Peoria Standard

Peoria County Board met Thursday, Nov. 10.

Peoria County has a Board-Administrator structure. The 18-member board (one representative per district) has a peer-elected chairperson and delegates the day-to-day duties to a hired administrator who supervises various county departments. The Board meets the second Thursday of each month at 6 p.m. at the Peoria County Courthouse.

Here are the minutes as provided by Peoria County:

Vice-Chairperson Sharon K. Williams, District 1

-Stephen M. Morris, District 10 Junior Watkins, District 2

Mary Ardapple, District 11 Lynn Scott Pearson, District 3

Robert Baietto, District 12 Chairperson-Andrew A. Rand, District 4

James T. Fennell, District 13 Rachael Parker District 5

Brian Elsasser, District 14 G. Allen Mayer, District 6

Carol Trumpe, District 15 James C. Dillon, District 7

Brad Harding, District 16 Phillip Salzer, District 8

Thomas H. O’Neill, III, District 17 Michael Phelan, District 9

Paul Rosenbohm, District 18

PEORIA COUNTY BOARD MEETING MINUTES Thursday, November 10, 2016 6:00 PM County Courthouse • 324 Main Street • County Board Room 403 • Peoria, Illinois 61602 Voice: (309) 672-6056 • Fax: (309) 672-6054 • TDD: (309) 672-6073 www.peoriacounty.org/countyboard

CALL TO ORDER MOMENT OF SILENCE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL BY THE COUNTY CLERK

Attendance was taken with the Roll Call-Pro voting system, and the following members of the Board were present: Ardapple, Baietto, Dillon, Elsasser, Fennell, Harding, Mayer, Morris, O'Neill, Parker, Pearson, Phelan, Rand, Rosenbohm, Salzer, Trumpe, Watkins and Williams.

I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

• Approval of October 13, 2016 County Board Minutes

• Approval of October 13, 2016 County Board Executive Session Minutes

O’Neill moved for approval of the minutes, Watkins seconded. The minutes were approved by a unanimous roll call vote of 18 ayes.

II. PROCLAMATIONS & PRESENTATIONS

• Proclamation recognizing the 2016 Peoria City/County Civic Leadership Academy graduates

• Proclamation recognizing November 26 as Small Business Saturday

• Proclamation recognizing Lynn Scott Pearson's 32 years of service as a County Board Member

• Proclamation recognizing Carol Trumpe's 27 years of service as a County Board Member

• Proclamation recognizing Mary Ardapple's 6 years of service as a County Board Member

III. CITIZENS' REMARKS

Mr. Evans requested that any comments be limited to information that had been previously presented at committee.

Dan Cordis, Attorney, Cordis Law Office, addressed the Board with regards to Item 1. He explained that he represents Chris Dearing and Mark Meisenheimer, the property owners adjacent to the proposed flagpole parcel, and his comments are only directed at that proposed parcel. He stated that zoning rules require a 25 acre parcel size in A-2 zoning, and creating a new 5 acre parcel with a new residence would interfere with the septic system of a neighbor. He contended that any new residence would not be able to get its own driveway access to the property due to the location of the parcel on a hill crest of Parks School Road. He said the owner would use a gravel driveway as part of an easement, but would not share the cost of upkeep; which is unfair. He asserted that the proposed parcel is small and any house built would be very close to Chris Dearing’s house, which would obstruct the view of Jubilee Creek valley to the north and bring down the property value of the existing house. He informed that there were 27 objections filed against the special use permit. He brought up that there is a water scarcity problem between the current owners and adding another well would add to that problem. He stressed that due to all of the issues, he cannot come up with any other better reasons to object to a 5 acre parcel in this area. He emphasized that the 25 acre rule is in place for a reason because people move to the country to not be close to neighbors.

Brad Guidi, Executive Director, Camp Big Sky addressed the Board with regards to the passing of the advisory referendum for disabled persons. He thanked the Board for placing the referendum on the November 8th ballot to increase the tax levy for the Veteran’s Assistance Commission and Care and Treatment Board. He said that he was pleased and encouraged with the outcome of passing with an overwhelming 56% majority vote. He identified that it is important to support the services because the current cost to maintain a person in a state operated developmental center is $258,000 a year, but a person in Peoria County can get a much higher quality of life through organizations like EP!C and Community Workshop at a cost of $53,000 a year. He explained that with 22,000 residents in Illinois on waiting lists to receive services, it makes sense to support the services. He expressed that people with developmental disabilities are only asking for the opportunity to live independently and be contributing members to the community. He thanked Ardapple, Pearson, and Trumpe for their service, and Chairman Rand and Advanced Medical Transport for hiring three more people with developmental disabilities through the Community Workshop and Training Center. He stated that one person hired was a graduate of the Camp Big Sky adult volunteer training program, which is partially funded by the Care and Treatment Board. He encouraged all employers to follow the example of Advanced Medical Transport and consider hiring individuals with developmental disabilities.

IV. CONSENT AGENDA

C1. The Treasurer report consisting of the Bank and CD's Portfolio for the month of September 2016 and Revenue & Expenditures for the month of August 2016.

C2. The Auditor's report of expenditures from Accounts Payable system is accessible at www.peoriacounty.org/auditor/transparency.

C3. A resolution (items 1 - 4 conveyances and item 5 reconveyance) from the Ways and Means Committee recommending that the County Board Chairman be authorized and directed to execute deed of said property to the highest bidder, and be authorized to cancel the appropriate Certificates of Purchase. This resolution shall be effective ninety days from November 10, 2016 and any transaction between the parties involved not occurring within this period shall be null and void.

C4. A resolution from your Executive Committee recommending adoption of the 2016 Strategic Plan.

C5. A resolution from your Executive Committee recommending approval of the allocation of $63,860.00 from the 2016 Board of Health Budget to the Heart of Illinois United Way to provide partial funding for a day drop-in Center to provide services to the local homeless population.

C6. A resolution from your Health, Public Safety and Justice Committee recommending approval of FFY 2016 State Court Improvement Program Grant Award Agreement for the Child Protection Data Courts Project, and appropriation of additional grant funds in the amount of $5,000.00 for FY 2016.

C7. A resolution from your Health, Public Safety and Justice Committee recommending approval of an additional appropriation in the FY 2016 budget in the amount of $1,499,095.00 for Peoria County Sheriff's Office Capital Projects.

C8. A resolution from your Health, Public Safety and Justice Committee recommending approval of the FY 2016 Bulletproof Vest Partnership Award for the Peoria County Sheriff's Office in the amount of $58.73.

C9. A resolution from your Health, Public Safety and Justice Committee recommending approval of the FY 2016 State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) Award in the amount of $4,289.00, with the funds to be appropriated to the appropriate line items in the Sheriff's budget.

C10.A resolution from your Health, Public Safety and Justice Committee recommending approval of an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Peoria for the FY 2016 Edward Bryne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG), with the County's portion of the funds, $28,976.00, to be used to purchase tasers and an electronic LED message sign.

C11.A resolution from your Health, Public Safety and Justice Committee recommending approval of an appropriation into the PCAPS Fund in the amount of $5,000.00, to be used to purchase prescription topical flea medication for all animals going into the adoption areas of the shelter for one year. (Poll Vote per Rules of Order, Article V, Section 18C)

C12. A resolution from your Land Use and Infrastructure Committee recommending approval of the lowest responsible bid of Schaefer and Son Construction, Chillicothe, IL, in the amount of $4,450.00 for the demolition of an unsafe, dilapidated house and accessory buildings located at 1506 S. Sarah Drive, Peoria.

C13. A resolution from your Land Use and Infrastructure Committee recommending approval of Amendments to Appendix A (Building Permit Fee Schedule), Chapter 12 of the Building and Property Maintenance Code, effective January 1, 2017.

C14. A resolution from your Land Use and Infrastructure Committee recommending approval of the execution and amendment of Downstate Operating Assistance Grant Agreement providing services for rural public transportation services for FY 2017.

C15. A resolution from your Land Use and Infrastructure Committee recommending approval of the execution and amendment of the Section 5311 Grant Agreement for the provision of rural public transportation services for FY 2017.

C16. A resolution from your Land Use and Infrastructure Committee recommending approval of a Local Agency Agreement for participation in the Illinois Department of Transportation's 2017 County Engineer's Salary Program.

C17. A resolution from your County Operations Committee recommending approval of the execution of the 2017 HIPAA Exemption Election document.

C18. Chairman Appointments

Ardapple moved to approve the Consent Agenda and Mayer seconded. Ardapple asked to pull Item C4; Morris asked to pull Item C13. The Consent Agenda, except for Items C4 and C13, was approved by a roll call vote of 17 ayes and 1 nay, with Harding voting nay.

C4. A resolution recommending adoption of the 2016 Strategic Plan.

Ardapple move to approve Item C4 and Dillon seconded. Ardapple recognized the Board and the elected and appointed officials for the work done on the Strategic Plan. She said that the plan is a working document, a good blueprint moving forward, and it is a byproduct of government working well.

Phelan thanked Ardapple for the work on the Strategic Plan and called it a good outcome. He discussed that there is a difference between efficient and effective and that must be kept in mind when discussing the budget.

Chairman Rand suggested that the Strategic Plan will be part of the legacy of Ardapple, and every time it is torn into, they will be reminded of her work. He promised that it will not be a document to sit on the shelf and the Board will do its best to make it a living, breathing document.

Elsasser noted that he does not object to the Strategic Plan, but to the cost to develop the plan.

Chairman Rand asked for the development cost of the Strategic Plan. Mr. Sorrel explained that the total cost would fall under $20,000, but Elsasser may be including the expense of the efficiency study, which was the precursor to the plan.

Ardapple suggested that Elsasser attend the Collaborative Committee meeting next Tuesday for a report on dollars that were approved for the efficiency study, a reconciliation of what was spent, and the savings that have actualized in 2016.

Item C4 was approved by a roll call vote of 16 ayes and 2 nays, with Elsasser and Harding voting nay.

C13. A resolution recommending approval of Amendments to the Building and

Property Maintenance Code.

Dillon moved to approve Item C13 and O’Neill seconded.

Morris stated that it's ever enough.

Dillon noted that the fees were debated at length in committee as a result of the cost study and what is presented was considered the noncontroversial. He stated that some fees were going up, some going down, with many remaining the same, but the more controversial issues were tabled until the new Board is seated.

Chairman Rand stated that the fee schedule was based on the fee study which validates changing the fees.

Dillon explained that the cost study was done about two years ago and may no longer cover the cost, but the efficiency study suggested implementing them and the committee used it as the basis.

Phelan asked for information on what is trying to be accomplished, either incentivizing building or covering cost, or a little of both.

Dillon stated that the committee did not raise the cost on building permits, but used data on the local economy and the types of permits being pulled. He reported that the fee for an above ground pool would be lower, while in-ground pools, demolition fees, reinspection fees, and telecommunication tower fees would increase. He said that a technology fee was instituted to cover costs. He emphasized that the policy is to cover the costs and the fees have not been updated in a very long time, which means that the cost is currently being subsidized.

Phelan requested information on where the County stands against other like-size counties on fees. Dillon said that the fees being discussed would only get the County to middle-of-the-pack in comparison, and if all the fees were taken up, it would only get the County to about the top three out of ten. Phelan explained that he would support the fees, but he thinks that fees cannot continue to be raised and not have a negative reaction. He said that if the Board is trying to get building going, put people to work, increase property value, raise property tax, and raise EAV, raising fees can cause people to think twice about adding on improvements.

Elsasser suggested that homeowners come to the Land Use Committee meetings to get perspective, and he was relieved that it did not get into the meat of it because that may deter business. He asserted that if someone cannot afford to build the house, there is an effect on jobs, taxes, and future purchases. He said that the County cannot afford to price itself out of the market under the current market conditions.

Morris inquired on if the technology fee would only be placed on the permits changed in the resolution. Mr. Wahl stated that the fee applies to the fees associated with the Building and Property Maintenance Code. Morris contended that the $45 fee would be applied on a per permit basis and would raise fees across the board. Mr. Wahl reported that it would only be assessed under the Building and Property Maintenance Code permits. Morris identified that the fee would still affect a great deal of permits issued. He maintained that there is not just a raise in fees on a few things, but it is on everything. He stressed that it is difficult times, but the Board cannot tax its way out of the problem, and these are real people paying real fees.

Phelan asked for clarification on whether the technology fee is assessed on more than the fees that are being presented at this time.

Dillon asserted that the committee did not take the fees lightly, but the fees are user fees for the service, not a tax. He said that there is a cost for the programs and it is a way to recoup cost and become more efficient.

Mr. Sorrel reported that the revenue collected by the technology fee would be used to replace the entire software package that Planning and Zoning uses. He said that the project has been a capital project for the past couple of years and is included in next year’s IT budget. He said that the new software would be a third-party software that replaces an in-house software that is about 20 years old. He noted that the new software would allow for electronic filing of plans and collection of fees, and it would drastically improve service for those applying for permits.

Baietto requested information on what the increase in cost to a permit would be with the technology fee on a house with 3,000 square feet.

Mr. Wahl explained that there would be three permits pulled that would have a technology fee attached to it; raising the cost in the example to about $135.

Harding discussed that during his tenure he has looked to have an advancement in technology like this, but he was unaware that there would be an added cost. He said that the basic flaw is that the cost structure is based on other government costs. He believed that when the cost structure is based on other governments it is a great barometer, but cost structure based against business and the real world may change the Board’s approach. He stated that fees have been raised to the tune of millions over the past few years and when is it enough.

Mayer called upon those that plan on voting against the changes to be very specific what positions and what services they intend to cut from the General Fund to make up for the loss of revenue.

Dillon summarized that when the committee brought up the fees, it followed Board policy of recovering cost and efficiency. He stated that he values his time, and if he could apply for a permit without leaving his house, he just made money because he does not have to come to the Courthouse and pay for parking. He emphasized that there is not a pot of money around to buy the software, and if the Board would like to improve efficiency, the software is a huge tool to achieve that goal. He said it is not about growing government, but about keeping government small and economical. He urged a yes vote.

Item C13 was approved by a roll call vote of 14 ayes and 4 nays, with Elsasser, Harding, Morris, and Phelan voting nay.

V. ZONING ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTIONS

1. Case 055-16-U, Petition of John Gilkeson (Mary Gilkeson Estate, Frank Gilkeson - executor, owners). A Special Use as required in Section 20.5.2.2.1.a.1 of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use when a proposed land split does not meet the 25 acre minimum lot size nor the 1 dwelling unit per 25 contiguous acres density requirement in the A-2 Agricultural District. The petitioner proposes to divide two 5 acre lots from a 125 acre parcel. The parcel is located in Jubilee Township. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends approval with restrictions. The Land Use and Infrastructure Committee concurs.

Dillon moved to approve the ordinance and Trumpe seconded.

Dillon noted that in his time as Land Use Committee Chair, there has never been such struggle over a perceived simple split. He summarized how the Gilkesons were splitting off their homestead and another property, and the Zoning Board of Appeals and Land Use Committee voted in favor of the special use. He explained that much concern was given because it is known that there is very little ground water, which leads to sometimes having to haul water to the homes. He expressed that the State does not keep very good records, but there is some evidence that points to there being little water in the area. He noted that a well was drilled that, by rule, must collect 3 gallons per minute. He reported that it came back with 6 gallons per minute, and that was his basis for voting yes in committee because it legally met the requirement. He predicted that with less rainfall there is a possibility that a property owner may not get water. He stated that there are no facts presented that would allow for sending the item back to committee.

Williams described how she visited the property, met with Mr. Dearing and Mr. Meisenheimer, and was given a tour. She believed very strongly that the special use should not be approved because there is not enough water and too many questions. She stated that a gentleman from the Illinois State Water Survey has been contacted to visit the property to make sure the questions are answered. She expressed that she would be very upset to hear if the use was permitted and it affected the water of the surrounding homes.

Trumpe detailed that the property is for the family’s use after being inherited from the parents and is the basis for her decision to support it.

Mayer requested that all remember the State’s Attorney’s direction on considering evidence from the speaker and base decisions only on what is in the record.

Elsasser brought up that his biggest concern is the lane leading back to the property. He requested information on the easement for access.

Mr. Evans stated that because it is a private easement, it could be changed but the County has no standing relative to it.

Dillon explained that the easement was discussed, but because it was part of a private easement created when the land was originally divided, the County could not legally do anything.

Elsasser asked for information on water quality on the proposed parcel due to the proximity of the neighbor’s septic system.

Mr. Dillon detailed that because the septic system has been approved, a new owner could not make the neighbor move the septic system. He confirmed that it is possible that the well could collect the leachate, but the requirements do not cover the quality of the water, only the amount of 3 gallons per minute. He said that under the laws they have set up, and although there is a possibility that water will not be available, it passes and works under the rules.

Williams mentioned that the topography of the property forces the well to be within a couple hundred feet of the neighbor’s septic system, and how can anyone be sure that there would be water on the property during a dry season. She stated that she would feel more comfortable if the State Water Survey would further study the property and give more information.

Chairman Rand reminded the Board that it must stick to the facts that are part of evidentiary proceedings, both in the ZBA and the Land Use Committee.

Phelan asked if the land is part of an environmental corridor. Mr. Wahl explained that the land has both environmental, agricultural designation, and part of the Jubilee Creek watershed.

Elsasser discussed what type of septic system is on the neighbor’s property. Chairman Rand directed the question to the Board’s meeting packet.

Harding had confirmed that there were 27 objections to the special use. He said there seems to be some unanswered questions, and it may be in the best interest to send it back to committee to get those questions answered. He emphasized that the expectation of the Board is to make a decision after all the questions are answered.

Chairman Rand contended that feeling uncomfortable about the situation is not a basis to refer back to committee. He stated that the committee and the ZBA have made their findings, but the correct path would be to give an up or down vote. He explained that sending it back would only present more facts and may not give a solution.

Mayer stressed that the ZBA believed it had done all the fact finding it could do.

Fennell acknowledged that the Land Use Committee has done as much fact finding as possible.

Dillon informed that even if studies were done, it would continue to find water as long as it keeps raining, and the only way it could be sent back would be if there was a new fact. He stated that in this case there isn't a basis of fact to send it back.

Chairman Rand requested information on whether the question in front of the Board is requesting an up or down vote based on the facts and evidence found in committee and Mr. Evans agreed.

Williams brought up the State’s report which explained that any new well development will affect existing water conditions.

The ordinance passed by a roll call vote of 10 ayes and 8 nays, with Elsasser, Harding, O’Neill, Parker, Pearson, Phelan, Salzer, and Williams voting nay.

2. Case 057-16-Z, Petition of Stephanie Swearingian (Coulter Properties Inc., owners). A Rezoning request from "I-2" Heavy Industrial to "I-1" Light Industrial. The petitioner proposes to rezone the property in order to allow for auto sales and automobile repair on the subject parcel. The parcel is located in Medina Township. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends approval. The Land Use and Infrastructure Committee concurs.

Dillon moved to approve the ordinance and Rosenbohm seconded. The ordinance passed by a roll call vote of 17 ayes and 1 nay, with Parker voting nay.

3. Case 059-16-U, Petition of Austin Engineering Co. Inc. (Pleasant Valley Public Water District, owner). A Special Use as required in Section 20-5.4.2.4.d of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use for non-essential governmental uses. The petitioner proposes the construction of a building for the Pleasant Valley Public Water District. The parcel is located in Limestone Township. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends approval with restrictions. The Land Use and Infrastructure Committee concurs.

Dillon moved to approve the ordinance and O’Neill seconded. The ordinance passed by a unanimous roll call vote of 18 ayes. (Watkins noted for the record that he meant to vote aye)

4. Case W06-16, Petition of Kathleen S. Raiborn. A resolution from your Land Use and Infrastructure Committee recommending approval of a waiver of compliance from Section 20-8.3.4.1.b.2.a of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section requires a new minor subdivision to have a public water supply. The petitioner is proposing to divide 3.819 acres into (two) 1.2 acre lots and (one) 1.419 acre lot. The nearest water supply is approximately 5 miles to the south. The parcel is located in Rosefield Township.

Dillon moved to approve the ordinance and Trumpe seconded.

Trumpe noted that the Agenda Item does not explain what the reports were from the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Land Use Committee.

The Clerk reported that both votes were unanimous in favor.

The ordinance passed by a unanimous roll call vote of 18 ayes.

5. A resolution from your Executive Committee recommending approval of the settlement of Ziegler v. Peoria County, et al, 16-cv-01022 in the amount of $78,000.00. (Poll Vote per Rules of Order, Article V, Section 18C)

Fennell moved to approve the resolution and Mayer seconded. The resolution passed by a roll call vote of 16 ayes and 2 nays, with Baietto and Phelan voting nay.

6. A resolution from your County Operations Committee recommending approval of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between Peoria County and LIUNA Local 165.

Phelan moved to approve the resolution and Salzer seconded.

Phelan described how the agreement is outstanding for the employees, the union, and the County. He stated that there is a very good relationship with the union, it has recognized the financial difficulty of the County, and it has done what it can to solve the problem. He highlighted the PCAPS unit because it is the first contract under the County after transitioning from the City of Peoria and it completed the process quickly. He thanked Ms. Musselman for her help in completing the contract.

Chairman Rand explained that this is a ground up contract which does not happen often and congratulated Ms. Musselman for her work.

The resolution passed by a unanimous roll call vote of 18 ayes.

7. A resolution from your Rules Committee recommending amendments to the 2015-2016 Peoria County Board Rules of Order.

Mayer moved to approve the resolution and Salzer seconded.

Mayer described how the changes made were to give flexibility to the Board regarding when the budget meeting is held and the budget is approved, it consolidates the regular meeting and organizational meeting into one meeting, and allows the Vice-Chairman to execute documents at the direction of the Chairman.

Chairman Rand thanked Mayer for making the adjustments so that the Board can have a more contemplative budget conversation.

The resolution passed by a unanimous roll call vote of 18 ayes.

VI. MISCELLANEOUS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

Chairman Rand announced that there would be a presentation on the budget from Mr. Dubrowski. He said he would be stepping down as Chairman and giving it to Fennell. He explained that there have been meetings with elected and appointed officials and secondary analysis over the last couple of weeks and the committees have deferred action to get more information. He detailed that the current budget year would end $1.3 million in the red based on softness in fees, fines, charges, and sales tax revenues. He noted that the Administrator’s recommended budget had a shortfall of $500,000, but would grow in future years.

Fennell assumed the role as Board Chairman.

O’Neill, Rand, Salzer, and Trumpe left the meeting.

Chairman Fennell summarized that usually a budget would be voted through the Executive Committee at this time, but what would have been approved was spending $1.3 million in reserves out of the General Fund and Rand asked what the fund balance would look like going forward. He noted that at the end of 2020 there would be a negative value of $3 million in the General Fund balance. He detailed how there have been meetings with elected and appointed officials to explain and get feedback, and because the County cannot make money, the Board must cut somewhere.

O’Neill, Rand, Salzer, and Trumpe returned to the meeting

Mr. Dubrowski reported that he will give a high level overview of the current budgetary issue and begin a dialogue of some of the potential solutions with the Board. He presented the current budget situation from 2012 through 2020; removing PCAPs for an apples-to-apples comparison of the General Fund without sub-funds. He explained that what he is presenting is based on 2012-2015 audited figures, 2016 projected, the 2017 recommended budget, a 2018 realistic as-is scenario, a 2019 and 2020 assumption of 1% revenue growth and 3% cost growth, and no material change in State funding or the local economy. He explained that there is modest growth on a rolling average for EAV and little growth in sales tax revenue projected. He reported that in a do nothing scenario a gap grows between revenue and expenditures, raising the deficit, and creating a negative fund balance in the General Fund by 2020; which must be fixed. He described a scenario based on the same assumptions and a $2.5 million decrease in expenditures in 2017, which results in the expenditures rising to meet revenues by 2020 and the deficit rising again. He identified that under this scenario, the fund balance would be replenished to policy in 2017 and increased until 2020. He provided a scenario with a $3 million reduction in expenditure, a larger hit, but the General Fund would remain balanced through 2020. He proposed that the scenarios could be revisited if conditions change, but it is better to address them sooner, and he would not endorse any solution presented. He detailed that under all of the scenarios there could be courses of action, in proportion or across-the-board, based solely on personnel cuts, or personnel cuts and a mixture of cuts to commodities, contractuals, and a rise in revenue due to higher fees and a small property tax hike. He explained that the cuts are shown in number of personnel cuts made because that is the lion share of cost, and to get the reduction in the General Fund needed, it will have to come from labor. He expressed that the options will get more discussion and detail at Executive Committee, a Committee of the Whole meeting, at special committee meetings for possible passage, and final adoption on December 1st.

Mr. Sorrel explained that without action, personnel cuts will rise in 2017 through 2020 totaling a 38% reduction in staffing in the General Fund. He noted that the expenditures outpace revenue again in 2021 in a $3 million cut, and begin spending from the reserves in that year. He stated that this is not panic, but a call to action to keep the General Fund solvent for the next several years.

Chairman Fennell noted that if nothing is done, the General Fund balance would be below policy in 2018. He discussed how there is a lot of work to do, but it will make it easier down the road.

Elsasser asked for information on how many employees retire or leave each year out of the General Fund.

Ms. Musselman stated that turnover rates are still being gone over and there will be a report given at committee.

Chairman Fennell brought up that with the recent VRI, many of those that were eligible to retire early have already done so.

Phelan asked if there would be action that comes out of the Committee of the Whole meeting.

Rand noted that there would be a full and frank conversation at the meeting, but having a discussion as a large group would be better to get out more voices in the conversation instead of going committee by committee.

Phelan suggested that there was a belief by members of the Board that the recommended budget was what the majority wanted, but the minority did not want to pass it because it is deficit spending. He said he hopes that the other side would express their opinions and bring forth some suggestions because it is a structural problem and there must be a consensus to pass the budget.

Chairman Fennell contended that those who were in favor of the original budget were unaware of the problems after next year.

Phelan expressed that the gap is widening and two years ago the Board knew about the structural problem.

Chairman Fennell agreed that the problem was known about six months ago when the $1.3 million loss in revenue was found.

Rand identified that it is very important to have the Committee of the Whole meeting because it will be a good opportunity to include the elected officials. He said that there would be a lot to hear that will affect real people and real services.

Harding asserted that all options should be on the table and he hopes that the Board can live up to that expectation.

Rand voiced that the Board will need to absolutely understand what is in the General Fund because that is the most critical fund. He expressed that the jobs, costs, contractuals, commodities, payroll, and capital are General Fund obligations.

Baietto highlighted that the passage at 56% for the advisory referendum was a significant accomplishment for the voters to support Care and Treatment Board and Veteran’s Assistance Commission. He recognized Rand for his leadership on the issue because he believes that it would have never made it to the Board. He thanked Mayer and the voters. He stated that he hopes it will be supported through the budgeting process.

County Clerk Steve Sonnemaker invited all to attend the Illinois Association of County Officials Conference beginning Sunday, the 13th through Tuesday the 15th at the Pere Marquette. He stated that there will be a hospitality room hosted in room 1102.

Rand noted that he met with the Coroner’s assembly last year, along with the other officials; it's great fun. He said that it is important to have the conference in Peoria because it creates a benefit in hotel room nights and folks get to learn about Peoria.

Parker thanked those that came out to Elected Officials Got Talent. She noted that donations are being collected for the Neighborhood Alliance until November 18th.

Dillon thanked the staff for their consistent attendance to the informational meetings held for the road referendum. He recognized Rand for bringing the issue forward and the Board for having the discussion. He said there is still work to be done on the roads. He noted that the school sales tax passed and he thanked Regional Superintendent Elizabeth Derry and Chad Allison for taking it across the finish line.

Trumpe thanked Parker for bringing the cake to the meeting.

Elsasser recognized the World Series win by the Chicago Cubs, and Baietto added that he did not have another 45 years more to wait once the game entered the 8th inning.

Williams noted that on November 8th James Polk passed away and will be greatly missed. She said that there would be a celebration of life on Saturday at the Gateway Building from 10am to 11:30am.

Chairman Fennell reported that St. Edward’s School should be moved into beginning the second semester.

VII. ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business before the Board, the Chairman announced the meeting was adjourned.