Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-07-1983 Council Meeting Minutes 391 A regular meeting of the Canton City Council was held on June 7th , 1983 in Council Chambers . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE OPENED THE MEETING , FOLLOWED BY THE INVO- CATION GIVEN BY MAYOR DONALD EDWARDS . Mayor Edwards asked for roll call at 6 : 30 P . M . Present : Alder- men Kovachevich , Hammond , Savill , Sarff , Carl , Horr . Absent : Alderman Workman . MINUTES OF MAY 17TH , 1983 MEETING . Motion by Alderman Hammond , second by Alderman Savill the minutes of May 17th be accepted and placed on file . Voice vote , motion carried . COMMITTEE REPORTS : Public Safety & Traffic . Council Action None . Informational : Alderman Horr objected to the closing of the rail road crossing at Liberty Place and Olive Street . Q Alderman Horr received complaints from citizens in his ward object- ing to the closing of fire house #2 . Street & Garbage . Council Action None . Lake , Building & Grounds . Council Action None . Informational : Jim Boyd reported that on the Linn Street crossing they will remove 1 of the rail road tracks , we will wind up with 1 track instead of 2 . Public Works , Water & Sewer . Council Action None . Planning & Zoning . Recommended the annexation and rezoning to I -1 heavy industrial of the Msd property located on West Locust Limits immediately west of the Canton City Limits and immeditely south of state Route 9 . COMMUNICATIONS FROM DAVE DORGAN - BUDGET/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR. No report . COMMUNICATIONS FROM CLIFF SAGASER - CITY ENGINEER . Will be having a recommendation for a drafstman at the next committee meeting . CRAWFORD , MURPHY & TILLY - SEWERS AND SEWAGE TREATMENT . Mr . Crawford reported that the grant program is in a status of change . The last big change by Congress , was in 1981 , when they passed the amendments to the grant programs . Mr . Crawfidrd !fee14 that congress is phasing out the grant program. Among the changes : a . 75% grants are to be ended after September 30 , 1984 . Grants after that date will be at 55% of eligible cost . 392 CONTINUED JUNE 7TH , 1983 b . Grants will not be mailable for Combined Sewer Overflow (CS ) ( treatment after September 30th , 1984 unless the Governor sets aside a portion of the grant funds for CSO . C . Step 1 (Facilities Plans ) and Step 2 ( Plans and Specifications ) grants are no longer available . Instead , municipalities are requiered to pre- finance the cost of Facility Plans and of pre- paration of plans and specifications . At the time of a grant for Step 3 ( Construction ) an "allowance" is made to reimburse the municipality for Step 1 and 2 costs . The allowance is based on a sliding scale percentage of construction and not on the cost to the municipality for the services . d . The municipality is required to procure the services of the engineer responsible for design to oversee operation of the plant for the first year after completion . At the end of the first year , the municpal, ity certifiesto USEPA that the project is capable of meeting its design requirements or , if not , that the municipality will provide corrective action . Federal Interim Regulations , dated May 12 , 1982 , have been followed in administering the revised grant program. The interim regulations provide that Step 2 + 3 grants can bd issued for projects costing less that $8 million and that 30% of the allowance for Step 2 + 3 grants are no longer permitted , we have now been informed that this is not really the situation . The IEPA anticipates a cash flow problem with Step 2 + 3 grants and thus will be reluctant to approved them except in instances of real need . The facilities Plan is scheduled for completion by July 1 . Illinois EPA estimates that their review will be completed by about September 30 . To permit review of plans and specifications on time for a Step 3 grant before October 1 , 1984 , ( to assure a 75% grant ) IEPA states that plans must be submitted to them by May or June of 1984 . This would allow 8 or 9 months for prepara- tion of plans , specifications and estimates , if a Step 2 + 3 grant cannot be obtained . The following steps are necessary before a Step 3 grant ( as comp- ared to a Step 2 + 3 grant ) will be awarded . a . Plans and Specifications must be completed and reviewed by IEPA and the Corps of Engineers . Any changes required as a result of the reviews must be made to receive IEPA approval . b . All right-of-way must be acquired . c . Provisions must be made by the City for financing it ' s share of the cost . The time limits that would be created if a Step 2 & 3 grant can- not be obtained will create some real concerns for the City in attempting to obtain a 75% grant . Among the concerns are : a . The time required for right-of-way acquisition will be very tight. Before right-of-way acquistion can be started , field surveys must be made , preliminary design accomplished and right-of-way plats and des- criptions prepared . If condemnation proceedings are necessary for any right-of-way , the time factor will 393 CONTINUED JUNE 7TH , 1983 be even more critical . b . The time available for preparation of plans and specifications fro the sewage treatment improvements is very limited . The West Side Sewage Treatment Plant is meeting most of the effluent requirements with the exception of to stream quality limit for ammonia''nitrogen . The East Side Sewage Treatment Plant is overloaded and cannot , at present , consistantly meet BOD , Suspened Solids or Ammonia Nitrogen limits . Approximately one-half of the cost of recommened improvements is for sewer improvements . These improvements are to : (�. a ) Relieve some hydraulic overload of sewers and �. basements flooding . b) Provide for additional treatment of East Side Treatment Plant effluent by pumping to the West Q Side Plant . Q c ) Elimination of sanitary sewage overflows to the receiving stream. The improvements that will be required at the West Side Treatment Plant are primarily to : a . Achieve reduction of ammonia nitrogen . b . Provide effluent filtration . C . Upgrade due to revised IEPA design criteria . Neither ammonia reduction nor effluent filtration was required by IEPA at the time of design of the last improvements . The following options appear available to the City : a . No action The City could decide to take no action . It does not appear likely that IEPA or the Pollution Control Board would take enforcement action against the City in the near future because stream quality violations do not appear to be severe . Eventually , however , enforcement action can be expected. At the time of such actions , the grant program may no longer exist . It is possible that enforcement action could result in an order by the Pollution Control Board or by a court that would permit the City to issue bonds and pay for the improvements without a referendum. This has happened in a number of instances . It could not be expected , how- ever , that such action would be final befor October 1 , 1984 . b. Apply for a "variance ' or "site specific rule change" as relates to ammonia nitrogen at the West Side plant . There appears to be reasonable evidence thatthe reduction of ammonia in Big Creek cannot be justified because the concentration is naturally reduced to a tolerable level in the strean withih a few miles . The aquatic life in the few miles of stream below the plant would , to some , not appear to justify the cost of providing ammonia removal . 394 CONTINUED JUNE 7TH , 1983 The Pollution Control Board has historically been reluctant to grant relaxation of their standards . Theier proceedings are complex and time consuming . If such a standard change could be achieved , it would result in significant decreases in capital costs and in operation and maintenance costs . Delays caused by the petition process would post- pone the need for City action but may also delay decreases until the grant program has ended . c . Seek a State Grant for Construction of for "up front ' funds for Plans and Specifications . State grants have been made for sewers and sewage treatment . So far as we know , no recent grants for this purpose have been made . We believe , however , , that legislation still permits state grant if the IEPA and the Bureau of the Budget under the Gover- nor ' s Office approves . Since the 1981 Federal grants amendments eliminated Step 1 and Step 2 grants , State Grants have been awar- ded to provide funds for plans and specifications under arrangements where the state grants are repaid when a Federal Step 3 grant is awarded . It is believed that it would be worthwhile for the City to explore the possibility of some type of state grants through its own channels . d . Ask for a 75% grant for sewer improvments and a 55% grant for sewage treatment improvements . Such a plan may have some merit since it appears that plans and specifications can be prepared earlier for the sewers than for sewage treatment . If consideration is given to a start of design without waiting for IEPA full review of the Facility Plans (_as suggested in ( F) below) , it appears that there would be relatively little chance that major changes would be required because of the review . Such a procedure would not help in the time squeeze for securing right-of-way . Assuming that the sewer improvements cost $4 ,000 ,000 and the Sewage Treatment Improvements $4 ,000 ,000 , the result would beairequirement for city funds of $2 ,800 , 000 rather than $2 ,000 ,000 if a full 75% grant could be obtained. Whether or not this option is viable would have to be cleared with IEPA. We have asked the question but have not yet received an answer. e . Proceed with improvements and seek a 55% grant . Assum- ing , as above , that the total cost would be $8 ,000 ,000 , this would require the City to raise $3 ,600 ,000 . f . Authorize a start on surveys and design after initial review of the Facilties Plan by IEPA and endeavor to submit plans and specifications to IEPA by May or June of 1984 and right-of-way acquisition completed before September 30 , 1984 . 395 CONTINUED JUNE 7TH , 1983 We believe that if we can begin surveys and plans by August 1 , 1983 , the engineering requirements .can ,be met ;within the .alloted time . We believe that right-of-way easement plats and descriptions could then be ready within six months or by January 31, , 1984 . In considering the time problems involved , it appears that the city should use whatever channels are open to attempt to get some type of commitment from Illinois EPA that a Step2 + 3 grant will be available . In considering the appropriate action by the City , it must be acknowledged that there can be no gurantee that a grant will be received even if all the present requirements are met or that future Federal or State actions may not change the requirements . Lengthy discussion followed . Gary Heinking from Crawford , Murphy & Tilly said that in October 1984 is when the grant funding drops from 75% to 55% . Our deadline would be in July . A public hearing is required for facilities plan stated Gary Heinking . Mayor Edwards recommened having the public hearing in conjuction with (29 the Mechanical Committee meeting on July 28th . Q Jim Malmgren City Attorney seconded having a meeting in July as Q he would want some idea what the councils determination for the month of July for , for 2 reasons : 1 . There would have to be some ordinances passed to put the issue on the ballot . 2 . Need some lead time , so he can get legal descriptions togather , title searches done , and if we have to go to condemnation . If so , wants to be prepared as much in advance as possible . Motion by Alderman Horr , second by Alderman Savill , the Mechanical Committee meeting would be in conjuction with a public hearing for facilities plan on July 28th . Roll call . AYES : Aldermen Horr , Carl , Sarff, Savill , Hammond , Kovachevich . NAYS : None . Motion carried . 6 ayes 0 nays 1 absent 1 resigned . COMMUNICATIONS FROM MAYOR EDWARDS . Traveled to Springfield today with Alderman ' s Horr, Savill , Kovachevich ; Dave Dorgan , Cliff Saggser . Did meet with Crawford , Murphy & Tilly and the Epa . It was a planned day by Rep . Tom Homer and Senator Dick Luft . Motion by Alderman Horr , second by Alderman Sarff , the appointment of Alderman Lester Workman to the Planning & Zoning Commission be confirmed . Voice vote , motion carried . Canton was designated and Enterprise Zone , we are the smallest community to be named . Pat O ' Grady will be heading it . Robert Molleck Chief of Police reported that last week he talked to council and gave a copy of a report of the action he took on one of his employees . He called th® employee around 10 : 15 p .m . May 31st and told him he was discharged for cause . The employee met with Mr. Molleck the next day for two hours . Robert Molleck wrote a letter indicating the decision he made and then he received a grievance from Donald Rombach stating the position you used was in violation of the contract on section 2 . 3 . Bob answered the grievance by saying not only did I have the majority approval of the council butl00% approval . Motion by Alderman Sarff, second by Alderman Kovachevich , the action taken by Chief Molleck be upheld . Roll call . AYES : Aldermen Kovachevich , Hammond , Savill , Sarff , Carl , Horr . NAYS : None . Motion carried . 6 ayes 0 nays 1 absent 1 resigned . OLD BUSINESS : RESOLUTION - ESTABLISHING AND "ANNIVERSARY DATE" FOR PRESENT CITY EMPLOYEES ( FORMER CETA EMPLOYEES ) AND SETTING AND ESTABLIS- HING POLICY GUIDELINES FOR ANY SUCH FUTURE EMPLOYEES . Second reading , read by title . Dave Dorgan stated that the union was waiting for some correspondence and did receive it from the Illinois Farmers Union which is the ceta coordinator for this area . Dave intends to stand by what he believes the document 396 CONTINUE[ JUNE 7TH , 1983 means and that is the federal. documents are ambiguous enough to say that we have to treat them equally , and the definition of equally is not very well defined . Equally to those in the bargaining agreement what that is enterpet in Dave ' s opinion is the condition those people work under are equal to those people under the bargaining agreement and has nothing to do with the anniversary date . Rick Murphy union representative quoted section 19 . 2 of the contract . He stated were worried about the past employees . Mayor Edwards stated that this resolution according to the city attorney agrees with section 19 . 2 and the mayor agrees also . Motion by Alderman Carl , second by Alderman Sarff , the reso - lution be adopted . Roll call . AYES : Aldermen Horr , Carl , Sarff , Savill , Hammond , Kovachevich . NAYS : None . Motion carried . 6 ayes 0 nays 1 absent 1 resigned . Resolution being #988 . NEW BUSINESS : ORDINANCE - PROVIDING FOR STOP SIGNS AT EAST MYRTLE STREET AND NORTH ELEVENTH AVENUE . First reading , read by title . ORDINANCE - PROHIBITING PARKING ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LINDEN STREET BETWEEN NORTH FIRST AVENUE AND NORTH FOURTH AVENUE . First reading , read by title . ORDINANCE - ANNEXING AND RE-ZONING CERTAIN TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF CANTON . First reading , read by title . Jim Malmgren City Attorney stated that this ordinance upon its passage actually annexed approximately 150 acres of ground . Steve Essex is requesting permission to operate a mobile gas grill to sell pork chop sandwiches in Jones Park . They will be selling at 2 other areas in town but on private property . Steve ' s daughter Janine , will be operating the grill. He will arrange his schedule so he will not be competing with the Brown Bag Luncheon ' s . Motion by Alderman Carl, second by Alderman Hammond the license be issued to sell pork chop sandwiches . Discussion . Jim Malmgren ask that the motion be amended to include affirmately saying to grant permission to include additional request with them and all the rest . Voice vote , motion carried , ADJOURNMENT : Motion by Alderman Hammond , second by Alderman Sarff, to adjourn . Voice vote , motion carried . Council ad- journed at 8 : 27 p .m. CIyr CLERK APPROVED . MAYOR