the shoulders wider.
City Administrator Olson stated yes.
Alderman Teeling asked how much wider do the shoulders add.
City Administrator Olson asked City Engineer Wywrot if he had a cross section.
City Engineer Wywrot stated that the outside lane would be one foot wider each direction.
Alderman Spears asked how wide it would be in total.
City Engineer Wywrot stated the 13 feet or 14 feet wide.
Alderman Spears stated that bicycles could easily ride on that size expansion, correct.
City Engineer Wywrot stated that bicyclers would share that lane with vehicles.
Alderman Spears asked how wide the area would be for people walking or cycling.
City Engineer Wywrot stated that he believes it is two feet.
Alderman Spears asked if someone could check on that footage to let the council know.
City Administrator Olson stated that if we don't do the bike trails the state will widen the road and the
shoulder will be grass or aggregate material.The actual road lane will be wider than normal, so people
will be expected to ride on the road lane.
Mayor Golinski asked if the lane line,white paint on the road,would be all the way to the edge of the
wider road or would it be two feet short to where there would be a line and two feet.
City Engineer Wywrot stated there would be no line between the bike lane and outside lane.There would
be one lane that would be a little wider for vehicles and cyclers to share.
Alderman Milschewski asked City Engineer Wywrot if the road would have a wider shoulder with a
white line such as on Van Emmon Road.
City Engineer Wywrot responded that is correct.
Alderman Funkhouser was under the impression that the scenario with the wider lane was similar to that
of Eola Road where there is a three or four foot section to the right of the white stripped line.That was his
understanding and this is contrary to what had been portrayed previously.
City Engineer Wywrot responded that he would conf=this item of interest.
Alderman Funkhouser stated that he would like the City Engineer to get back to the council on this
matter.
Mayor Golinski asked if there were any other comments or questions on this topic.
Alderman Spears asked what it would cost to put a white line in there so we could have two feet of
walking/bike space.
City Engineer Wywrot stated to comply with IDOT the outside would have to be widened more to put a
lane. If IDOT did that the city would need to repay for a portion. There is a Minimum width for a bike
lane approximately four feet.He believes that the City would have to pay for 20%of the costs for the
addition of a bike lane.
Alderman Gilson questioned why the bike trails need to be ten feet in width.Alderman Gilson expressed
concern for the individuals trying to raise funds.
Alderman Teeling asked if other communities with bike trails have been contacted for their maintenance
costs.
City Administrator Olson stated he had but none have gotten back to him. This is not an item that can be
found in a city's budget.
Alderman Gilson asked City Administrator Olson how wide our existing trails are.
I
i
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-May 24, 2011 -Page 9 of 15
City Administrator Olson referred question to City Engineer Wywrot.
City Engineer Wywrot stated most are ten feet wide and some are eight feet wide.
Alderman Milschewski asked City Engineer Wywrot if the State uses a white stripe to divide the path for
traffic.
City Engineer Wywrot stated there is not a stripe.Ten foot is a federal standard but there are some
conditions where the path width can be reduced.
Mayor Golinski stated that the city has a clear directive from the city council.
1. PW 2011-12 An Ordinance Prohibiting the Use of Groundwater as a Potable Water Supply by the
Installation of Use of Potable Water Supply Wells or by Any Other Method—authorize Mayor
and City Clerk to execute
Alderman Gilson brought this back to relay a response to the question if city passes this ground water
ordinance how does it relate to the no further remediation letter. If we do go forward with this then it
becomes automatic which is his rub. It is his rub because the state has L.U.S.T. funds.The L.U.S.T. fund
is Leaking Underground Storage Tank funds. State developed a standard for storage tanks and that
standard didn't hold up and they leak. If you look at a L.U.S.T.map for the state of IL the L.U.S.T. funds
are all over the place.The L.U.S.T. fund program that the state has is supposed to have money in each
fund for each site to remediate those particular problems; the state is in charge of that program.Even for
our city's contract work the contractor hasn't been paid.If the city council moves forward and approves
this the city is saying that the L.U.S.T. fund program is ok. By the city passing this ground ordinance, it is
saying that it is ok to have these L.U.S.T. funds and the city will get an automatic no further remediation
letter issued.For Alderman Gilson personally,he has internal issues saying that.
Alderman Colosimo asked City Administrator Olson if we pass this ordinance and the NFR letters are
issued by the IEPA what happens in the future if this area has an issue with mediation.The city has let the
owner off the hook. Alderman Colosimo does not trust the state of IL,to come in and help. At that point is
the city on the hook for that money.
City Administrator Olson stated that it was a good question and he referred to City Engineer Wywrot
City Engineer Wywrot stated he does not have a great deal of experience on this issue.He referred to the
agenda in which a state statue is available for reference.From his understanding the L.U.S.T. fund is still
available to further remediation areas that might exist after the letter is approved.He does not know who
the correct entity would be to access the money,but he still knows that the L.U.S.T. fund money would
be eligible to use.
Alderman Spears asked if City Administrator Olson could answer this question. She stated Alderman
Gilson said the last contractor hasn't been paid in two years from the lust fund. Is that correct?
i
City Engineer Wywrot stated there were four invoices sent to the state for this particular site.Two paid
and two still waiting.
Alderman Spears asked when the invoices were sent?
i
City Engineer Wywrot thinks there is a two year waiting list for reimbursement.
Alderman Spears stated that there is a two year waiting list just for our property in Yorkville. We did see
a map with a gazillion people waiting for L.U.S.T. funds.That may push us back to thirty or forty years
before the money is distributed to everybody. She does not believe that Yorkville is a priority.
City Engineer Wywrot stated it is a first come first serve to get in line and wait to rise to the top to get
money.
Alderman Spears is sure that list is huge.
City Engineer Wywrot replied that it is about a thousand invoices.
Alderman Spears thanked the City Engineer Wywrot.
Alderman Teeling stated that in a past conversation it was discussed that if anybody did any work those
people were responsible for anything that happens.
I
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-May 24,2011 -Page 10 of 15
City Engineer Wywrot replied that was only when the city was considering highway authority agreement.
The city would have a permitting responsibility.
Alderman Teeling stated then that doesn't have anything to do with this issue.
City Engineer Wywrot stated the permitting responsibility, yes. If IDOT goes in and they do 47 and they
fmd contaminated soils,he thinks it is likely that IDOT would be the one who would pay for the cost of
removing those contaminates.
Alderman Teeling said the person doing the work is responsible for contaminates.That is the thought she
got from the Public Works meeting.
City Engineer Wywrot stated that from a practical point of view the person who did the work would front
the cost and seek reimbursement from the L.U.S.T. funds.
�I
Alderman Teeling asked if that would be the only reason why we would need to have this remediated.
Are there other reasons this needs to be remediated?
City Engineer Wywrot said if it was disturbed. Otherwise it is just going to sit there.
Alderman Colosimo stated looking at the map provided in the packet,his neighborhood has one of our
own sanitation sewers going right through that area.If there is an issue with that sanitation sewer, isn't the
city the ones digging and isn't the city on the hook for remediation?The city will get into this queue to be
reimbursed two years from now.
City Engineer Wywrot said there is one sanitary sewer and one storm sewer going through that area.Both
of those sewers are said to be abandoned due to the Route 47 project.The city will have no utility in the
area after the 47 project is complete.
Alderman Colosimo said it goes back to his original question. Is the United City of Yorkville on the
hook?If the city is on the hook he does not want to pass this ordinance. If the city has no liability then he
has no problem passing the ordinance.Alderman Colosimo stated that this is a critical question for him
that needs to be answered.
City Engineer Wywrot if the city were to dig and discover contaminated soils above a certain level that
need to be removed the city more than likely would bear the cost of removing that soil and then seeking
reimbursement for L.U.S.T.money.There would be no reason for the city to go in there once these two
sewers are abandoned.The road is going to be reconstructed.The contamination is by and large below
that five foot elevation.
I
City Administrator Olson thinks the better way to phrase the question is"what are the chances of the j
IEPA rescinding in an NFR,the remediation letter?"That is essentially what the remediation letter does.
It says you don't have to do anything with the site. It is acceptable even if it is not perfectly clean but it is
generally protected.That would be a scenario where the IEPA would say yes we have issued this NFR but
will repeal it for whatever reason.
Alderman Funkhouser wanted to know if the city had to remediate,how much could that potentially cost
the city?Is anything done about liability?
City Engineer Wywrot states that it depends on the quantity of soil being removed.
Mayor Golinski asked where do we go from here. Should the Council table this topic.
City Attorney Orr stated that a motion has to be put on the floor before tabling for the council never made
a motion before discussing this issue.
Alderman Gilson made a motion for PW 2011-12 An Ordinance Prohibiting the Use of
Groundwater as a Potable Water Supply by the Installation of Use of Potable Water Supply Wells
or by Any Other Method. Seconded by Alderman Spears;
Alderman Colosimo made a motion to table PW 2011-12 An Ordinance Prohibiting the Use of
Groundwater as a Potable Water Supply by the Installation of Use of Potable Water Supply Wells
or by Any Other Method. Seconded by Alderman Spears
i
Motion approved by a roll call vote Ayes-7 Nays-1
Gilson-aye,Kot-aye,Munns-aye, Spears-aye, Colosimo-aye,
Funkhouser-aye,Milschewski-aye,Teeling-nay
I
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-MU 24, 2011 -Page 11 of 15
Economic Development Committee Report:
No report
Public Safety Committee Report:
No report
Administration Committee Report:
No report
Park Board:
No
Mayor Golinski asked City Administration Olson if he wanted to say anything about the Kayak Attack.
That was after the last city council meeting,right.
City Administration Olson replied that yes,that is correct dererring it to additional business.
Mayor Golinski states that the council can talk about it under additional business.
Plan Commission:
No report
Mayor's Report:
1. CC 2011-46 Appointments to Boards and Commissions
Mayor Golinski entertained a motion to approve the Mayor's appointments of Bob Johnson to the Fire
and Police Commission,Anna Schwein and Margene Westlund to the Human Resources Commission,
Barb Johnson,Joanne Gryder, Sandy Lindblom and Susan Chacon to the Library Board,Ken Koch and
Mark Dilday to the Park Board,Tom Lindblom to the Plan Commission, and Fred DuSell to the Police
Pension Fund Board
So moved by Alderman Funkhouser. Seconded by Alderman Spears
Mayor Golinski asked if there were any questions on these appointments?
Alderman Teeling asked if the Plan Commission is a full board now.
Mayor Golinski stated that there are two appointments outstanding. The next meeting we should have
more appointments. Department heads have not gotten appointed and must get appointed soon.Any other
comments or questions?
Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes-8 Nays-0
Spears-aye, Colosimo-aye,Funkhouser-aye,Milschewski-aye,
Teeling-aye, Gilson-aye,Kot-aye,Munns-aye
2. CC 2011-47 Library Board—Annual Report
Mayor Golinski stated that this is an informational item.He asked if anyone had any comments or
question on the annual report. This is mandated by statue that we have this annual report from the Library.
Mayor Golinski stated that there are no comments or questions.
3. CC 2011-48 City Debt Obligations and Options
Mayor Golinski stated that this is another informational item.Right after the swearing in Mayor Golinski
met with Peter Raphael and Kevin McCana our bond council and financial advisor.Mayor Golinski asked
Alderman Spears to sit in with him for she is chairman of administration committee. The point of the
meeting was to look at the city's debt obligations and what can be done in light of the new sales tax that
was passed. It is anticipated that the new sales tax will generate about$1.5 million in tax revenue.This
$1.5 million will not cover all of our future bond obligations.He thought it was a priority to see how the
city council can abate these bonds and get them off the citizen's property taxes.That was the point of the
meeting to see what options are available.Refinancing is an option and would definitely lower our current
obligations. It comes at a cost. It stretches out the payments and incurs more interest.Mayor Golinski
asked City Administrator Olson to put together a presentation for us to see where we stand and what
options are available and Kevin McCanna from Spear Financial is here to answer any questions that we
may have.
City Administrator Olson stated he was happy to project any spreadsheets.The two spreadsheets that are
going to be most useful are spreadsheet E and spreadsheet F. Spreadsheet E is a scenario where if we
were to refinance we take our sales tax dollars and put them towards our debt obligations for the next few
i
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-May 24,2011 -Page 12 of 15
years.Look at what impact that would have on property tax associated with bonds,your general city
property taxes and your total property tax bill. Spreadsheet F takes into account the most advantages as
far as financing.You incur the most interest with that option.There are other options.If you want to
decrease property tax burden then Spreadsheet F would be your best option. Spreadsheet E and F are in
your packet. Spreadsheet E shows that if you were to take a million and a half non local sales tax dollars
per budget year and dedicate those to your debt obligations,you can decrease your total property tax
associated only with debts by about 54%next year and 51%the year after and that number would dwindle
because your bond obligations actually go up year after year for the next four or five years. That probably
ends up somewhere around 35%of your 16 or 17.Again your bonds are only about 45%of your total city
revenue tax bill. Generally went on for about 45 cents to about 90 cents.44%related to bonds only and
the other portion is related to tax cap and really your share of the property tax value.
Mayor Golinski stopped the conversation and asked City Administrator Olson is there was a spreadsheet
F in the online packet?
City Administrator Olson stated that Spreadsheet F is four pages after spreadsheet E. He stated that he
separated them. The reason he did that was because Kevin McCanna's documents for debt service
schedule,his analysis of our debts,are included in between there so he wanted to make sure everyone saw
that before they saw spreadsheet F.
Total city property tax under scenario E would decrease next year by about 28%and that would erode a
little bit as tax payers payments go up each year.The tax payer would probably end up with about a
quarter reduction four or five years from now,which all that equates to a 3%reduction in the city's tax
bill. Since the city is such a small portion of it, even though we have wild fluctuations year to year in our
debt obligations it is a smaller portion of your total tax bill.This would have the least financial impact for
the city.
Spreadsheet F is laid out in the same fashion.Instead of making your Rob Roy payments in their current
schedule,the amount could be financed over 20 years for an average payment$950,000.00 per year.The
city is occurring additional interest of spreading out that debt over a longer period of time which would
allow the city to reduce the city portion of the tax payers' property tax debt by 35%. That would equate to
an overall property tax decrease of four or five percent.That four or five percent could be hundreds of
dollars if someone has an expensive home or business. Those are the two main options.The four debt
service schedules show financing over a 20 or 15 year term. This option allows the city to make equal
yearly payments based over its term. The balloon payment option of 14 or 17 year term allows for lower
equal payments for the first ten years and significant increases in the final years.This is the option that
was originally chosen for Rob Roy bond debt. With this option,hopefully in ten or fifteen years the city
will have growth to pay for this debt obligation and then the city is able to make those initial payments
comfortably. City Administrator Olson stated he would be happy to answer questions.
Mayor Golinski talked about the pre-payment option if the city refinanced.This would allow for
prepayment of the bond after seven years in the event development dramatically improves.Mayor
Golinski asked Kevin McCanna to come up front in case of questions.
Kevin McCanna from Spear Financial stated that the pre-payment option is available after seven year and
the wrap around is done in case the city has growth but also the city has other water and sewer bonds that
need to be paid off in the next ten or eleven years so those free up additional revenues and will help with
those balloon options if the city chooses to do that.
Mayor Golinski stated that this is an informational item and the council does not need to decide tonight,
but he wanted to make everyone aware of this issue.
Alderman Colosimo stated to clarify the difference in property tax reduction between the financing and
refinancing options would be three and four percent respectively with a difference being one percent
between the two options.How much more interest does the city incur between the financing and
refinancing options?
City Administrator Olson stated of the 11.5 million dollar principle bond debt interest would be 4.5 or 6.5
million depending upon which term chosen. The city is looking at a substantial interest cost.
Alderman Colosimo stated as he sees it to reduce the property tax bill by one percent the city will be
adding between 4.5 and 6.5 million dollars in additional debt obligation.
City Administrator Olson stated yes.
Alderman Colosimo stated that if the additional sales tax revenue is committed to repayment of this debt
alone there is already a three percent reduction and believes that the costs is too high for the citizens to
refinance for only a one percent additional reduction.And stated he is only in favor of supporting the
I
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-May 24,2011 -Page 13 of 15
additional sales tax increase if it is 1 00/ dedicated to the repayment of these bonds.Alderman Colosimo
requests feedback from the citizens if incurring this additional debt is desired.
Mayor Golinski stated_that he agrees with Alderman Colosimo and would prefer to retire debt as early as
possible however this is the predicament we are in and must determine the appropriate direction going
forward.
City Administrator Olson stated that there are a couple time lines if the city chooses to refinance soon.
The city will have a chance to reduce the tax burden for 2011,because additional taxes will have already
been collected.The city has a few months to decide.
Alderman Gilson asked City Administrator Olson to go through the timelines once again.
City Administrator Olson stated the timelines.
Kevin McCanna from Spear Financial stated the whole process takes ninety days so to impact this year's
taxes and a decision would have to be made by early fall.Kevin McCanna discussed the various financing
options.
Alderman Colosimo asked City Administrator Olson,"When does the city realize the revenues from the
proposed sales tax?"
City Administrator Olson said January 1, 2012 pending approval of the council.
Alderman Gilson asked Mayor Golinski to recognize a question from Larry DeBord,a Yorkville citizen
in the audience.
Larry DeBord, a Yorkville citizen asked City Administrator Olson to explain financing terms,the rate,
and timeline
City Administrator Olson answered questions and stated projections are assuming all other taxes stay the
same.
Kevin McCanna from Spear Financial stated current bond rate is at five and a half and refinance rate at
four and a quarter percent.
Alderman Colosimo stated the only thing the council has control over is the city's portion.
Mayor Golinski asked if there are any comments or questions.He asked if we should send this on to
administration for more discussion.A decision doesn't need to be made any time soon.The council
should get input from their constituents and bring that back to administration.
Alderman Gilson asked City Administrator Olson to provide a timeline for the financing options
impacting each year's property taxes and abetment.
1. CC 2011-49 Subdivision Control Ordinance Text Amendment
Mayor Gohnski entertained a motion to direct the Plan Commission to conduct a public hearing regarding
a proposed amendment title eleven, chapter one, section 4 regarding exemptions to requirements for plats.
So moved by Alderman Spears and seconded by Alderman Colosimo
Mayor Golinski solicited questions or comments or asked if any background is needed.
Community Development Director Barksdale-Noble provided background on proposed amendment
stating that the sale of parcels or tracks of land into no more than two parcels not involving any new
streets or easements providing minimum lot size is met for that zoning district.
Mayor Golinski asked if anyone had questions.
Alderman Spears stated that it sounds logical.
Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes-8 Nays-0
Colosimo-aye,Funkhouser-aye,Milschewski-aye,
Teeling-aye, Gilson-aye,Kot-aye,Munns-aye, Spears-aye
i
i
4. CC 2011-36 Police Sergeants' Union Contract
I,
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-May 24,2011 -Page 14 of 15
Mayor Golinski entertained a motion to approve a collective bargaining agreement between the Illinois
FOP Labor Council representing Yorkville Police Sergeants and the United City of Yorkville and
authorize the Mayor and Chief of Police to execute.
So moved by Alderman Munns and seconded by Alderman Spears
Mayor Golinski asked if there were comment or questions on this.
Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes-8 Nays-0
Funkhouser-aye,Milschewski-aye,Teeling-aye, Gilson-aye,
Kot-aye,Munns-aye, Spears-aye, Colosimo-aye
City Council Report:
No report
City Clerk's Report:
No report
City Treasurer's Report:
No report
Community and Liaison Report:
Alderman Spears attended the MEIL board meeting with Charles Johnson reporting. Charles Johnson is
the Director of the Illinois Department on Aging.
Please, see attached statement given by Alderman Spears on this meeting.
Alderman Spears asked for citizens to contact their senators if they disapproved of the budget the deadline
is May 31,2011.
Alderman Spears stated that her second report is a happy report. She would like to congratulate the
Yorkville Girls Tract team.Mark Johnson's niece,Ali Hester,was part of the Yorkville Girls Track team
that brought home a 1 st place in State in the 4 x 400 meter relay yesterday. They set a new Class 2A
record at 9:17:32 breaking the record they set with Hampshire last year.
Ali also won 5th place in the 1600 meter run which earned her All-State honors.
The Relay team consisted of Bri Stuepfert(So),Leena Palmer(Jr),Ali Hester(Jr)and Esther Bell(Jr). Ali
lives in Ward 3.We should congratulate these young women for an outstanding job.
Mayor Golinski stated that he would like City Administrator Olson to get above list of girls in to the June
14,2011 city council meeting to formally recognize them. Mayor Golinski asked if there were any other
Liaison Reports.
Mayor Golinski met with representatives from Bank of America in regards Grande Reserve and the large
increase in their HOA fees.Bank of America talked to PSI and tried to trim down the budget. Citizens in
Grande Reserve should be receiving a letter with the revised budget.
Staff Report:
No report
Additional Business:
Alderman Teeling stated she was wondering if the videos were going to get back on line.
City Administrator Olson stated not in the foreseeable future. Staff doesn't believe that can be done
without an I.T.person.
Mayor Golinski stated that the audio gets up quickly and until the city can get the video up on line,the
audio should continue to get up quick.
I
Alderman Spears stated she had one thing for Chief Hart.At a baseball game played near McHugh Road
she noticed cars parked along the street which allowed for only one lane open. Is there something the city
can do about that situation?
Chief of Police Hart stated that his department would keep an eye on it.
Alderman Spears stated she thou g ht the city had an agreement ement with Smith Engineering to allow the
citizens to park on their property.
City Administrator Olson stated that was the case up until a couple years ago but permission to park on
their property has since been rescinded.That was between the property owner and the individual
organizations.
Alderman Spears stated she did not remember seeing any signs posted.
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council-May 24,2011 -Page 15 of 15
Mayor Golinski stated that he remembers having a conversation about McHugh in regards to parking.
Alderman Teeling stated she received a phone call asking if signs can be posted in neighborhoods saying
Children At Play. Is that something the citizens can do for their neighborhood watch program?
Chief of Police Hart stated they typically do not put up those types of signs,unless it is a special situation,
for everyone would want them.He suggests to citizens to put up bright green or orange flags in their yard
along the curb.
i
Alderman Teeling stated that she wasn't sure if the neighborhood watch association was responsible for
those type of items.
Mayor Golinski stated he does have a baseball with the Mayor event at the Bristol Bay ballpark field
number two.Mayor Golinski will be there from 5:30 to 7:00 on Thursday June 26, 2011 to answer
questions or take suggestions concerning city business.
Alderman Funkhouser said that regarding the community gardens, gardeners have been driving out into
the gardens. Clarification needs to be made towards parking being accessible.
Executive Session:
Mayor Golinski entertained a motion to go into Executive Session for the purpose of discussion:
1. For the appointment, employment, compensation, discipline, performance, or dismissal of
specific employees of the public body or legal counsel for the public body, including hearing
testimony on a complaint lodged against an employee of the public body or against legal counsel
for the public body to
determine its validity.
2. For collective negotiating matters between the public body and its employees or their
representatives, or
deliberations concerning salary schedules for one or more classes of employees.
Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes-7 Nays-0
Spears-aye,Milschewski-aye, Colosimo-aye,Kot-aye, Teeling-aye,
Gilson-aye,Funkhouser-aye,Munns-aye
So moved by Alderman Gilson and seconded by Alderman Spears.
Motion approved by a roll call vote. Ayes-8 Nays-0
Spears-aye,Milschewski-aye, Colosimo-aye,Kot-aye,
Teeling-aye, Gilson-aye,Funkhouser-aye,Munns-aye
The City Council entered Executive Session at 8:52 p.m.
The City Council came back into session at 9:46
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Golinski entertained a motion to adjourn the meeting. So moved by Alderman Colosimo;
seconded by Alderman Milschewski.
Adjournment of the meeting was unanimously approved by a viva voce vote.
Meeting adjourned at 9:47 p.m.
utes ubmitte : Beth Warren
Beth Warren
City Clerk City of Yorkville, Illinois
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
May 24, 2011
PLEASE PRINT
NAME: SUBDIVISION OR BUSINESS:
jo 4 n � — c-LI�u 1,N�
I -e LA ,✓ N K� �f e e r F I k k k c I I1'
rgc-r,> rHE
R vE�s �DG�
� DAB d
SIGNIN
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Public Comment
May 24, 20H
PLEASE PRINT
N SUBDIVISIO R BUS SS.
SIGNIN
6/6/2011
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
Watershed Planning
in Blackberry Creek
3
j
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
� I
What is a watershed.
• The area of land that
6
f catches rain and snow and
drains into a stream,river,
Take or groundwater. [il�
• How land is used in a
watershed effects water
quality.,
• The watershed has become
the planning and 4
Y
management unit of choice
for many water resource
issues.
1
6/6/2011
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
Issues of concern
i
a THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
i
Issues of concern
{ 4 1 +y yy
x F;�
I
2
6/6/2011
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
Issues of concern
4
� r
1
05
.rRi
t
f THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
Issues of concern
Ym
t
�y
f ;
i'
i
3
6/6/2011
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
Issues of concern
f*P
F
w /J
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
i
j Issues of concern
Y
I
rN� 1g AAa !i' t,S i c s iPw-
xa
f
4
6/6/2011
-� THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
Watershed Planning:
Involves local stakeholders,and facilitates partnerships to
protect and improve the health of the watershed.
• Addresses problems that go beyond political and
geographical boundaries-problems that are often too
costly and complex for just one.
• Creates a useful plan with specific problems and solutions
(so stakeholders can apply for grant money to implement
ja
projects).
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
<< A watershed plan. .
' Recominends voluntary methods to
protect and enhance water quality. - -
• Develops an action plan for restorative
and preventative efforts,
f4 Addresses point and nonpoint source
pollution issues.
• Focuses on a waterway and its tributaries.
A watershed plan is NOT...
• a legally binding document • a comprehensive plan
a means to designate land uses • a zoning map
are part of local a land-use map
comprehensive plans
5
6/6/2011
_ THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
Nine Elements of Watershed Plans
1. Identify and quantify causes and sources of
. . unpairments.
2. Estimate expected load reductions following
i implementation.
3. Identify BMW's needed to achieve load reductions and
critical areas.
1 4. Estimate needed financial and technical resources.
5. Provide a public information education component
that is designed to change social behavior.
6. Include a schedule for implementing BMPs
7. Identify and describe interim measurable milestones.
8. Establish criteria to determine if load reductions are
A being achieved.
W 9. Provide a monitoring component to evaluate the
k, effectiveness of the implementation over tune for
criteria in number 8.
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
t Regional Criteria
Develop a vision for watershed land use by evaluating the
r collection of local comprehensive plans and estimating the
cumulative impact on future water quality.
t Set target pollutant-load reductions for impaired waters taking
into account both point-and nonpoint sources.
• Consider groundwater protection from both water quality and
water quantity
r perspectives.
• Compare municipal
codes and ordinances
with the US EPA
developed Water
Quality Scorecard. i' z
6
6/6/2011
ry THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
v� The Fox River Basin
Third-largest tributary to the
} Illinois River.
Abundant recreational
n opportunities and high quality
natural resources attract'
population growth.
Segments found nonsupport ;
for: primary contact,aquatic 1
life,fish consumption,public 1
water supply.
Z k
• Urban development and
agriculture contribute to
impairments.
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
i
Blackberry Creek Watershed
Quality of Lower Fox River
s Basin gives context for our - �x
watershed.
32 miles;73 sq. miles
56% agricultural
r
z 25,374 population
• Kane&Kendall Counties
• Aurora,Elburn,Montgomery, ie'
North Aurora,Sugar Grove,
and Yorkville
,.
7
6/6/2011
w THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
Blackberry Creek Watershed
Previous Plans
7
4 t
k 6 EILACKBERRYCR
WATERSHED j WATENSNEO MANAGEMENT y �,
PLAN
a
4 F min 5; 4e
-
Blackberry Creek Watershed
Management Plan- 1999
Blackberry Creek Watershed
Alternative Futures Analysis
2003
i
i .
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
Blackberry Creek Watershed
Conditions r ,
t Fully supporting for aquatic life.
Not supporting for primary contact
due to fecal coliform.
• Not assessed for secondary contact,
' fish consumption, or aesthetic quality.
Flooding. .
• Problem: poor water quality
Pollutants: Fecal coliform, 5'
chlorides
• Stressors: low dissolved oxygen,lack of habitat
8
6/6/2011
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
Illinois Environmental Protection
o (IEPA),Bureau of Water, awarded a
grant to the Chicago Metropolitan
Agency for Planning (CNIAP) to
complete the watershed plan through section 604(b)
{
' of the Clean Water Act.
The Chicago Metropolitan Agency For Planning
AX,x is the official regional planning organization for
'
the northeastern Illinois counties of Cook,
DuPage, Kane, Kendall,
0
Chicago Metropolitan'
Lake, McHenry, and Will. Agency for Planning
lVe Save Land the Save Biverr.
i
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
C UP Contracted With:
? The Conservation Foundation (TCF) -
A local not-fox-profit land and watershed
r protection organization,established in 1972.
f TCF is providing planning coordination and
technical assistance,
f
t; The Fox River Ecosystem Partnership (FREP) -
One of 41 partnerships of the
x Illinois Department of Natural Resources'
CO IPartners for Conservation Program,established in
asn�r,
1996. FREP is providing outreach and education.
r i F U%Save Land.. We Save Rivers.
9
6/6/2011
x THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
j�
BBC Watershed Plan Timeline
September 2010 Introductions/
Project purpose
October 2010 Watershed Plan Goals and Objectives
,i November 2010 Watershed Vision
{ December 2010 Groundwater Protection
1
January 2011 Ordinance Review Exercise
February 2011 Open Space/
Green Infrastructure Framework
March 2011 Review of Plan Chapter 1
Impairinents/Ordinance 1lnalyses
April 2011 Review of Watershed Inventory
Chapter/FORTRAN(HSPF)
pollutant-load model/Load-reduction
t targets
I
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
{; BBC Watershed Plan Timeline
May 2011 Plan recommendations/
Project selection
June 2011 Plan recommendations/
3� z Project selection
July ul 2011 Plan recommendations/Tech and
financial assistance needs
M t
nts Au
August 2011 Public education coin one
( September 2011 Monitoring and Assessment chapter
October 2011 Implementation schedule/
Measurable milestone and successes
November 2011 IEPA feedback/
` Finalization of remaining issues
December 2011 Final draft plan approval/
t Next steps
10
6/6/2011
THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
t
s
How can I be involved?
Participate in the planning process by attending monthly
stakeholder meetings.
Provide input and jJ t
V
1
information
J,, — Comprehensive Plans
r -
P3 Ordinances
— Maps
` Adopt the completed
plan and integrate its
recommendations as appropriate.
ff To receive monthly meeting announcements, or if you have
® questions,please contact Tara Neff: 630-428-4500 x 23;
tneff(cutheconservationfoundation,org.
i
i
i
j
I
I
11 �!
6/20/2011
United City of Yorkville
Glen D Palmer Dam Bypass and
Marge Cline Whitewater Course
Maintenance Obligations
May 24, 2011
ti uw
6/20/2011
Weekly maintenance
Mowing, trimming, weeding
Trash removal
General obstruction removal
In bypass area
In fish ladder area
General inspection of area
Notice problems associated with less
frequent inspections
Monthly maintenance
Inspect the fish ladder for trash,
debris, and logs items impeding water
flow
Should also occur after heavy rain
events
6/20/2011
Semi-annual maintenance
"Walk around" checklist
Contact IDNR if:
Surface cracks in concrete
Slump or slide on the upstream or
downstream face
Embankment, abutment or spillway
seepage
Seepage or flows of muddy water
Uneven settlement
Semi-annual maintenance
Contact IDNR if (continued) :
Concrete deterioration or cracks
Pipe joint separation
Scour
Cracks or leakage at sills ..
6/20/2011
Semi-annual maintenance -
��Walk around" checklist
City repairs if:
Erosion from runoff, wave action, or
traffic
Uneven concrete blocks
Trees, brush or burrow holes on the
embankment
Spillways or trash racks blocked
Exposed rusty metal
Semi-annual maintenance
City repairs if (continued) :
Vent pipe blocked
Grass over 12" tall
Pools contain debris
Signs are obstructed or contain graffiti
Boulders out of position
Place buoys before May 15t" and remove
prior to November 1St
BKFD to assist!
6/20/2011
Annual maintenance
Grease the sluice gate
Items to purchase?
k Life vests (4)
Estimated cost - $300
Hydraulic winch, to remove large logs
from channel
Estimated cost $1,500 to $2,000
6/20/2011
costs Annual of
Activa Unit Cest 0 Cos[ Notes
O eralion
Dam
MCnlh! Walk Aruunds $240 13 53,72D 52491dav=520.�hr.$tOfirberw!its
En'nennn Ins ecnon 51,667 I 51867 Tn-Annual Coal tl:viCed 3
Ornil
Amual!ns ecllon $960 1 56602 rnon crew,2da.
BbMfWdl InsoBCban!a VW,ume U Cream $480 1 5180 2 rson Crew,2 da,,divided W 2
B ass Channel
En Ineenn ins eclion 57,667 1 $1.687 TrHArnual Cosldrvidedb 3
hi
MMWTIYLZMEW 240 13 53.120$2AO/d¢ a$20rhr h5i0fir oerelils
0 eratB SWicB Gale 560 4 $2d0 2 hrs ea:h ume
seems c a Ans cl $30 82 St,5E0 1 hr eatlr time.eve week
Annual costs of maintenance
Maintenance
Dam
Minor Maintcnance,Branch Removal,Etc 5480 12 55.760 2 erso0 Crew,f dayper mMI,
Spalring Concrete.Larger Repairs $4,000 1 $4,000 1 Major Annual Concrete Repair
Denil
Sprin0,Fail Months Only,semi-monthly.112
Mrnnr Maintenance,Branch Removal,Elc $240 12 $2,880 cre-da
5 agr Concrete,L.,q.,Re airs $1,500 1 51,600 1 Ma or Annual Concrete or Steel Repair
same Replacement $1,000 1 $1,000 S40,D00 annualized over 40 yfS
SIDP Log Re lacem enl $120 1 3120 5600 averj S yrs
Bypass Channel
Mirror Main1warlce,Branch Removal,Etc 5480 16 $7,680 2 person crew,2 day per mondL 8 movitislyr
SpaHN Conoret9,Grouted Bould9r,Larger
Re .M $4,0001 Sd,ODO i M or Annual Goncrele Re air
Sluice Gate Maintenance $480 1 $480 2 pe,Son crew,7 day ±year
Sluloe Gate Re^.acemenl 31,000 1 51,000$20,W0 annualized over 20 m
Cia a Re IaCemeM $500 i $500$10,000 annualized over 20 ym
Total Operation and Mahrtenarwe $41233
6
6/20/2011
Annual costs of maintenance
Non-staff costs
One annual large concrete repair @ $4,000
One annual repair to fish ladder @ $1,500
Replacement of fish ladder baffles @ $1,000
per year (40 year life span)
Replacement of fish ladder stop log @ $120
per year (5 year life span)
One annual concrete repair in bypass @
$4,000
Sluice Gate replacement @ $1,000 per year --
(20 year life span)
TOTAL ESTIMATE PER YEAR @ $11,620.:
Other issues?
Insurance
To be completely finalized in FY 13
? Recreational amenities have strong tort
immunities
Possibility City may have to increase
base property insurance rates to
accommodate maintenance of a unique
feature, or a separate policy
I.E. Add parks, add insurance cost
6/20/2011
4)07,09 @oil RD SINHIMING
BOAT A!MUR OWN RISW
FUR LMEZ;
Other issues?
Life safety
- � � . WATER RAPIDS
$ .
Other issues?
Life safety
Bristol Kendall Fire Protection District to
undergo swiftwater training, by Geneva
Kayak employees
More spectators, more likely to have
emergencies reported than on open river
6/20/2011
Other issues?
Park issues
Alcohol is not allowed in parks, but is
allowed under certain circumstances in
the water
Parking!
Traffic on whitewater course
Traffic on land
Timeline
TDNR contract for completion
extended through September to
address erosion issues
Phase III (bridge!) expected to be
completed by end of calendar year
■ ■
Yorkville Public Library
Library Board of Trustees ■ ■
■
ANNUAL REPORT '
Beth Gambro . ■
Barb Johnson
2010-2011 '
Carol LaChance
Sandy Lindblom
Zach Frisch
Marianne Wilkinson ■ "' _ '
Gail Gaebler ■ '
■ ■
Robert Allen ■ '
Michelle Pfister, Director ■ �.� '
M ■
M ■
Information on the library ■
■ Current statistics and financial budget ■
■ ■
M ■
■
■ ■
n■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Ip
Annual Report 2010-2011
Total patron visits 165,422 Expenses
Number of patron library cards 8,338
Children attending programs 5,188 Personnel services 578,966
Adults attending programs 1,442 (salaries, insurance, dental/vision)
Resources owned: Books 48,616
DVD's 1,884 Professional services 6,578
Audio Recordings 3,010 (bonding)
Interlibrary Loans: Yorkville Public Library bor-
rowed 9,118 books from other libraries for out
patrons. The Library also loaned 19,162 items Contractual services 72,718
from our collection to other libraries. (contract services, maintenance, utilities)
Items checked out by patrons 165,888
The Library has five (5) newspaper subscriptions, Professional Development 8,508
125 magazine subscriptions, and 1,246 pieces of (subscriptions, training,public relations, etc)
sheet music.
Dial-a-Story activity(#of calls): 4,226
Operations 173,950
New items added this fiscal year: 7,997 (office supplies,postage, audio/visual,
books, alarm monitoring, memorials)
Library Revenues
Taxes 669.561
Development Fees- Books 8,825 Retirement 59,846
Copy Fees 3,339
Subscription Cards 13,741
Rental DVD's 4,131 Capital Outlay 59,171
Rental Building 1,454
Program Fees/Exam Proctoring 91 (automation, building expansion)
Fines 14,161
Sale of Books 300 Total $958,737
Memorials 1,883 Debt Service-Bond
Interest 690 Revenue 589,090
Grants 17,191 Expenses 605,925
TOTAL $735,367
F/Y Development Fees- Building 8,825
Total Development Fee 332,518
05-23-11
LIAISON REPORT
NEIL
During the NEIL Board meeting, Charles Johnson, Illinois Department on Aging
Director addressed the Board. He reported the State of Illinois has $7 billion in
unpaid bills, which means it is six to seven months behind in its payments. Both
a cut in programs and borrowing will be necessary. The proposed 2012 budget
includes elimination of the Circuit Breaker Program and the Illinois Cares
Program.
The state budget is scheduled to be approved by May 31St. Please urge our
state senators to preserve funding for critical home and community based senior
services in the state budget. The budget proposed by Governor Pat Quinn is bad
news for Illinois seniors struggling to remain in their homes as they age. Illinois
lawmakers simply cannot balance the state budget on the backs of seniors.
Nearly 200,000 seniors rely on the Illinois Cares Rx program to afford their
prescription medications. The proposed budget eliminates funding for this critical
program and will force many seniors to choose between their medications and
i
other basic necessities.
It is far more cost-effective for the state to provide home and community based
care over institutional care, yet the proposed budget also cuts funding for
services such as home delivered meals and transportation. Nearly half of all
nursing home eligible people seeking more cost effective home based care will
also be turned away from the state's Community Care Program.
`1