McLean County Finance Committee met Nov. 7.
Here is the minutes provided by the committee:
Members Present: Chairman David Selzer, Members Chuck Erickson, Catherine Metsker, Jim Soeldner, Scott Murphy and Laurie Wollrab
Members Absent: Member Erik Rankin
Other Members Present: Chairman John McIntyre
Staff Present: Mr. William Wasson, County Administrator; Mr. Eric Schmitt, Administrative Services Director; Mr. Donald Knapp Assistant Civil State’s Attorney; Ms. Julie A. Morlock, Recording Secretary; Department Heads/Elected
Officials Present: Kathy Michael, County Clerk; Michelle Anderson, County Auditor, Marshell Thomson, Animal Control
Others Present:
Chairman Selzer called the meeting to order at 4:30 PM.
Chairman Selzer presented the Minutes the September 18, 2018 special meeting and October 3, 2018 regular meeting of the Finance Committee.
Motion by Metsker/Soeldner to approve the Minutes of the September 18, 2018 special meeting and October 3, 2018 regular meeting of the Finance Committee for approval.
Motion carried.
Chairman Selzer confirmed there were no appearances by members of the public.
Chairman Selzer asked with the leave of the Committee to take general reports first and move action items to later on the agenda. The Committee concurred.
Ms. Marshell Thomson, Director, Animal Control Program presented her monthly reports to the Committee. Ms. Metsker asked her for an update on the vaccination and microchip event. Ms. Thomson provided an update on the successful event hosted by State Farm. Ms. Metsker asked if State Farm approached us. Ms. Thomson indicated they did approach us. Ms. Metsker asked if this was something that could happen in the future. Ms. Thomson indicated she had been contacted about doing this again next year. Chairman Selzer asked if there were any further questions for Ms. Thomson, hearing none, he thanked her.
Chairman Sezler indicated that Ms. Michael was not present but her monthly reports were in the packet. He asked that if there were any questions from the Committee that they bring them to the meeting next month or if they wanted to present them this month we could see if Administration could answer them. Ms. Metsker asked if Ms. Michael could address the long lines at ISU next month as she thought they had put money aside to address this matter. Mr. Selzer agreed they had previously increased the amount of money budgeted to address this issue, but did acknowledge that it is hard to plan for last minute voters. Ms. Wollrab indicated she was at ISU about noon, and the line was out the door. She stated that students indicated to her they had waited 45 minutes to 1 hour and were still not at the head of the line. She stated there was plenty of room and that once voters got through the line to register with the Election Judge they had to wait in another line for a voting machine. She said that she counted voting machines at her own precinct and there were eight there, so was concerned there were only 10 at ISU. She said she felt there had been plenty of advanced talk to indicate there was going to be a massive turn out. Mr. Selzer encouraged members to talk to the Clerk. He said this same issue happened in other precincts and to avoid this there is early voting. Ms. Metsker pointed out that there was early voting at ISU but felt we should have learned from the past that this precinct does not get the early voters.
Mr. Erickson stated that lines happened in other jurisdictions and provided an example of busloads brought in to vote and stated it is hard to prepare for those events. Mr. Erickson stated that if individuals wait until the last minute to register to vote and vote there are going to be lines. He stated that this is a prime example of an unfunded mandate and that we cannot solve all of the problems that this unfunded mandate has caused. He stated the Committee went out to Bone Student Center before and had a meeting about this and he felt that the Clerk had done the best she could with this. He stated that no one was disenfranchised and not allowed to vote and felt we will continue to learn how to handle voting at ISU.
Chairman Selzer stated there was early registration and voting at ISU and was not sure why they did not take advantage of that. Ms. Wollrab stated that we do not have the numbers in to see how many students took part in early voting. Ms. Metsker said she did not bring this up to say that anyone was disenfranchised, just to question what preparations had been done to try to handle this situation when we put money to the situation in the past. Mr. Erickson said people wait until the last minute to register and then there is likely going to be a wait and felt that the answer to the problem was to get them to register early or vote early so the lines move quicker. Mr. Selzer said he wished the Clerk was here to answer and did not feel it was fair to continue the conversation without her present to answer questions, he hoped that the dialogue would happen next month.
Ms. Michelle Anderson, County Auditor presented and went over her quarterly financial reports. Chairman Selzer asked if there were any questions regarding the reports, seeing none, he stated that he had one other item with regard to the Auditor. He stated that on July 30, 2018 Ms. Anderson submitted a request for review of public access alleging the Finance Committee held closed meetings improperly. He stated that the Attorney General had ruled in what they referred to as a binding decision, but not final decision, as there is still recourse through the Courts, ordering us to release the closed session audio and minutes. Mr. Selzer stated that we have gone into closed session before to discuss performance of an elected official and they did not go into this session with any ill will but to take care of business. He said that because it was a closed session of the Finance Committee they wanted to make the Committee aware of the decision and get a consensus on whether the minutes should be released or court action pursued. Ms. Woods said this is a binding opinion by the Attorney General that requires us to either file a lawsuit challenging the decision in the Circuit Court or release the minutes by December 4. She said that if they release the minutes that would affectively make the issue moot and would indicate that we are not going to move forward with a Court case. Ms. Metsker asked for clarification on whether a decision had been made to release them. Ms. Woods confirmed no decision had been made and they were here to ask for direction from the Committee. Mr. McIntyre indicated he set in on the closed session and had since listened to the tape and did not see a reason why the audio could not be released to the public. He said that Mr. Selzer and the Committee were called out in the media about it, but there was nothing in the meeting. He stated this would be setting a precedent so any other type of thing that comes up about an elected official we will discuss publically. Mr. Selzer agreed that if they open this then anything in the future regarding an elected official would have to be discussed in open meetings. Mr. Erickson asked if members could read minutes, as there might be a member who would like to review what they said before it is released. Mr. Wasson confirmed they could listen to the audio. Mr. Erickson said that the transcript would be easier as you can do right to where you spoke. Mr. Wasson reminded them that we do not have transcripts of meetings, but minutes. Ms. Wollrab stated that she read the Attorney General’s opinion and the question was whether we violated open meeting act by discussing an elected official and the Attorney General feels that we did. She said that when the question came up in the meeting we quit and now we are trying to do the right thing, so she felt we should release them. Mr. Murphy said that he heard the State’s Attorney say they could give her direction from the Committee but it is the State’s Attorney decision whether to open or not. Ms. Woods confirmed that was correct and that she felt she had received direction from the Committee in these discussions. Ms. Wollrab asked if there was a procedure in place to review situations where we plan to go into closed session. Ms. Woods indicated the State Attorney’s office does usually provide input and are aware of them. Chairman Selzer asked if there were any further questions from the Committee on this matter or the reports from the Auditor, hearing none he thanked her.
Chairman Selzer presented for action a request to accept and place on file the County Treasurer’s monthly financial reports. Ms. Becky McNeil, County Treasurer, went over her monthly reports including the investment report including CD’s with an increased interest rate of 2.5%. Ms. McNeil stated that the Board had approved a process to pay expenses out of one account, which had helped her office. Ms. McNeil indicated they were going to look at closing some of the account to continue to find efficiencies. Ms. Metsker asked her to confirm that they would close accounts but still with the same number of institutions. Ms. McNeil confirmed. Ms. McNeil went over the summary of tax revenue. She also went over property tax and the tax sale indicating they had more buyers come this year. Ms. McNeil went over the Blue Cross Blue Shield report and discussed the stop loss adjustment amount. Ms. Wollrab asked if the stop loss claims occurred in 2018 or in 2017. Mr. Wasson indicated he was not sure.
Ms. McNeil went over the Nursing Home report stating that we are 75% into the year on budget side and the nursing home has 61% of revenue in and 68% of expenses in. She
indicated there would also be the inter-fund transfer in January that will help the operating deficit. Mr. McIntyre asked her to explain the transfers. Ms. McNeil stated that transfers have always taken place out of the FICA and IMRF fund. She said that other departments do payments directly from those funds and but this is a once a year transfer. Mr. Wasson stated that a majority of our special revenue funds also receive assistance from those FICA/IMRF Levy funds. Mr. McIntyre said he just wanted to make it clear because they are working to change things at the Nursing Home but he felt this had been misrepresented every year by the Auditor and wanted it clarified. Ms. Wollrab asked if this could be shown quarterly or monthly instead of annually. Mr. Wasson said there had been discussions about doing that, but there are impacts on payroll and other processes and affects how we use the budget as a management tool. Ms. Wollrab indicated this might be an instance where it would be worth those changes. Mr. Erickson said he voted in favor of the Blue Ribbon suggestions as he hoped it would be a road map to a break-even point at the Nursing Home. Mr. Wasson went over amounts due from Medicare and budgeted amounts for next year, which they felt were realistic, based on ACO agreement and indicated that these can help the Nursing Home break even in the future.
Motion by Metsker/Wollrab to recommend approval of the County Treasurer’s Monthly Financial Reports.
Motion Carried.
Mr. Bill Wasson, County Administrator presented for action a request to approve critical hire requests including one for the State’s Attorney office, Circuit Court, Coroner and Circuit Clerk’s offices that are recommended by the Administrator. Ms. Metsker asked if these are replacement requests and not new positions. Mr. Wasson confirmed they are replacement requests.
Motion by Wollrab/Murphy to recommend approval of the critical hire requests.
Motion Carried.
Mr. Wasson presented for action a request to approve the Economic Loan Development Programs.
Motion Soeldner/Metsker to recommend approval of the Economic Loan Development Programs.
Mr. Wasson stated they had worked to put together a program based on the previous revolving loan program that also reflects current needs of the County. Mr. Wasson stated there were several questions from Board members, and Economic Development Council Staff about sections of the program so Staff brought those questions to this meeting to be discussed. Mr. Wasson suggested they go over each of the questions and give members and Mr. O’Grady an opportunity to comment. He presented the first question was under loan limits of 40%. He stated that cash was 50% and some felt that this should also be 50%. He reviewed the discussion about this number. Mr. O’Grady agreed 50% would be more consistent with the rest of the document. Ms. Wollrab stated that she was still concerned about the maximum of $250,000 when we only have $600,000 to loan and the ability of companies to get up to two loans. She would like to lower that amount so more individuals will have access. Ms. Metsker said she understood but felt that $250,000 was not much. Ms. Wollrab posed that maybe they should limit the number of loans an individual or company could get. Ms. Metsker said that she would agree with that more than reducing the amount. Mr. McIntyre said he understood diversifying risk but reminded them this is a GAP loan so applicants have already secured some funding. There was discussion about the original loan, limits on that loan and amounts lost through that program. Mr. Erickson asked them to confirm who was in charge of final approval. Mr. Wasson confirmed that the EDC could recommend a loan application, but the Finance Committee and the County Board have final approval. Mr. Erickson stated that he asked that because if they recommend something then the Finance Committee could recommend changes such as amount. Mr. Wasson confirmed they could change the amount. Mr. Erickson stated these are just the guidelines for loan applications. Mr. Wasson confirmed these are guidelines for the program.
Mr. Selzer asked Mr. O’Grady of his opinion on the amount. Mr. O’Grady said that $250,000 is not a lot, but the provision where they have to hire one employee per $35,000 would be a lot of people to hire. He also stated he did not see a lot of interest in these larger loans. Ms. Wollrab stated that after listening to comments around the table she wanted to confirm what the goal of program was as she felt there were people with different goals. Mr. Selzer agreed and said he understood the program was taking money from the unencumbered fund balance to make larger and smaller loans to help with economic development in McLean County. Ms. Metsker said she thought it was money we had in a CDAP Fund not in the unencumbered fund balance that could be used in a similar way as the old CDAP loan program. Mr. Wasson explained that under the CDAP program we were required to have it in a separate fund/account balance and had specific restrictions on how the funds could be utilized and when it was determined that the restrictions were dropped the funds became unrestricted so they had to be moved to the unencumbered fund balance. Mr. Selzer asked if we do not have a program, could the EDC come to us with a proposal from a company and the Board loan those funds. Mr. Wasson stated they believe we do have the authority to make economic development loans under statute. Mr. Selzer suggested using term “targeting up to 40% and up to $250,000” to help with the guidelines.
Ms. Wollrab asked about the microloan program as she did not see those documents. Mr. Wasson stated there were no question on that loan program from County Board members, so Staff had not included it in this packet for discussion. Mr. Wasson stated that Mr. O’Grady was the only one who had a question about that program. Mr. O’Grady said he felt that program would be more viable and questioned the section about loaning money to municipalities as he felt they would get a better rate than this. Mr. Wasson stated that comments were that this might be easier process. Ms. Wollrab questioned loaning money to other governmental entities, but had some other questions.
Mr. Soeldner asked if this program was to help many smaller businesses or a few larger ones. Mr. Selzer stated that he did not feel we could address every issue that might come up and should not be too specific. Mr. Erickson stated members had already met for hours on this matter and this was the compromise. Mr. Selzer asked what items people wanted to see changed considering Finance Committee and County Board could make changes before final approval of any loan. Mr. O’Grady stated that the Economic Development Council could work with the document as presented as a guideline for proposals because they could reach back out to Finance Committee.
Mr. Selzer stated that there probably should just go point by point in the document and make decision. Mr. Wasson clarified they decided to change to 50% in Loan Limits and stated that they needed to decide this program was to grow a business or start a business because 10 is a lot of people to start a business. Mr. O’Grady agreed and felt that the $35,000 was tied to this and recommended two employees and increasing the amount of one employee for every $100,000. Mr. Selzer questioned retention because there might be a situation where they need to upgrade or do renovations but would not bring on new employees. Discussion ensued about confirmation of hiring and changing to $50,000. Ms. Wollrab also questioned if it would be a full-time job. Ms. Metsker agreed that she would be in favor of two full-time employees, and one full time per $50,000.
Mr. Erickson confirmed these are guidelines. Mr. Wasson confirmed guidelines and that we have heard that they need to be general and others have said need to be more specific. Ms. Wollrab stated that she would like to have them be more specific because then less likely people will question the individuals we provide the loans to. There was discussion about full time positions and whether this program was to bring in new business or new jobs. Ms. Wollrab stated that she had not been in the CDAP meetings and so if members wanted to continue this discussion to another date she would understand and made a motion to table this to a date certain, but there was no second. Members stated that they wanted to get things resolved.
Mr. McIntyre asked if they could please get this resolved as he felt there was a general consensus. Ms. Wollrab said that she had questions about the document that she wanted addressed. Mr. O’Grady indicated he needed to leave and was allowed to provide his concerns to the Committee:
1) Loan security and who has first position on a loan,
2) Suggested an Exhibit C which is the Application,
3) Use the community development board for an analysis of the collateral,
4) Somewhere in the document applicant should be advised that their personal finances are subject to FOIA,
5) Utilize the small business development center with the micro-loan program and possibly investing there as they have so many cases and not enough staff.
Mr. Wasson again confirmed changes to this point, 50% Loan Limit, 2 full time employees, and one full-time job for every $50,000. Ms. Wollrab asked about employee requirement and those applying for $25,000. It was determined that those would be under the micro-loan program as they can apply for up to $25,000 for start-up business and up to $50,000 for established businesses in that program and that program does not have a job requirement. Ms. Wollrab asked about those needing more than $25,000 but not $50,000 for start-up. There was discussion about FTE requirements. Ms. Metsker stated that she felt these are guidelines and that EDC and bankers will review and send to us for further review. She was concerned we would not make these guidelines but rules. Ms. Wollrab stated she wanted us to decide what we are doing with this funding and then design the guidelines to fit, as she was concerned we would open the County up for lawsuits if we are not specific enough. Ms. Wollrab said she was not sure what the rush was to get this program started. Mr. Selzer stated that they had been discussing this at meetings for several months and stated there had been a program with a lot of restrictions that had not seen applications for several years.
Ms. Wollrab stated that maybe we could decide to give some of the funds to the Small Business Development Center. Mr. Erickson stated that he appreciated that Ms. Wollrab was not on the sub-committee, but the Sub-Committee was three Republicans and three Democrats who tried to compromise as best as they could and while he understood she had the right to question the programs, he wanted to move forward with what was proposed. Ms. Metsker stated that her concern is that if they move this forward the same discussion would occur at the County Board meeting. She suggested assisting the Small Business Development Center and the micro loan program but not moving the larger loan program forward. Mr. Selzer said he would agree with Ms. Metsker and stated that the Economic Development Council could bring things to the County Board when they come up, but there were people on the Board who wanted this program. Mr. Soeldner said he has been a supporter of the Small Business Development Center but would like to get some information from them before we give them funds. Mr. Selzer stated that it was his understanding that they were not looking for a loan program, but were looking for funds to help with operations.
Motion Erickson/Murphy moved to approve as presented. Ms. Wollrab stated there were several things Mr. O’Grady had mentioned that were not in the proposal and felt if they were going to be the advisor then those items needed to be addressed. Ms. Metsker agreed as she was also concerned about loan position, so she was not in favor of accepting as it is. Mr. McIntyre asked them if the Committee would be ok having Mr. O’Grady write-up program with EDC’s suggestions and bring to the Committee to review. Ms. Wollrab said that she had questions about how the document as written, but liked suggestion to have Mr. O’Grady work on the document. Ms. Metsker suggested that Ms. Wollrab also share her thoughts with Mr. O’Grady as well as anyone else that has concerns and he could compile and bring back to the Committee. Mr. Selzer stated that he felt we should vote on the motion and allow Ms. Wollrab to present her points. Mr. Murphy asked if this would be without Mr. O’Grady changes. Mr. Selzer confirmed.
Motion Erickson/Murphy moved to approve as presented. Motion did not pass.
Mr. Selzer said that he would ask Ms. Wollrab to present her questions and asked that the Committee hold discussion until the end. Ms. Wollrab stated
1) She felt the Brownfield section needed to be more specific.
2) She was concerned about section that allows property developers and Industrial Development Corporations to apply for loans as she did not feel they would have ongoing full time jobs. Mr. Selzer stated that right now we have wording “create job”, but there is nothing about retention.
3) She felt we needed stronger language concerning the conflict of interest statement.
4) She questioned businesses listed in the ineligible business section. Mr. Wasson stated this is standard language to not include businesses that do not generate revenue for the local economy. Discussion ensued regarding businesses that should be eligible.
Mr. Selzer stated he was not sure there was ever going to be an agreement on everything. Ms. Metsker suggested again that Mr. O’Grady propose language. Mr. Selzer said Mr. O’Grady did not ask for this and as this was our plan he was not sure why we would have someone else set this plan up. Ms. Metsker said that she felt he had experience with previous plan and could take these ideas and bring them back to the Committee.
Motion Metsker/Soeldner to send suggestions to Mr. O’Grady by end of the day Thursday, November 8th, have Mr. Mike O’Grady work in suggestions along with his suggestions and provide to the Committee by Friday, November 16th, so new proposal could be addressed at 8:00 a.m. on Tuesday, November 20th before County Board in Room 404.
Motion Carried.
Mr. Wasson presented for action a request to approve the Fiscal Year 2019 Compensation Plan. Ms. Wollrab asked about changes from last year. Mr. Wasson stated that merit provisions are suspended again this year but there is an across the board increase.
Motion by Murphy/Metsker to recommend approval of the Fiscal Year 2019 Compensation Plan.
Motion Carried.
Mr. Wasson presented for review and approval the Cooperative Extension (0133-0088) Fiscal Year 2019 budget. Mr. Wasson stated there was an Extension Board meeting and a budget was approved by the Board at that time and the levy request recommended was still the same. Mr. Soeldner stated that they had a good meeting.
Motion by Metsker/Wollrab to recommend approval of the Cooperative Extension (0133-0088) Fiscal Year 2019 budget.
Motion Carried.
Mr. Wasson presented the IMRF Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (0131-0069) and F.I.C.A. Social Security (0130-0069) budgets for review and approval.
Motion by Wollrab/Murphy to recommend approval of the IMRF Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (0131-0069) F.I.C.A. Social Security (0130- 0069) budgets.
Motion Carried.
Mr. Wasson thanked the Committee for their time as there had been several items on the agenda that needed attention. Chairman Selzer asked if there were any questions for Mr. Wasson, hearing none, he thanked Mr. Wasson.
Chairman Selzer presented the Finance Committee bills and transfer from the County Clerk’s office for review and approval as transmitted by the County Auditor. He stated that the Finance Committee bills include a Prepaid and Fund Total of $1,363,690.73.
Motion by Soeldner/Erickson to approve the presented bills in the amount of $1,363,690.73.
Motion carried.
Chairman Selzer thanked everyone for their work on the Committee. Chairman Selzer asked the Committee if there was any other business to come before the Committee; hearing none, he adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m.
https://www.mcleancountyil.gov/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6362
Alerts Sign-up