PROCEEDINGS OF THE
STATE OF
) SS
Proceedings of the regular meeting of the Knox County Board, held at the
Knox County Courthouse,
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Janet Occhi and upon roll
call the following members reported present:
District 1
Caroline Porter
District 2
Paul Stewart
District 3
Janet Occhi
District
4 George Knapp
District
5 Gerald Link
District
1 Allen Pickrel
District
2 Greg Bacon
District
3 Paul Hevland
District
4 Wayne Saline
District
5 Ricardo
Sandoval
District
1 Linda Roberts
District
2 Dana
Shallenberger
District
3 Dale Parsons
District
4
District 5
Stephen Johnson
Also
present was Scott Erickson,
Chairman Occhi led the Members in the pledge to the flag. Rev. Paul
Newhall, Pastor of Faith United Methodist Church gave the invocation.
Chairman Occhi asked for additions to the agenda. Member Pickrel asked
that the rules be suspended to vote on an item that concerns negotiations.
Chairman Occhi stated that since agenda items 8 and 9 needed to be deleted, this
item would be inserted at agenda item 8.
Chairman Occhi asked for public comments. There were none.
Chairman Occhi presented the following items of the consent agenda: 1)
minutes of the Board Meeting held
Treasurer Robin Davis introduced for discussion a debt certificate for
the Mary Davis Home. She then introduced a representative from Speer Financial,
Inc. to answer any questions. He stated that the same payment debt would be kept
as it wraps around the current payment schedule. The level of $280,000 is the
same. If this measure is approved tonight, Speer Financial will be back at the
next meeting to present bids from various underwriters. Actually the general
credit of the County is pledged as a revenue source. It does not have to be
specified. According to the debt certificate ordinance to be voted on at the
next meeting, it will be stated that this money is being borrowed for specific
projects for the Mary Davis Home. These funds cannot be spent on anything other
than what is defined in that ordinance. It does not have to be spent all at once
but can be invested and interest can be earned. This interest would have to go
to the Mary Davis Home, and could be applied to that debt fund if so desired.
These are general obligation bonds but not tax levies.
Chairman Occhi introduced for approval to authorize a debt certificate
for the Mary Davis Home for up to $1,050,000. Motion was made by Member Stewart
and seconded by Member Link to approve this measure. Member Johnson stated that
this is a commitment of a lot of years and questioned if the County would be
able to repay this debt. Member Saline responded that this is something that has
to be done. One way or another we will have to spend the money to make the
upgrades and this is a better, less expensive alternative. Member Stewart noted
that the County has been successful in retiring other bonds. Roll call vote is
recorded as follows: Ayes—Porter, Stewart, Occhi, Knapp, Link, Pickrel, Bacon,
Hevland, Saline, Sandoval, Roberts, Shallenberger, Parsons, Mannhardt, and
Johnson—(15). Noes—(0). Motion carried.
Motion was made by Member Stewart and seconded by Member Porter to
approve the payment of dues to Prairie Hills Resource Conservation Development.
Chairman Occhi reminded Board Members that the County already does belong to
this organization. Roll call vote is recorded as follows: Ayes—Porter,
Stewart, Occhi, Knapp, Link, Pickrel, Bacon, Hevland, Saline, Sandoval, Roberts,
Shallenberger, Parsons, Mannhardt, and Johnson—(15). Noes—(0). Motion
carried.
Motion was made by Member Parsons and seconded by Member Roberts to
approve the payment of dues to United Council of Counties of Illinois. Roll call
vote is recorded as follows: Ayes—Porter, Stewart, Occhi, Knapp, Link,
Pickrel, Bacon, Hevland, Saline, Sandoval, Roberts, Shallenberger, Parsons,
Mannhardt, and Johnson—(15). Noes—(0). Motion carried.
Chairman Occhi appointed the following Board Members to the ad hoc
committee for a
Member Parsons announced that the first meeting of this committee would
be held
Member Pickrel asked that the rules be suspended to add this item to the
agenda. This information has to do with union contract negotiations. If the 2/3
vote is achieved then he will pass out the specific information. Motion to
suspend the rules to address this subject was made by Member Pickrel and
seconded by Member Parsons. Roll call vote is recorded as follows:
Ayes—Porter, Stewart, Occhi, Knapp, Link, Pickrel, Bacon, Hevland, Saline,
Sandoval, Roberts, Shallenberger, Parsons, Mannhardt, and Johnson—(15). Noes—(0).
Motion carried.
Member Pickrel passed out a policy on conflict of interest that he said
had to do with the recent union negotiations. Late that afternoon he had
received paperwork and direction from legal counsel. We have been discussing
certain matters with him. No one on the negotiating committee is doing this to
make any enemies or upset anyone. We currently have a Board Member whose wife is
employed by the County. She is also the president of the union. There have been
some cases that have come down in which our legal counsel, Mr. Bruce Beal, has
advised that this Board Member should not vote. Mr. Beal has sent the case file
of similar cases in other counties. This comes down to State guidelines. Member
Porter earlier in the evening had addressed this very subject. Member Pickrel
drew the Board’s attention to the handout which states that “a conflict of
interest exists when a person has a financial interest, either directly or
indirectly through business, investment or family members.” In which case,
that Board Member should not participate in discussions of that topic or the
actual vote. Additionally, that Board Member might also be asked to leave the
room during the actual discussion. Further, this Board Member also depends on
the Public Defender to sign his per diem to get paid. According to the State,
our attorney, and the County Government Law Reference Guide book that Member
Porter has, this Member should not be able to have any interest, interaction, or
allowed to vote on union matters. Motion was made by Member Pickrel and seconded
by Member Bacon to adopt this policy on conflict of interest.
Dean Stone, from the State’s Attorney’s Office, questioned if this
policy had been reviewed by the State’s Attorney’s Office, as Paul Mangieri
may have an opinion. Member Pickrel stated that it had not. Mr. Stone stated
that the Board should be cautious about excluding an elected representative from
discussions. Member Pickrel stated that it is due to the financial interests of
the person and their families. Mr. Stone asked that a copy of this policy be
sent to the State’s Attorney’s Office. He advised caution be exercised in
regards to this purposed policy, especially since this was brought as a last
minute agenda item.
Member Porter quoted from The County Government Law Reference Guide
written by the Taxpayers Federation of Illinois regarding common law and
conflict of interest. This volume states “an examination of whether a county
board member has a conflict of interest does not end with whether or not there
is a statutory conflict. But rather a common law conflict may exist when a board
member has a personal interest in a matter coming before the body, even though
the conflict does not violate the provisions of the Public Officer’s Activity
Act. Common law conflict of interest exists when official action could result in
a personal advantage or disadvantage to the board member. To avoid this
conflict, the Board Member may simply acknowledge the conflict and abstain from
voting or acting on the matters in question.”
Member Johnson responded the according to that last statement, the Board
Member makes that an individual decision, not the body of the Board. The Board
Member, in this case, meaning himself should make the decision of when to
abstain, not this body.
Member Porter shared her opinion that this does not preclude the Board
Members asking Member Johnson to exclude himself. The simplest method is for him
to offer to exclude himself when questions come up. Member Johnson replied that
they can ask whenever they want.
Member Pickrel stated that basically what we could do is take a vote
tonight to decide what the body of the whole would like, if they would like
Member Johnson to abstain when it comes to matters involving the union. This
decision does not have to be binding. Member Pickrel does not have the
County’s legal opinion, but does have this legal opinion that he had received
from
Member
Shallenberger stated that this should go the State’s Attorney’s Office
first. Member Stewart agreed. Although we do have an attorney currently advising
us, it would be a good idea to have the State’s Attorney look this over before
we vote on this.
Member
Parsons responded to Member Stewart that since he is new on the Board, he may
not know that this matter has been brought to Paul Mangieri’s attention
before. Mr. Mangieri will not give a ruling on this. That is why it is being
brought to the full Board. Member Johnson posed two questions: 1) who wrote
this, and 2) he believed that in Member Parsons’ response that Mr. Mangieri
had received an opinion from the Attorney General on this same issue. Member
Pickrel disagreed and stated that he had a different answer and so did another
attorney. Member Saline stated it was his understanding that Bruce Beal wrote
this policy.
Member
Johnson responded that first of all, on any contract issues that concern the
union that his wife has been president of these past years, he has abstained
from all of those votes. This policy would limit his freedom of speech by not
allowing him to speak on issues before this Board. He has abstained from every
vote on union contracts.
Member
Pickrel said that he does understand what Member Johnson said. This has to do
with things that pertain to his wife. Earlier during the executive session,
there was discussion about an office that she had worked in, and confidential
information that Member Johnson had obtained. Member Johnson interrupted that
this information came from the Treasurer’s Office. Member Pickrel asked if
this confidential information should have stayed with Member Johnson and this
Board and not shared with his wife. Member Johnson responded negatively. Member
Pickrel continued that this referred to a dollar amount that Member Johnson had
received from the Treasurer’s Office that was private information that he was
able to obtain because of his position as a Board Member. This information
should have stayed with Member Johnson. During the closed session, he shared
that information with this Board. Member Johnson agreed that this was discussed
in the executive session. Member Pickrel stated that this information was
brought up during the union negotiations, by the attorney for the union. He
brought up the exact dollar amount that Member Johnson had mentioned to the
Board. How could this attorney have received this specific dollar amount? Member
Johnson countered that this dollar amount is contained in the budget.
Member
Pickrel stated that the Board could vote on this. It doesn’t mean that Member
Johnson must comply, until we get the legal opinion. Member Mannhardt suggested
that this policy could be tabled. Member Pickrel stated that rather than tabling
this, the Board could ask Member Johnson to make his own decision until we get
the legal rule. Member Porter stated that previously Paul Mangieri had concluded
that it was not illegal for Member Johnson to participate in these discussions.
However, she continued this is a matter of ethics. Member Pickrel stated that he
never mentioned any legal problems with this. The case in point is that the
union representative spoke up because he supports Member Johnson speaking up as
much as he can. Roll call vote to adopt this policy on conflict of interest is
recorded as follows: Ayes—Porter, Stewart, Occhi, Knapp, Link, Pickrel, Bacon,
Hevland, Saline, Roberts, and Parsons—(11). Noes—Shallenberger, Mannhardt,
and Johnson—(3). Pass—Sandoval—(1). Motion carried.
Treasurer Robin Davis presented for first reading the resolution on
increasing of minimum pricing for auction sales by delinquent tax agents. She
reminded Members of the information included in the Member packets. This would
increase the minimum price to $600 for silent auctions. Most parcels go for over
this amount.
Treasurer Robin Davis presented the condition of the banks report through
John Kennedy presented the animal control business report by saying that
it is business as usual. They made their first $25.00 on State redemption fees.
John Kennedy introduced for discussion the resolution for fee increase
and collection of fees. So far he has not received anything from the State’s
Attorney’s Office regarding a resolution for the ordinance for the increased
fees or job duties of the deputy administrator. Chairman Occhi stated that they
could still discuss adding the $1.00 to the cost of the rabies tag fees. Mr.
Kennedy stated that he estimated that this would generate approximately $10,500
annually for the Animal Control Program. These additional funds would offset any
additional costs associated with the implementation of this new law. The
majority of the surrounding counties charge a $10 registration fee. These
counties do charge more for the registration of unaltered animals. In light of
the new state law and the State Overpopulation Fund, he would also like to see
an increase in the unaltered registration fees. This would put more money into
the fund should the County decide to do their own spay/neuter program. He would
present this fee increase information in the next Board packets. With the new
$10 differential licensing fees, the $3.00 fee increase for an unaltered animal
would raise the total fee amount to $20.00. Member Pickrel asked for
confirmation that State’s Attorney Paul Mangieri was asked
Rod Cleair presented the Mary Davis Home business report. He did finally
get a budgetary estimate for the security system. Currently, there are 34
clients and 10 of those from the County. A week ago the security system was down
for six days. MSI, Alpha Omega, and our maintenance staff worked together to get
this system back up. Although the estimate does not contain an itemized list, it
does look like it will cost $100,000 less than anticipated. This company
estimates that this project will require five weeks of work. From the
information provided, it should meet the needs of the facility. He did not
succeed in getting other bids as most of the money is in new construction. Some
companies do not want to accept these kinds of projects on a pre-existing
structure. The cameras would come from one company and the intercom from another
company. The warranty includes one year for labor and up to three years for some
of the cameras. This would be an easy system to expand. The outdoor cameras
would rotate. There would be a camera out by the purposed fuel pumps. If need
be, an additional 16 cameras could be added to this system.
Chairman Occhi introduced for approval to bid and bring back for fuel
pumps. Rod Cleair stated Oil Marketing Company in
Rod Cleair stated that the security cameras had been down for six days
and they were only able to open the doors with keys. The rotating camera and
intercom continued to function. He would really like to move on a new security
system as soon as possible. If this existing system fails again, there is no
guarantee that the whole system won’t also fail. Then many hours of overtime
would be involved. Only one company has expressed interest in doing this
project. The existing locks of the doors are fine. It is the wiring that is a
problem.
Motion was made by Member Johnson and seconded by Member Pickrel to
suspend the rules to allow Members to vote to accept the bid from Pratt for
$151,976 to provide a security system for the Mary Davis Home. County Clerk
Scott Erickson expressed concern about proceeding with this, especially
considering the large expenditure of funds and since this item was not on the
agenda. Member Bacon stated that for the safety of both the Board and the Mary
Davis Home, there should be an itemized list. Member Johnson shared his opinion
that since this is an emergency situation, he is not sure that we would be in
violation of the Open Meetings Act.
7:
Motion
was made by Member Johnson and seconded by Member Stewart to bid and bring back
for security systems for the Mary Davis Home. Voice vote is recorded as follows:
Ayes—(15). Noes—(0). Motion carried.
Member Porter suggested that a paper trail of appropriate records be maintained.
Joyce
Skinner presented the assessor/zoning business report. They ended up with 39
complaints for the Board of Review. Unfortunately, the majority of those are
large commercial properties. She is sure that a lot of those will go to P-Tab at
the State. Later on we will probably have to have some appraisals. The Board of
Review did meet and some of those complaints were resolved.
When
someone applies for a tax exemption such as churches, the Board of Review has to
either deny or approve that request. Recently a request came in for a large
facility that has six houses, a chapel, a storage pole building, as well as a
church. They want the whole thing to be tax exempt. The Chairman of the Board of
Review came in and got the statutes out. Since neither of us is an attorney, we
went back and asked Mr. Geoff Campbell to look at this, so that we could get the
paperwork filled out and sent in. He did provide an answer to us. This situation
creates the question if the Board would consent to allow Mr. Campbell to be
consulted in times like that. Although we are to consult with the Mr. Mangieri,
sometimes we need things quickly. As you have heard before, sometimes it is hard
to quickly obtain things from the State’s Attorney’s Office. The other
problem is that some of these complaints have been from the State and are
represented by attorneys. Since neither she nor any Board Member is an attorney,
we could use an attorney to advise us. Such services could prevent the loss of a
large amount of money. Member Bacon stated that since Mr. Mangieri is our legal
counsel, that decision would have to have from him. Chairman Ochi said that she
would contact him and ask his decision.
Mrs.
Skinner reminded Board Members that the Board of Review will be meeting January
23rd and 24th. State hearings will be held on the January
25th and February 17th. Some of these cases are for the
year of 2004 and one is for 2003.
Motion
was made by Member Johnson and seconded by Member Mannhardt to approve the
request of conditional use permit for horse boarding and riding facility—Case
# CU-0505. Voice vote is recorded as follows: Ayes—(15). Noes—(0). Motion
carried.
Larry
Larson presented the landfill business report. The tarp machine is working very
well. The rear axel housing on the trash compactor broke in half. It appears to
be a flaw in the housing.
Larry Larson presented for approval authorization to attend the landfill
technology conference. Several subjects that pertain to our landfill will be
discussed at this conference. One area of special interest is that of post
closure and bioreactor landfills. If we can successfully implement these
measures we can decrease the maintenance time after closure from 30 years to 20
years. Motion was made by Member Johnson and seconded by Member Link to approve
this item. Roll call vote is recorded as follows: Ayes—Porter, Stewart, Occhi,
Knapp, Link, Pickrel, Bacon, Hevland, Saline, Sandoval, Roberts, Shallenberger,
Parsons, Mannhardt, and Johnson—(15). Noes—(0). Motion carried.
Duane Ratermann presented the highway business report. He reminded
Members of the report included in the packets. The last three weeks they have
been conducting the bi-annual bridge inspection. Every other year it is a
federal requirement to inspect every structure that is over 20 feet long.
When
asked about the condition of the bridges, Mr. Ratermann responded the some of
the bridges are in good condition and some are not so good. Some bridges will
need to be replaced in the next year.
Member
Knapp questioned the condition of the landfill road. He had discussed this with
Mr. Larson a couple of times. He was told that this is a township road. Word is
out that since
Motion
was made by Member Pickrel and seconded by Member Parsons to approve the
addendum agreement for the union contract for the Highway Department. Roll call
vote is recorded as follows: Ayes—Porter, Stewart, Occhi, Knapp, Link,
Pickrel, Bacon, Hevland, Saline, Sandoval, Roberts, Shallenberger, Parsons,
Mannhardt, and Johnson—(15). Noes—(0). Motion carried.
Motion
was made by Member Parsons and seconded by Member Stewart to approve the local
agency agreement for federal participation, County Highway 39 Bridge, Section
05-00142-00-BR. Roll call vote is recorded as follows: Ayes—Porter, Stewart,
Occhi, Knapp, Link, Pickrel, Bacon, Hevland, Saline, Sandoval, Roberts,
Shallenberger, Parsons, Mannhardt, and Johnson—(15). Noes—(0). Motion
carried.
Marianne
Wiesen presented the Nursing Home business report. Currently, there are 139
residents and 4 pending admissions. The balance in the Nursing Home account is
$180,000 and $1,303,000 in the tax referendum account. They are making the first
payment to Johnson Building Systems for work that has been done. The
presentation for the new web page will be at the next meeting. She then
introduced Betty Lindstrom Boone as the newly hired Director of Nurses. Ms.
Boone has 30 years of experience in nursing. Board Members were invited to go
and visit her at the Nursing Home.
Marianne
Wiesen introduced for discussion or approval the insurance for the doctors at
the Nursing Home and Health Department. Dr. Strauch is not covered for
professional liability as the Medical Director at the Nursing Home. Basically he
is bare if there was a lawsuit brought against the
Treasurer
Robin Davis stated that the insurance carrier does not cover those who are not
employees of the County. Ms. Wiesen stated that in order for the doctor to
provide his own insurance, the stipend would have to be increased approximately
$300 per month. Greg Chance stated that since this insurance is normally
provided by the employer, he is not even sure that the doctor can independently
obtain this insurance. The situation at the Health Department is different in
that they have an advanced practice nurse. Since this is a full-time health
department, State law mandates a collaborative physician. This person only comes
in to confer with the advanced practice nurse. This is not the same situation as
the Nursing Home. Dealing with insurance is one thing. It is quite another to
deal with malpractice and professional liability. For now we are still
contacting insurance companies to try to figure out how to proceed. We will need
to decide whether it would be better to have this under individual policies or
include both facilities under the same insurance.
Member
Porter stated that medical liability policy is very unique. She agreed with Mr.
Chance that the doctor probably can’t even get this coverage himself. It is in
the County’s best interest to have him covered. Medical malpractice insurance
is a critical need. Mr. Chance stated that the point of this discussion was to
bounce ideas off of the Board Members. Chairman Occhi stated the need for an
update at the next meeting regarding their decision.
Motion
was made by Member Pickrel and seconded by Member Parsons to bid and bring back
for a new time clock for the Nursing Home. Voice vote is recorded as follows:
Ayes—Porter, Stewart, Occhi, Knapp, Link, Bacon, Hevland, Saline, Sandoval,
Roberts, Shallenberger, Parsons, Mannhardt, and Johnson—(14). Noes—(0).
Pass—Pickel—(1). Motion carried.
Chris
Wood presented the GIS business report. Upon delivery of the new desk, he would
like permission to throw away the old one. A consensus was given.
He
reported that he is getting close to completing the land use layer. The next day
he planned to begin in township 18. Soon he will be phoning to get the county on
the schedule to do the air checking. When that is done, he will turn that over
to Sidwell. That part should take 4-6 weeks. We are in pretty good shape. His
next project will be the road center line data. This will involve the signing of
a licensing agreement. He will bring that to the next meeting. Regarding the
actual road center line data that we get from the State, Mr. Wood is only
willing to share that specific data for free. There are a lot of issues with the
road data not being accurate on County plat books. One is his ideas to generate
revenue for the County would be to use this new data and hire a company to print
plat books, which we could in turn sell to the general public. Another idea is
to make foldable maps or large wall maps, which would include community
landmarks. To depend on the revenue generated by GIS fees would be risky as this
will not be a steady stream of income.
Member
Johnson questioned a bill for an additional tray for the printer at a cost of
$508. Mr. Wood stated that this additional tray was needed to make it easier to
print different sizes of the maps. Previously this printer only had one tray.
Motion
was made by Member Parsons and seconded by Member Roberts to approve claims
against
Member
Link questioned a bill on page 76 dealing with the price of gasoline from the
City of
Board
Members questioned a bill for $1,310.00 on page 63 as there is no appropriation
line assigned to this bill. Chairman Occhi stated that the Board would have to
decide what appropriation line to take that out of. This is for services
provided to the Annex. They have a small maintenance supply which does not cover
this expenditure. The Sheriff doesn’t want this responsibility. After some
discussion, it was decided to take this appropriation out of capital
improvements. Roll call vote to approve the payment of the bills excluding the
judicial attorney’s bills pending further documentation is recorded as
follows: Ayes—Porter, Stewart, Occhi, Knapp, Link, Hevland, Saline, Sandoval,
Roberts, Shallenberger, Parsons, Mannhardt, and Johnson—(13). Noes—(0).
Pass—Pickrel, and Bacon—(2). Motion carried.
STATEMENTS OF
GENERAL CONCERN
Member Porter, Member Stewart, Member Occhi, Member Knapp, and Member
Link had no comments at this time.
Member Pickrel commented that first he wanted to thank the courthouse and
highway committees for their negotiations. Things went well and it is nice to
get those completed in one night even though it was a very long night. Secondly,
he expressed all the respect in the world for Member Johnson both as a friend
and as a fellow Board Member. This is not intended to be an attack on him at all
or his reputation. He didn’t mean to insinuate that Member Johnson is breaking
confidentiality or anything. This was just basically to see how people felt.
There are a lot of things that are going around. This wasn’t a personal
attack. Member Pickrel wanted to express his respect of a Board Member and
friend and move on from there.
Member Bacon echoed the comments about the union negotiations. Even
though it was a long process, it was a pleasure to work with these union
representatives.
Member Hevland, Member Saline, Member Sandoval, Member Roberts, and
Member Shallenberger had no comments at this time.
Member Parsons commented that he would like to say to Member Johnson that
this is not a personal attack. He just wanted this to be all out and in the open
and let the air clear.
Member Mannhardt had no comments at this time.
Member Johnson commented that he personally took it as a direct attack on
himself. His further comments will be made after he consults with his attorney.
Chairman Occhi announced that the next regular meeting will be held on
Motion was made by Member Roberts and seconded by Member Link to adjourn
with voice vote recorded as follows: Ayes—(15). Noes—(0). Motion carried.
Meeting was adjourned at