Loading...
2009-10-05 - Village Board Regular Meeting - Minutes 12251 10/05/2009 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE VILLAGE BOARD OF THE VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS,50 RAUPP BOULEVARD, BUFFALO GROVE,ILLINOIS ON MONDAY,OCTOBER 5,2009 CALL TO ORDER President Hartstein called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. Those present stood and pledged allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL Roll call indicated the following present: President Hartstein;Trustees Braiman,Glover,Berman,Trilling,Stone and Sussman. Also present were: William Brimm,Village Manager;William Raysa,Village Attorney;Ghida Neukirch,Deputy Village Manager;Scott Anderson,Director of Finance;Art Malinowski,Human Resources Director;Robert Pfeil, Village Planner;Brian Sheehan,Village Health Officer;Fire Chief Vavra;Deputy Fire Chief Ciecko;and Joseph Tenerelli,Village Treasurer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Glover,seconded by Berman,to approve the minutes of the September 21,2009 Regular Meeting.Upon roll call vote,Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6—Braiman,Glover,Berman,Trilling,Stone, Sussman NAYS: 0—None Motion declared carried. WARRANT#1130 Mr.Tenerelli read Warrant#1130. Moved by Glover,seconded by Braiman,to approve Warrant#1130 in the amount of$2,230,701.27,authorizing payment of bills listed. Upon roll call,Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6—Braiman,Glover,Berman,Trilling,Stone,Sussman NAYS: 0—None Motion declared carried. VILLAGE PRESIDENT'S REPORT President Hartstein read a proclamation designating the month of October as National Breast Cancer Awareness Month,urging all persons in our community to become aware of their own risks of breast cancer,to talk to their health care providers about breast cancer and whenever appropriate,to get screened for the disease. President Hartstein dedicated this proclamation to Eve Bresnick,who died today of cancer. President Hartstein reported on the recent Illinois Municipal League Conference held this past weekend in Chicago. During the conference,President Hartstein attended sessions on Parliamentary Procedure and Civility in Government,and he will do his utmost to run our meetings in a smooth manner,and he urged all Board members to join in this effort. President Hartstein reported on possible Pension Reform,bringing it to the attention of residents because approximately one-third of the Village portion of property tax bills goes to fund pensions. Senate Bill 2011 is a bill to address pension reform,and he urged resident to contact our legislators urging them to pass Senate Bill 2011. 12252 10/05/2009 TRUSTEE REPORTS Trustee Stone reported that there will be a Community Drug Forum on October 7,2009 at Buffalo Grove High School addressing the issue of heroin. This forum is coordinated by the Buffalo Grove Police Department and Buffalo Grove and Stevenson High Schools,and she thanked them all for their efforts in presenting this program. WTTW is also doing a two-part series on the heroin epidemic. Trustee Stone suggested,in contemplation of the proposed recall ordinance,that she would like the Village to have an ordinance proposing Term Limits,so she asked for the consensus of the Board to direct the Village Manager and the Village Attorney to draft such an ordinance. If the recall ordinance is not enacted,then term limits would not be required. President Hartstein stated that proposal would be best brought up under New Business. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT Mr.Brimm introduced Chief Vavra who thanked all the individuals,businesses and organizations involved in the recent Fire Department Open House. Chief Vavra and President Hartstein then presented the Firefighter of the Year Award to Wendy Durkin. The Chief reviewed the criteria for this award, Lt.Durkin was congratulated by the audience and the Board. PUBLIC HEARING—eSkape At 7:55 P.M.,President Hartstein noted that the Public Hearing for amendment of special use,eSkape Family Entertainment Center,350 McHenry Road will need to be continued due to the fact that not all documentation has been received. Moved by Berman,seconded by Trilling,to continue the Public Hearing for amendment of special use,eSkape Family Entertainment Center,350 McHenry Road,until the October 19,2009 meeting. Upon voice vote,the motion was unanimously declared carried. QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE Frank Ladonne,Chestnut Court West,asked about the status of the proposed Ethics Commission. Mr.Brimm answered that the proposed ordinance will be presented to the Board at the October 19,2009 meeting;the drafting has been done,comments have been circulated,the research is complete and it is ready for presentation. John Teckorius,Raupp Boulevard,has an issue with the Park District's exclusive use of Emmerich Park East and West for practices. Mr.Brimm responded that he has researched the issue,and he does believe that the Park District is continuing to operate the program in compliance with the ordinance with regard to the use of the sound amplification system. Mr.Brimm is suggesting that he would like to have a meeting with himself,Mr.Teckorius and the Park District after the season is over to work out a solution that will be beneficial to all parties. Debra Jess,464 Raphael Ave.,questioned the role the Village plays in the Park District Dog Park;she does not believe the location is a good one. Mr.Brimm responded to Mrs.Jess' questions;he noted that the parking lot is owned by the Village;Metra has encouraged this type of use for the parking lots;the Village and the Park District will work together to iron out the details. CONSENT AGENDA President Hartstein explained the Consent Agenda,stating that any member of the audience or the Board could request that an item be removed for full discussion;there were no such requests. The Village Clerk read a brief synopsis of each of the items on the Consent Agenda. Trustee Berman pointed out that the dates on the Police and Fire Pension Fund report should be December 31,2008, rather than 2009. Moved by Braiman,seconded by Berman,to approve the Consent Agenda. 12253 10/05/2009 ORDINANCE#2009-66—SNOW/DISABLED PARKING Motion to pass Ordinance#2009-66,amending Chapter 10.08 Snow,Chapter 10.18 Citation and Compliance Violations,of the Village of Buffalo Grove Municipal Code. ORDINANCE#2009-67—BUSINESS LICENSES Motion to pass Ordinance#2009-67,approving Amendment No.2 to an Agreement with Edward Hines Lumber Co. ASAP SOFTWARE Motion to approve Certificate of Initial Acceptance&Approval—ASAP Software Building Addition. POLICE PENSION FUND—MUNICIPAL COMPLIANCE REPORT Motion to accept Village of Buffalo Grove Police Pension Fund—Municipal Compliance Report—December 31, 2008. FIREFIGHTER'S PENSION FUND—MUNICIPAL COMPLIANCE REPORT Motion to accept Village of Buffalo Grove Firefighter's Pension Fund—Municipal Compliance Report—December 31,2008. Upon roll call,Trustees voted as follows on the Consent Agenda: AYES: 6—Braiman,Glover,Berman,Trilling,Stone,Sussman NAYS: 0—None Motion declared carried. ORDINANCE#2009-68—931 TWISTED OAK LANE Moved by Sussman,seconded by Glover,to pass Ordinance#2009-68,approving a special use for a child day care home at 931 Twisted Oak Lane. Mr.Brimm reviewed the proposed ordinance,details of which are contained in the Village Board Meeting Agenda Item Overview prepared by Mr.Pfeil. Upon roll call,Trustees voted as follows on the Consent Agenda: AYES: 6—Braiman,Glover,Berman,Trilling,Stone,Sussman NAYS: 0—None Motion declared carried. AGENDA President Hartstein suggested moving to Item XII.C.on the agenda;there were no objections from the Board. 1 12254 10/05/2009 RESOLUTION#2009-37—CLARKE ENVIRONMENTAL Moved by Berman,seconded by Braiman,to pass Resolution#2009-37,approving a contract between the Village of Buffalo Grove and Clarke Environmental Mosquito Management,Inc.in an amount not to exceed$48,298.00 in conformance with the materials contained in Board packets. Upon roll call,Trustees voted as follows on the Consent Agenda: AYES: 6—Braiman,Glover,Berman,Trilling,Stone,Sussman NAYS: 0—None Motion declared carried. FIRE ENGINE&TRUCK PURCHASE Moved by Braiman,seconded by Glover,to waive bid and authorize purchase of one FFA Rescue Pumper,for a price not to exceed$383,723.00,and one FFA 100'Rear-Mounted Platform ladder truck,for a price not to exceed $782,813.00 from Ferrara Fire Apparatus,Inc. President Hartstein thanked Chief Vavra for the information that he compiled in explaining the significant savings realized through these negotiations. Chief Vavra then briefly reviewed the negotiation process,noting that the savings amounted to approximately$300,000.00 over the estimate for the original cost. Trustee Braiman noted that he appreciates the information received from the Chief. Trustee Braiman stated that he normally hesitates to waive bids because bids normally result in the lowest possible cost. In this case,the bidding process would have resulted in a much higher cost. The way the Chief handled this purchase was excellent and a benefit to the Village as well as the Department. Trustee Trilling pointed out that the Chief has requested an additional$8,464.00 in order to cover replacement of equipment for the trucks. Trustees Braiman and Glover amended the motion to include the additional$8,464.00 requested. Mr.Brimm pointed out that the contract is subject to final review by the Village Attorney. Upon roll call,Trustees voted as follows on the amended motion: AYES: 6—Braiman,Glover,Berman,Trilling,Stone,Sussman NAYS: 0—None Motion declared carried. RECALL OF ELECTED OFFICIALS Moved by Berman,seconded by Trilling to pass Ordinance#2009-69,adding Chapter 2.70,Recall of Elected Officials,to the Village of Buffalo Grove Municipal Code. Trustee Berman briefly reviewed the background for this proposal;the right of recall is not uncommon,but it is an extraordinary remedy in a democratic government;it provides a means for citizens to retain direct control over elected officials;it empowers citizens to petition and vote directly on the removal of elected officials who they believe are not representing their best interests or who are unresponsive or incompetent;it entrusts both judgment and ultimate control of the power to govern to the citizens directly and does so by majority rule;recall also can be abused. At the last meeting,every single member of the Board expressed support for the recall concept. The form of the proposed ordinance presented on tonight's agenda is improved from the original draft,having benefited from the input of the Board,the public,the staff,and most particularly,the Village Attorney. V 12255 10/05/2009 Trustee Berman firmly and fervently hopes that the mere potential for recall will have a positive impact on the conduct of the people elected to this Board,and that it will never be invoked. The proposed ordinance does nothing more than provide the framework for a process by which the people of this community are empowered to take action if they choose to do so. Mr.Raysa reviewed three basic areas:the Bill of Attainder,Home Rule and Due Process. Based upon Home Rule power,and pursuant to the First District Illinois Appellate Case of Williamson vs.Doyle,a 1981 case,Mr.Raysa quoted"the 1970 Constitution gives Home Rule units broad legislative powers and states that those powers are to be construed liberally." Further,"Consequently,a Home Rule unit could enact a valid Home Rule ordinance." Based upon the case law that he has researched,it is Mr.Raysa's opinion that the proposed Recall Ordinance that is on the agenda tonight dated 9/30/2009 in the upper left-hand corner of page one,which makes several changes from the previous draft pursuant to the Board's direction,is not a Bill of Attainder and the Village as a Home Rule unit of government can enact a valid Recall Ordinance. Mr.Raysa reviewed three alternative subsections on page five in subsection 2.70.060 in the proposed ordinance. President Hartstein stated that,at this time,he will entertain only questions for the Village Attorney. In answer to a question from Trustee Berman,Mr.Raysa reviewed his recommendation to eliminate the provision for continuing prohibition against appointment or election to office following recall. President Hartstein reviewed the procedure to be followed tonight. Trustee Stone moved to amend the motion as follows: 1. This ordinance shall not be amended or repealed during the period of time in which a Notice of Recall has been filed with the Village Clerk. 2. Once a Notice of Intent to Recall has been filed,the Village Board will not place any other referendum questions on that ballot. 3. If there are any other referendum questions that have been filed by the Village,the ordinances that place that referendum question on the ballot will be repealed to make room for the recall referendum question. 4. Any recall referendum ordinances will be adopted in the order in which properly completed petitions have been filed. 5. When completed recall petitions are filed with the Village,the petitions are to be stamped with the current date and time. Consideration of ordinances to place the recall on the ballot shall be done in the order in which valid recall petitions have been filed. 6. In keeping with the consistency of the petition for nomination to run for Trustee,the recall petition should have the exact language and terms regarding the circulators of the petition. To circulate a petition by election board laws,you must be 18 years of age or older,a citizen of the United States,and that the signatures on the sheet are signed in your presence. The recall petition currently is requiring that the circulator be a registered voter in Buffalo Grove,which conflicts with the petition for running for the position. President Hartstein asked if there was a second to the motion;there was no second. Trustee Braiman suggested that each of the six items should be voted on separately. Copies of the proposed amendments will be copied and distributed to the Board. Trustee Sussman stated that,if there is going to be a recall ordinance,it should be the very best one possible. Because of an incident that took place this afternoon,she now believes that there must be a reason for recall. Moved by Sussman,seconded by Stone,to amend the ordinance to include a reason for the recall. Li 12256 10/05/2009 In answer to a question from Trustee Braiman,Trustee Sussman stated that there just needs to be a statement noting the reason for recall so that the person subject to recall may respond. In answer to a question from Trustee Berman,Mr.Raysa quoted an Illinois Supreme Court decision stating that recall elections may be held in order to remove from office local elected officials because of the voter's displeasure with the policies pursued by those officials regardless of the lack of nonfeasance,misfeasance or malfeasance on the part of such officials. Trustee Berman stated that he appreciates Trustee Sussman's concerns,and he is somewhat torn. Case law suggests that there is not a requirement in the law for a reason. On the other hand,everyone does have a right to understand and be apprised of the reasons before them. Anyone that comes forward with a petition has an affirmative obligation to make their case to the public. If they do not tell the public why they seek the recall,the public should reject the recall. No one who runs for office is required to include a statement with their reasons for running for office. Trustee Trilling asked that voting on the amendments be deferred so that the Board may look at the context of all of the items,as some decisions may impact other decisions. Trustee Sussman stated that she believes that the reason for recall should be stated in both the petitions and in the Notice of Recall. The question of why a candidate wished to run for office was asked at the forums. Donna Stoller, 1114 Larraway Drive,stated that she has scrutinized the proposed ordinance;she believes that Trustee Sussman's motion is terrific but she does not believe it goes far enough;she believes each individual elector must give a reason for signing a petition;she would support Trustee Sussman's suggestion,but she believes it needs to be expanded. Rob Sherman,778 Stonebridge Lane,supports Trustee Sussman's amendment because it directly addresses a concern that he has raised publicly pertaining to defensive petitions for recall where someone would try to get petitions against others to fill up the ballot with three to prevent ones self from being recalled;this would go a long way toward eliminating recall purely for political reasons or for no reason at all. Frank Ladonne,34 Chestnut Terrace,stated that Trustee Sussman makes an excellent point,since otherwise it would be removing a duly elected official without due process,and without giving that person the ability to mount a defense;he also agrees with Trustee Trilling. Craig Horwitz,883 Stonebridge Lane,questions the sense of urgency to put the proposed ordinance together;he does support the proposed ordinance;he believes without a cause,this will likely become a witch hunt;there needs to be a succinct statement of cause so that the accused can respond. Mike Powell,280 Blackthorn,agrees with Trustee Sussman;it is his concern that this could be used to highjack the well-meaning intent of the board;he is concerned that a resident who is denied a variance of some sort could then use vast resources to begin the recall process of those who voted against him. John Teckorius, 199 Raupp Boulevard,agrees with everyone who has spoken as well as with Trustee Sussman;he needs to know a reason that he would want to remove someone from office. Trustee Stone strongly agrees with Trustee Sussman's suggestion and agrees with the resident comments;there needs to be a legal or ethical breach or violation. Trustee Trilling moved to table the amendment suggested by Trustee Sussman;there was no second. Trustee Glover confirmed that it is up to the individual passing petition to explain the reason for recall;there does not have to be any sort of malfeasance;there just needs to be a reason. 12257 10/05/2009 Trustee Braiman confirmed that the same reason would be stated on the Notice of Recall as well as the petitions. Trustee Berman suggested the following wording:"an identical,short and concise statement of the reasons for recall shall be included on the Notice of Intention to Recall and the recall petition." Trustees Sussman and Stone agreed to this language. Upon roll call,Trustees voted as follows on the amended motion: • AYES: 5—Braiman,Glover,Berman,Stone,Sussman NAYS: 0—None ABSTAIN: 1—Trilling Motion declared carried. President Hartstein proceeded to open the floor to comments from the audience;he asked that residents state their name and address and succinctly state their thoughts on the proposed ordinance;he asked that speakers refrain from repeating comments already made by other speakers. Brian Rubin 453 Caren Drive,stated that he has always strongly supported the concept of a recall ordinance;he strongly supports the proposed ordinance in the form published dated 9/30/2009 as drafted;he would delete the subsection 2.70.060 E.in its entirety;he is very supportive of the amendment that was just passed. Mr.Rubin respects the opinion of our Village Attorney,as well as other municipal attorneys that have arrived at the same conclusion,i.e.Home Rule communities have the authority to adopt such an ordinance. Several area communities already have such ordinances. Having been an elected official himself,Mr.Rubin also believes that elected officials are responsible and accountable to the electorate for their behavior in office. The electorate is entitled to expect its elected officials to properly and appropriately discharge their responsibilities of office,and to have the power to recall and provide an expeditious and effective means of removing from office an official who has failed to sustain the public's trust. Elected officials face their fellow residents,the voters,in scheduled elections,and scheduled elections provide the residents an opportunity to remove an elected official from office,however,it could be 3-4 years until that official is to stand for re-election. When a majority of the residents,the voters,are of the common opinion that an elected official should be removed prior to the expiration of the elected term,for whatever reason they may have,the residents should have that right and power. If the proponents of a recall cannot make their case, the recall initiative will simply fail or not take place for a lack of signatures. It is having the people retain the power in the event that a sufficient number of voters are of the common mind that the matter cannot wait until the next election in which the official would stand for re-election. The majority of the Village Board cannot cause a recall. Under the proposed ordinance,the citizens of Buffalo Grove alone would be given that power. The requirement for signatures will be more than adequate protection to keep the process from being abused. The protections are in place to eliminate attempted harassment of any elected official. This is about trusting the residents,the voters. This applies to all elected officials. Election and a recall ordinance accomplish the same goal as term limits,thereby making term limit legislation unnecessary. A resident on Willow Parkway stated that if the Village Board votes in a way that is not consistent with the best interest of the voters,the voters should be able to have a referendum on the ballot to overturn something that the Board voted on that the residents do not like. If we are talking about democracy,that should be part of it. It was suggested that there should be a 60-day period of time to allow more residents to comment on this;he does not understand why this has to be voted on tonight. Chuck Pozniak,555 Estate Drive,is concerned about the term identical used in the amendment just voted on;he is concerned that a missing comma or period could deem the proposal invalid;he would prefer to see the word similar substituted. Kathryn Hedlund, 39 Timberhill Road and prior elected official,knows how numbers may vary in an election turnout;the proposed ordinance deals with taking away the original will of the people;it is possible to structure things through poorly attended elections to thwart that will of the people by special interests;just as there is a minimum number of signatures required for ballot placement,there should also be a minimum number of votes to remove an official;she concurs with having an effective date in the future. 12258 10/05/2009 John Teckorius, 199 Raupp Boulevard,echoed the comments of previous speakers;he believes he is for the proposed ordinance,but it must be fully researched and discussed;he agrees with Trustee Sussman's motion;he totally agrees with Trustee Stone's amendments;we need visionary leaders on the Board;we do not need stuffy agendas. Barnet Fagel,224 Stanton Court West,stated that it is disappointing for Buffalo Grove residents to witness their more experienced politicians displaying intolerance toward newer elected officials;there is an evident undercurrent of dissent;it would be in the public's best interest for the senior trustees to display that same service and cooperation they themselves received;harboring intolerance and impatience against a fellow member destroys the fabric of public service;collective heads should hang in shame;the recall ordinance essentially allows for the override of a choice legally cast by voters;the anticipated recall ordinance infringes on the protections guaranteed by the Illinois and United States Constitutions;it is also a breach of the Illinois Electoral Code;this gives the right to recall,but at the cost of the rights of the accused;the glaring question of why is noticeable by its absence;requesting citizens to vote on this recall without cause would ask the voters to be participants in a fraud. • Craig Horwitz 883 Stonebridge Lane,resident,referred to Home Rule regulations,noted that he believes that the proposed ordinance should be a referendum question;he is concerned about the sense of urgency to do this without making sure everything is right;he has a concern with the number of days allowed to gather signatures;the State of Illinois does not have the word recall in their deeming of a petition as valid;he believes the accused must have a platform for rebuttal;he is for recall,but he stresses that there should not be any urgency. Mrs. Stoller questioned the verification process for determining whether or not a signature is valid;she is disillusioned by the haste in acting on the proposed ordinance;the proposed ordinance needs to be amended;this should not be voted on tonight;she is concerned that a defeated candidate could be prepared to"lie in wait"ready to thrust a petition to the public;a recall ordinance should not be employed to silence a voice of dissent; she implored the Board to take more time;she has no interest in the recall ordinance,but merely the constitutionality of it. Susan Glazer,302 Chateau Drive,referred to an article by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan stating that she is opposed to changing laws once someone is in office;she wonders if anyone has talked to Attorney General Madigan to find out what her stand is if Buffalo Grove invokes this ordinance right now;she is in favor of a recall,but not in favor of this one;she does not want to see this voted on tonight;she is concerned with the constitutionality of the proposed ordinance;she is concerned with the cost to the Village and the demands on the staff and the Board;she is concerned with retaliation;she knows that there are people waiting tomorrow to present an intention to recall on three of the trustees;it is clear that that the town is ready to file a notice of intent to recall on perhaps all seven elected officials;the issue of chaos in the community concerns her;the signatures will not be a problem;she is concerned that all of the sitting trustees are going to have to be campaigning in the middle of their terms and not able to do the work that Buffalo Grove needs them to do;it is not in the best interest or the most cost-effective way for this recall right now;she believes the Board should take the advice of the Daily Herald editorial board and try to work with a mediator or counselor so that everyone can work together;she believes the Board owes it to the citizens of this town to try to reconcile before looking at immediate recall. Gary Stone, 1924 Beverly Lane,shared a letter from his son,Jordan,a college student,stating that it is a sad day in politics when the method of engaging a challenging voice is to alienate it and drive it from the system it seeks to improve. Mr.Stone disagrees with a recall because he does not believe recall is the appropriate method to do what the Board is seeking to do;there is a lot of effort put into elections and engaging the citizenry to vote because we know it is important to vote;there is a lot of time,effort and money spent on campaigning;many people in the last election chose not to vote;if a recall is a possibility,it will make a vote even less important,and he is concerned that even fewer people will vote;he believes a recall disenfranchises voters;it is a tool that the Board has to be very careful about enacting;there are positives to the proposed ordinance,but he believes the negatives outweigh the positives;he is not convinced that it will be deemed constitutional if it is challenged;he is not in favor of a recall because he believes elections are important;he agrees with some of the sentiments in terms of taking time to be sure it is done correctly if it is done. President Hartstein declared a recess from 9:55 P.M.until 10:04 P.M. V 12259 10/05/2009 Rob Sherman,778 Stonebridge Lane,appreciates the outstanding job that the current and previous elected officials do for the Village;he is opposed to recall,but he does see the trend,and,if it is passed,he wants it to be the best ordinance possible;he has been working with Trustee Stone,and he believes that she is moving in the right direction and he believes the changes evident tonight along the lines of civility and other issues demonstrate that maybe a 1/1/10 effective date for the proposed ordinance would be sufficient to meet the needs of the community;the issues that have generated the interest in the recall are being addressed so that there will be harmony;he believes that things are coming under control. Frank Sears,50 Lake Boulevard,commended several other speakers;he hopes the Board is listening to what people are telling them because it has been their habit not to listen to what the people are saying;it seems that the Board is working with vehemence and rapidity to get this ordinance passed;he believes the Board is out to get someone;he cannot believe the ordinance was proposed without a reason;people believe that the Board does not care what the citizens want;if this ordinance is passed,the Board should be careful because it may come back to bite them. Mark Elias,resident,stated that he believes this whole thing is silly;it has to do with personalities;the ordinance should be on the topic,not because of who a person is;the Board does what they believe is in the best interest of the Village;business people ask whether they should move into Buffalo Grove,and the current situation creates a problem;the Board is elected to do the best job possible for the Village,even though not everyone agrees with their decisions;he asked that the current trustees stop creating problems and get together and work out the problems;he would like to bring more business into the Village,but it is currently hard to recommend moving into Buffalo Grove;recall is not necessarily the best option to have;he believes that,without exception,even though he does not agree with every decision made,each Board member has the Village's best interests at heart;the Board needs to work together;he truly believes that the best place to do business is in the Village of Buffalo Grove,as there are so many attributes;he believes that Buffalo Grove is the best place to live;the OTB turned out to be a non-issue,and he believes the owner is owed an apology;he does not like off-track betting,but he sees that it is not a big deal;he wishes everyone well and he hopes that everyone does well;he hopes this can be resolved with or without the recall, and if recall is passed,he hopes that it never has to be used. V Mike Powell,280 Blackthorn,truly appreciates the sacrifices made by elected officials,but he believes the recall is slightly misguided;he believes the minimum of 1,000 signatures is a very low threshold;he believes that each and every elected official has the Village interest at heart;he is concerned that one or more Board members will be facing recall,rather than attending to the business of the Village;Buffalo Grove will not look good in the eyes of residents or neighbors;if there are valid reasons for recall,in the right case and for the right reasons,it could be accomplished with a much higher number of signatures required;this would limit the number of recalls;it would make it a more serious issue;if the recall progresses,he would ask that the minimum standard be raised so that only the most egregious cases of misuse of the seats are brought before the people,and the reputation of the community is kept intact and Buffalo Grove does not become a laughingstock. Adam Moodhe, 151 Mary Lu Lane,agreed with other speakers in that personalities don't matter;facts matter;the majority of states allow for municipal recall;he believes the amendment is a good one;the majority of states allow for a much lower threshold for signatures;bills that affect much larger groups of people are passed in a matter of hours;delaying the ordinance does nothing more than take the will of the people out of the equation;trustees are expected to understand and digest the information brought before them and to expeditiously render an opinion;this bill should be considered with regard to facts and should be passed as presented. Jeff Rotman, 15 Thompson Court,stated that he is happy to see that people care enough about the village to attend tonight's meeting;he has been proud of the professionalism and quality of leadership that residents have received; people believe that a dissenting voice is not welcome,and he does not believe that is the case;he is not concerned with a dissenting voice,but he is concerned that it has more to do with the way that it has been happening;meetings have been less about village business and more about who has the best act for the three-ring circus;he is discouraged by that and he would like to see the Board move on to the work at hand;he helps develop leaders for corporations,and studies have proven that one of the major reasons leaders fail is that they fail to respond to V 12260 10/05/2009 feedback;he agrees that sitting trustees should help new trustees;this has to be a terribly difficult environment to want to step into;he does not believe that the Board does not like newcomers;he also recognizes the importance of humility and respect;he would hope that one of the lessons learned is that trustees do not have to agree with each other,but they do have to behave in a manner that represents the high standards that Buffalo Grove residents have come to expect;he is in favor of the recall ordinance being passed,but he hopes that it never has to be used. Finally, Mr.Rotman thanked the Village staff for what they do,and he knows that they do what they do because they love this Village. Phil Bruckman,554 Lyon Drive,noted that,if there is recall,and the person is voted back into office,we're back to square one;all citizens of Buffalo Grove hope that the Board can work together;it is frustrating to work under these conditions,but the Board needs to take care of the things that need to be taken care of in Buffalo Grove;there are more important things that need to be done in Buffalo Grove;the Board needs to work together. Barbara Monson,397 Bernard Drive,has lived in Buffalo Grove since 1963,and she and her friends and family members want Buffalo Grove to remain a place that they want to live;good government begins at home;citizens expect the people that are elected to do a sound job in representing them;she is surprised that there is not an ordinance in place that focuses on the accountability of each and every elected official;she works hard to do her best and she expects all of her associates to do their best to be a contributing member of the team;if someone does not do their job well,they should be removed;she believes there should be a recall ordinance;she believes it should be clear and short and concise and well written and follow all the laws,and it needs to be a tool that can be used when needed to reflect the will of the voters. If this ordinance is passed,which she is not in favor of after what she has heard tonight,Trustee Stone asked for clarification on the period of time that the person being recalled would have to verify the signatures on the petition. Trustee Berman stated that the ordinance that was drafted was intended to follow the State Statute on the process for petitions and challenges;he used the time period provided in the State Statute. Mr.Raysa stated that a petition is deemed valid unless an objection is made in writing within five business days after filing. If an objection is filed,then a local electoral board has the duty to review the objection,and if part of the objection is signatures,then the local electoral board will make a decision as to whether or not the signatures are valid. Trustee Sussman stated that she assumes there is nothing illegal in the action,but she finds it very troublesome that Mr. Sherman keeps coming up and giving notes to Trustee Stone,and she saw him shaking his head telling her how to vote on an ordinance. President Hartstein asked that Mr.Sherman refrain from passing notes to Board members. Trustee Sussman moved to include an effective date of 1/1/10 for this ordinance;Trustee Berman seconded the motion. Trustee Berman stated he hopes that the Village will never see this ordinance used,but that it will serve as a deterrent process and an effort to get people to take a closer look at how they act and how they behave on this Board. Just by introducing the ordinance,behavioral changes have occurred on the Board,and he believes that is a positive step. The discussion has been productive,and there have been good suggestions made tonight;he does not believe the ordinance is ready for a vote tonight,and he believes there is more drafting that needs to be done;he does not object to a 1/1/10 effective date. Trustee Berman does believe in the concept of recall. Trustee Trilling stated the there is a perception that this ordinance is moving very quickly;it will take as long as it takes to get it right,and it will be right and in the right format,and the Board will then decide whether or not to pass it;he has not yet decided whether or not this is the right thing for Buffalo Grove;the Board is trying to present the best possible ordinance;there is nothing that is pushing through the process. 12261 10/05/2009 Trustee Braiman responded to Mr.Sears,stating that this Board always listens to the residents,although Mr.Sears' perception of the people of Buffalo Grove may be different than that of the Board;he has had hundreds of people asking what can be done about the current environment and situation;something needs to be done;he believes it a good idea;if someone is not performing up to standard,they should be removed;he wishes that we did not have to do it;he would hope that the Board is able to get along;he is hopeful that the Board can work together;if the delay creates a more cohesive Board,that would be great;if not,then it should go to recall because it is ultimately the people's decision. Trustee Braiman stated that Trustee Stone's amendments have merit and he asked that,in the future,she distribute this type of information to the Board beforehand so that they have a chance to review it. This ordinance is better than it was two weeks ago,and will hopefully be even better the next time it is on the agenda,and he will support the ordinance. Moved Braiman,seconded by Trilling to table the motion with regard to the effective date. Upon roll call,Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6—Braiman,Glover,Berman,Trilling,Stone,Sussman NAYS: 0—None Motion declared carried. There was no objection to using 1/1/10 as an effective date in the next draft of the ordinance. Trustee Braiman wants to give direction to staff with regard to 2.70.060 e. On page five,there are three alternatives in section e.: 1. No Notice of Intention to Recall may be filed against any Elected Official within the first six(6)months following the date of election or appointment of the Elected Official,or during the last six(6)months of the term of office of such Elected Official. 2. No Notice of Intention to Recall may be filed against any Elected Official during the last six(6)months of the term of office of such Elected Official. 3. Delete all language in Section 2.70.060 E. 4. Restriction of only the first six months. Trustee Braiman suggest a fourth option,that being only the first six months,but not the last six months since he does not believe the last six months makes any sense since the official will be up for election at the end of the last six months;he does not believe there should be any restriction as far as the first six months either. President Hartstein polled the Board,with each Trustee signifying the number stated above: Option 3: 5-Braiman,Berman,Trilling,Stone,Sussman Option 4: 1—Glover Trustee Stone asked for further clarification. Option 3 will be included in the draft to be prepared. Moved by Berman,seconded by Braiman,to defer until the suggested changes are made. Mr.Raysa confirmed that the changes in the 9/30/2009 draft are acceptable except for the direction given tonight and except for the six items that Trustee Stone presented. Upon roll call,Trustees voted as follows on the motion to defer. AYES: 6—Braiman,Glover,Berman,Trilling,Stone,Sussman NAYS: 0—None ` Motion declared carried. V 12262 10/05/2009 President Hartstein thanked the Board for a very healthy and productive discussion tonight,and he also thanked the members of the public that took the time to contribute. EXECUTIVE SESSION Moved by Sussman,seconded by Berman,to move to Executive Session for the purpose of discussing Approval of Closed Meeting Minutes,Section 2.C.21 of the Illinois Open Meetings Act. Upon roll call,Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6—Braiman,Glover,Berman,Trilling,Stone,Sussman NAYS: 0—None Motion declared carried. The Board moved to Executive Session from 11:00 P.M.until 11:12 P.M. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Braiman,seconded by Glover,to adjourn the meeting. Upon voice vote,the motion was unanimously declared carried,and the meeting was adjourned at 11:13 P.M. Janet M. Sirabian,Village Clerk APPROVED BY ME THIS 19th DAY OF October ,2009 Village President Li